Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from:

• Councillor Trevor Carbin, who was substituted by Councillor Gordon King
• Councillor Jonathon Seed, who was substituted by Councillor Tony Jackson
• Councillor Suzanne Wickham, who was substituted by Councillor Mike Sankey

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 7 August 2024.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 August 2024 were considered. Following which, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee approved and signed the minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 August 2024 as a true and correct record.

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

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no specific Chairman’s announcements.

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 no later than 10 minutes before the start of the meeting. If it is on the day of the meeting registration should be done in person.

The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are linked to in the Council’s Planning Code of Good Practice. 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.

Members of the public and others will have had the opportunity to make representations on planning applications and other items on the agenda, and to contact and lobby their local elected member and any other members of the planning committee, prior to the meeting.

Those circulating such information prior to the meeting, written or photographic, are advised to also provide a copy to the case officer for the application or item, in order to officially log the material as a representation, which will be verbally summarised at the meeting by the relevant officer, not included within any officer slide presentation if one is made. Circulation of new information which has not been verified by planning officers or case officers is also not permitted during the meetings.

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 no later than 5pm on Wednesday 28 August 2024 in order to be guaranteed of a written response. In order to receive a verbal response, questions must be submitted no later than 5pm on Friday 30 August 2024. 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 explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

There were no questions or statements submitted by Councillors or members of the public.

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.

The Chairman invited Kenny Green, Development Team Leader, to update the Committee on the pending and determined appeals as per the appeals report included within the Agenda Pack.

The determined appeal for application PL/2023/10654, pertaining to outline consent for 4 no. dwellings, was detailed and Members were informed of the Council’s successful defence with the Planning Inspector endorsing the delegated refusal on the grounds of unsustainable location and Core Policy 2 conflicts alongside robust technical reasons for refusal such as highway safety and unacceptable impacts on the National Primary Road Network.

Mr Francis Morland then presented a statement to the Committee under public participation where he highlighted a missing appeal decision within the published list relating to application PL/2022/09842, Land off Storridge Road, Westbury. Officers acknowledged the appeal and noted that it had been decided after 23 August 2024 and therefore not included within the report. However, Members were reassured that the appeal decision would be circulated to Members outside of the meeting and included within the Agenda Pack for the next meeting of the Committee. The live appeal for planning application PL/2021/03749 was also raised, pertaining to residential development for up to 145 homes at Land at Glenmore Farm, and it was noted that the Strategic Planning Committee would be receiving updates on the application at their next meeting and that legal advice was being sought.

Members discussed the appeal for planning application PL/2021/09013, pertaining to the erection of up to 205 no. dwellings and associated works, on Land West of Westbury Road, Warminster, and officers confirmed that further legal advice was being sought on cost implications if the appeal were to be contested. The impacts of Wiltshire’s Housing Land Supply deficit on appeal decisions were also raised, with officers giving further explanations as to the planning balancing exercise undertaken by the Planning Inspectorate and the benefits of having technical grounds to support a refusal in addition to Core Policies 1 and 2 conflicts.

Following which, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee noted the appeals report for the period 26 July 2024 to 23 August 2024.

Demolition of existing modular classroom and rear extension to main school building to accommodate the erection of two storey building on existing playground with erection of single storey rear extension and associated landscaping.

Public Participation

• Ms Belinda Bates, Nestlings Pre-School, spoke in objection to the application.
• Ms Heather Derrick, Nestlings Pre-School, spoke in objection to the application.
• Mr James Burgess, representative from Emmaus School, spoke in support of the application.
• Ms Hope Brett, representing the families of the school, spoke in support of the application.
• Mr Neal Thompson, agent, spoke in support of the application.

Russell Brown, Senior Planning Officer, presented a report which recommend that the Committee granted the application for the demolition of an existing modular classroom and rear extension to the main school building to accommodate the erection of a two-storey building on the existing playground with the erection of a single storey read extension and associated landscaping.

