Agenda item

Public Participation

Harriet James spoke in objection to the application

Mark Reynolds, Chartered Town Planner, spoke in objection to the application

Anthony Setter, Road Safety Auditor, spoke in objection to the application

Paul Greatwood spoke in support of the application

Ian Mellor, Chartered Country & Town Planner spoke in support of the application

Diccon Carpendale, Agent, spoke in support of the application

Cllr Denis Brett Warminster Town Council, spoke in objection to the application

Steve Sims, Senior Planning Officer, introduced the report which recommended outline planning permission be granted subject to a s106 legal agreement for up to 28 dwellings on land to the east of Damask Way with all matters reserved except for the vehicular means of access (with a new access being proposed off Upper Marsh Road).

It was noted that two late representations had been received in objection to the application however they did not raise new or additional matters.

Key issues included within the officer’s presentation comprised; the principle of development, the impact on the character and appearance of the area, the impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, highway issues, ecology issues, and the impact on heritage assets and drainage issues.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on: The current status of the emerging housing sites allocation plan (HSAP DPD) and settlement boundary review, details on the planning history of a neighbouring site, details on the emergency vehicle access, the grading of the land, the extent of local road widening and the impact on the established trees on the site.

Kenny Green, Development Management Team Leader, informed the Members that the emerging HSAP was scheduled to be reported to Cabinet on 3 July, following its endorsement, the Plan would be reported to full Council for its approval before being sent to the Secretary of State, to appoint a planning inspector who would be tasked with opening up an examination in public and to review and determine what needs to be examined and to weigh up a number of conflicting representations.  Members were advised on the direction provided by paragraph 216 of the NPPF in terms of the weighting decision makers can apportion to emerging plans.  The paragraph was read out in full and the officer advised Members that at this stage, the plan should be afforded limited weight. The weight would increase as the HSAP advanced through the process and after unresolved objections were duly appraised by a planning inspector.  Members were informed that the HSAP had numerous conflicting and unresolved objections which meant that at this stage, with an adopted core strategy in place, the application having reached such an advanced stage, should be tested against the Core Strategy, and that full weight should be apportioned to the relevant policies identified within the published officer report.

The pervious planning application which was refused for a single dwelling on land near to the site on the opposite side of Upper Marsh Road was referenced and the highway reasons for refusal were fully explained. The Council’s highways officer, Chris Manns, who provided the highway consultation response for the current application before the committee, advised that he was satisfied that the new development would provide a suitable and safe access in-line with national guidance and council policy.

Following a question raised about the site’s agricultural land classification, officers advised the committee that they understood the site to be grade 4 – which was taken from the Council’s mapping constraint database. There was however some doubt as local residents believed the land to be grade 3a and 3b.

Members of the public, as detailed above, had the opportunity to speak on the application.

Local member, Councillor Tony Jackson, spoke in objection to the application and duly argued: that the development would damage the environment and countryside setting, that the proposed new access was constrained and dangerous, that the application was subject to a large number of objections and concerns which had not been fully explained. Cllr Jackson then argued that there was a plan being advanced to remove the site form the settlement limits and that it was right to exclude it as it was not suitable for residential development.  Cllr Jackson moreover argued that presently the settlement boundary also included the town park and nature reserve but they too, were not deemed suitable parcels of land for residential development.  Cllr Jackson argued that significant weight should be afforded to the emerging HSAP and that the development was contrary to Core Strategy 51.

Steve Sims informed the committee that the development site was not within a conservation area and no trees which had been felled were subject to preservation orders. Members were informed that the development proposal included a plan to safeguard the surrounding on-site trees and to create a buffer zone. The Council’s ecologist consultation conclusions were reported to members confirming that there was no ecology objection reported. It was also noted that although there would be some impact on the setting of a nearby listed building, the level of harm would be at the low end of less than substantial harm and in following the direction provided by NPPF paragraph 134, officers argued that the proposed scheme would deliver substantial public benefits in the form of additional housing including affordable housing that would outweigh the low level degree of harm to the wider setting of the nearby listed building.

A motion was moved to defer the application for a site visit and to request more information on the agricultural grading of the land, by Councillor Andrew Davis and was seconded by Councillor Pip Ridout.

A debate followed and the key points included: The need for more information on the grading of the land and whether the weighting of the settlement boundary review would change when it returns to committee.

Kenny Green explained the provisions of paragraph 216 of the National Policy Planning Framework in more detail and advised the committee to be mindful that the emerging plan still had to gain Cabinet and full Council endorsement and that there was a significant process still to follow before the HSAP could be reasonably afforded significant weight. Members were informed that even following Cabinet and full Council approval for the emerging housing sites allocation plan, the plan may be challenged on its soundness and/or be subject to potentially significant modifications by a planning inspector; and, as a consequence, officers advised members that the weight to be applied to the HSAP should be minimal.

At the end of the debate it was;

RESOLVED

To defer the application for a site visit and to request more information.