Agenda item

Public Participation

Mr Grasson spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Gilbert spoke in support of the application.

Mr Ray Robinson, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Mr Nigel Lilley, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Planning Officer introduced a report which recommended refusal. The main issues included the impact on the character of the, previous planning history on the site and the impact upon the tree in the adjacent site. It was stated the members had had a site visit prior to the meeting.

The Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officers.

Members of the Public then had the opportunity to address the Committee with their views, as detailed above.

The Local Member, Cllr Brian Dalton, then spoke in support of the application.

A debate followed, where the access to the proposed property was raised, and the lack of objection from Highways officers was noted. The impact on the adjacent tree was debated, along with the plot ratio and dimensions, and the loss of amenity and character of the application in comparison with the local area was discussed.

At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.    The existing property is located in an established residential area, adjacent to a Bridleway. There is a large, established Oak tree located to the immediate south of the site. The proposed sub-division of the existing property to provide an additional dwelling would result in a significant reduction in the size of the rear garden area serving the existing dwelling, and create a new dwelling with limited outdoor amenity space, given the close proximity of the site to the adjacent mature Oak tree In combination with the close proximity of the established tree, it is considered that the proposal would constitute an unsatisfactory sub-division of an existing residential plot representing a cramped form of over development, out of keeping with the general scale and character of existing development in the area. The proposal would also be likely to result in harm to the residential amenity enjoyed by occupiers of both the existing dwelling and the proposed dwelling, and would set an undesirable precedent for the creation of similarly cramped proposals along the Drove and in the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the adopted policies; G2, D1, D2 and H16 as saved within Appendix C of the adopted South Wiltshire Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework, particularly paragraph 53.

2.    The proposed residential development is considered by the Local Planning Authority to be contrary to Policy R2 as saved within Appendix C of the adopted South Wiltshire Core Strategy together with Core Policy 3 because appropriate provision towards public recreational open space and offsite affordable housing contributions have not been made.

Informative

1.    Officers note that the Applicant within the Design and Access Statement has principally agreed to the submission of funds associated with the required planning obligations. The reason given above relating to saved policy R2 and Core Policy 3 could be overcome if all the appropriate parties agree to enter into a Section 106 Agreement requiring financial contributions towards off-site recreational open space provision and off-site affordable housing.