Key material considerations were identified including the principle of development; design and landscape implications; residential amenity; ecology; drainage; and highways safety issues.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. Members raised the neighbouring residential properties and the adjoining Nestlings Pre-School and queried the impact to their amenities. Clarity was also sought on safety issues in respect of the playground’s proximity to the adjacent carriageway and building site; landscape harm; previous relevant planning history; land ownership; red line parameters; and the proposed building materials, design, and massing.

In response, it was confirmed that although officers recognised that the proposal would impact local/nearby residents during the construction phase of the development, they were satisfied that the application would not harm the immediate surroundings or wider landscape character due to the position of the proposed extensions between the existing school and adjacent nursery building with no substantive overbearing detriment to the immediate neighbours. Furthermore, no objections to the scheme had been raised by the Council’s Highway Team.

The named public speakers as detailed above then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee.

Councillor Ernie Clark then presented a statement in respect of the application on behalf of Councillor Trevor Carbin, the Local Unitary Member.

A debate then followed where Members discussed the separation distances between the proposal and neighbouring properties, and the enhancement to existing structures, capacity, and accommodation which would improve the education of students on roll at the school. It was acknowledged that although playground provision would be reduced, the expansion of space indoors was more critical, particularly as the school had alternative arrangements for external play areas for outdoor physical education activities.

At the conclusion of the debate, Councillor Ernie Clark moved to grant the application in line with officers which was seconded by Councillor Tony Jackson. Following a vote on the motion, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee APPROVED the application subject to the following conditions and informatives:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON:   To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Reserved matters application pursuant to Outline Planning Permission 16/01123/OUT relating to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the Proposed Primary School (including Nursery and SEN provision).

Public Participation

• Mr Tom Molyneux-Wright, agent, spoke in support of the application.
• Mr Anthony Dixon, Senior Project Manager and applicant on behalf of Wiltshire Council, spoke in support of the application.
• Councillor Alan Baines, on behalf of Melksham Without Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Gen Collins, Principal Planning Officer, presented a report which recommended that the Committee delegated authority to the Head of Development Management to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and informatives, for the reserved matters application pursuant to Outline Planning Permission for application 16/01123/OUT relating to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the proposed Primary School (including Nursery and Special Educational Needs (SEN) provision).

Key material considerations were identified including the principle of development; design/visual appearance; heritage impact; impact on the residential amenity; highways/parking issues; ecology; drainage; Section 106/Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL); and other matters.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. The representations received from neighbouring residents were raised in relation to the relevant planning history of the site and the 16/01123/OUT development, alongside queries regarding drainage and rainwater harvesting. Further concerns were raised in reference to highway safety and safe walking routes to the school as per the objections raised by Melksham Without Parish Council.

In response, officers explained to Members that the scheme had been subject to significant revisions following consultations with local Parish/Town Councils and neighbouring residents which had led to design solutions to address the impact on neighbouring amenities. Furthermore, officers confirmed that connectivity and accessibility to the application site and proposed neighbouring 16/01123/OUT development had been discussed in detail alongside the suggestion of a left-turn only junction, however as per Page 72 of the Agenda, the Highways Team had concluded that this would not be required or supported in that location.

The named public speakers as detailed above then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee.

Councillor Nick Holder, as the Local Unitary Member, then spoke to the application and thanked all officers for their hard work, but reiterated the concerns raised with regard to the decision to not implement a No Right Turn exit restriction.

A debate then followed where Members acknowledged the highway concerns raised by local residents and queried if a condition could be imposed to require the school not to be brought into use until a designed No Right Turn exit onto Pathfinder Way from the school had been delivered on site. Members then discussed suggesting a number of further planning informatives including: encouraging the consideration and use of rainwater harvesting for the school; requiring the completion of the site security boundary fencing prior to the school being brought into use; encouraging the Council as the applicant to maximise and bring forward a safe walking route to the school from Berryfield and Semington Road; and requiring the Council to expedite the delivery of the footpath connectivity from the school to the wider site northern boundary using Section 106 money secured from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

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

There were no urgent items.