Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Andrew Davis, Magnus MacDonald (replaced by Cllr Gordon King) and Roy While.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 29 April 2015

The minutes of the meeting held on 29 April 2015 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 29 April 2015.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

The Chairman gave details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

There were no declarations of interest made.

The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public.

Statements

Members of the public who wish to speak either in favour or against an application or any other item on this agenda are asked to register in person no later than 2.50pm on the day of the meeting.

The Chairman will allow up to 3 speakers in favour and up to 3 speakers against an application and up to 3 speakers on any other item on this agenda. Each speaker will be given up to 3 minutes and invited to speak immediately prior to the item being considered. The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are detailed in the Council’s Planning Code of Good Practice.

Questions

To receive any questions from members of the public or members of the Council received in accordance with the constitution which excludes, in particular, questions on non-determined planning applications. Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named on the front of this agenda (acting on behalf of the Corporate Director) no later than 5pm on Wednesday 13 May 2015.Please contact the officer named on the front of this agenda for further advice. Questions may be asked without notice if the Chairman decides that the matter is urgent.

Details of any questions received will be circulated to Committee members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website.

The Chairman welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

Mr Francis Morland spoke regarding the agenda supplement, which had provided further information on planning history that had been omitted from the original report; he expressed concern that the current data management system was not as good as that previously used by the West Wilts District Council. He stated that, despite previous assurances to the contrary, he remained concerned that important information had being omitted in error.

Specifically he asked:

How many past case officer report have had some planning history information omitted due to the errors in the system?

Does anyone in Wiltshire Council have the knowledge to search out the history and have access to the backup files to find the information from the old system?

The Chairman asked that a written answer be provided to Mr Morland and that this be circulated to all members of the Committee for their information.

Public participation:

Mr Paul Walsh spoke in support of the application.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the report that outlined the proposals for the discharge of a Section 52 Agreement.

Councillor Jon Hubbard spoke as the local member.

Issues discussed in the course of the debate included: that the agreement currently restricts development on the land in question until discharged; the planning history on the site and  extant permissions; the procedure and guidance for dealing with discharge of agreements; the now built developments near the site; the possible reasons for the agreement; the views of the consultees to the original application; the relevance of the Local Plan policies; the covenant only  coming to light during research as part of the preparation of the s106 agreement linked to the current approved application; whether the s52 agreement was material to the consideration of the current application; how many other similar situations there are in the County; and that the s52 agreement remains binding on the land until it is formally discharged.

Councillor Ernie Clarke proposed that the agreement should not be discharged. There was no seconder to his proposal, so the proposal was not put to the vote.

Councillor Trevor Carbin proposed, subsequently seconded by Councillor Tony Knight, that the Committee should raise no objection to the discharge of the agreement as per the officer’s recommendation. This proposal, upon being put to the vote, was lost.

Councillor Ernie Clarke proposed, subsequently seconded by Councillor Gordon King, that the matter be deferred to find more information.

At the end of the debate the meeting, upon being put to the vote;

Resolved

To defer consideration of the matter, pending the provision of additional information.

Public participation:

Mr Martyn Williams spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Paul Langley spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Trevor Carbin spoke as the local member.

The Area Team Leader outlined the report which recommended the application for approval subject to conditions. The meeting’s attention was drawn to the late observations including additional information on the planning history.

Members of the public were invited to speak on the application as listed above.

Issues discussed in the course of the debate included: the planning history of the site; the location of the site and the proximity to other buildings; the design and layout of the proposals; how the current proposal differed from a proposal refused previously by the Committee; the position of the windows in the proposal; the existing boundary treatments; the impact of the proposals on the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties; the views of the consultees;

Councillor Trevor Carbin proposed, subsequently seconded by Councillor Gordon King, that the application be refused.

At the end of the debate the meeting, upon being put to the vote;

Resolved to refuse permission for the following reason:

That the rear extension by reason of its size, mass, bulk and height would result in a substantial addition to the dwellinghouse which accommodates a narrow plot; and it would lead to an unacceptable level of overbearing and overlooking to the immediate neighbours at No 220 and No 222 Melksham Road which would result in loss of amenity and privacy contrary to the requirements of Adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy Core Policy 57.

Any other items of business which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be taken as a matter of urgency.