Agenda item

Public participation

Mr Watt-Jones spoke in objection to the application.

Mr and Mrs Labouchere and Mr Richards spoke in support of the application.

The officer introduced the report which recommended planning permission be refused. He noted the site benefits from consent for a dwelling, however the approved scheme was not well supported. He explained that the proposal’s scale, bulk, mass and especially height did not respect characteristics and constraints of the location. Additional information had been submitted by the applicants at the start of the meeting regarding the drainage and flooding matters however there had been no time to review and therefore this could not be commented on. The ecologist had signed off the approved scheme however as the proposal now included a basement element this information would need to be updated. He acknowledged that he had not asked the applicants to submit further information due to the costs involved and that refusal was also recommended around the design and character and the lack of a Section 106 Agreement.

The Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer and it was noted that examples of materials shown was a preferred option to ensure appropriateness.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to address the committee as detailed above.

The local member, Cllr Howard Greenman spoke in support of the application, recognising the lack of support for the existing scheme and noting the proposal was more sympathetic to its surroundings. He drew the Committee’s attention to their decision on a previous application heard at this meeting and urged them not to be inconsistent with their decision-making.

A debate followed, during which concerns were raised over the scale of the proposal and materials used. The Committee noted that there was a variety of properties within the village that were made out of a variety of materials including Bradstone. It was noted that the parish council and villagers were in support of the application and the design was in keeping with other two storey properties in the village. Concerns were raised over the use of aluminium windows in a conservation area, the need to see sample panels of the materials used, the risk of flooding and the effect on the water voles.

A motion to move the officers recommendation was seconded. A vote was taken and lost.

Resolved:

To DELEGATE authority to the Area Development Manager in consultation with the Chairman of Northern Area Planning Committee to grant the application for the following reason:

The development is considered to respect the character of the locality, to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and will not have a harmful impact upon the setting of the Grade II* listed Church of St Michael and its Grade II listed lychgate.  The proposal complies with Policies C3, H3, HE1 and HE4 of the adopted North Wiltshire Local plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Subject to:

i)                The submission of satisfactory assessments and information to resolve the outstanding matters relating to flood risk and ecology;

ii)               Conditions to be drafted by the Area Development Manager in consultation with the Chair of the Northern Area Planning Committee to include approval of sample materials; and

iii)             Completion of a legal agreement to secure the contribution of £26,000 contribution towards affordable housing and £7,400 towards improvement to the Kington St Michael Recreation Ground.