Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllrs Adrian Foster and Christopher Newbury.

Cllr Foster was substituted by Cllr Stewart Palmen.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2024 were presented for consideration, and it was,

Resolved:

To approve and sign the minutes as a true and correct record.

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

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no 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 10.20am on the day 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. Representatives of Parish Councils are included separately in the speaking procedure, please contact the officer listed for details.

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 10 April 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 12 April 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 procedure for public participation was noted.

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

The planning appeals report detailed in the agenda pack was received and noted.

Proposed commercial development comprising a Use Class E foodstore (including the sale of non-food goods) and ‘drive thru’ coffee shop unit; petrol filling station; provision of open space / landscaping including a new pedestrian and cycle link between London Road and Green Lane; access, parking, and associated infrastructure and development.

Public Participation

Andrina Bradley had registered to speak against the application but was unable to attend the meeting – Cllr Ian McLennan read out her notes at the meeting.

Adam Cundale spoke in support of the application.

Additional correspondence – the case officer summarised the further correspondence received since the report was published, including clarification of some points of the officer report.

Richard Hughes, Development Management Team Leader presented the report which recommended that planning permission be approved subject first to referral to Secretary of State (for possible call-in for his determination) and subject to conditions and a suitable S106 legal agreement for a commercial development comprising a Use Class E foodstore (including the sale of non-food goods) and ‘drive thru’ coffee shop unit (Class E); petrol filling station; provision of open space / landscaping including a new pedestrian and cycle link between London Road and Green Lane; access, parking, and associated infrastructure and development.

The background to the application was explained along with a description of the site, planning history, associated planning policy, details of the consultation and publicity responses, planning considerations, clarification about NPPF and CIL/S106 contributions. The officer concluded that, whilst the various concerns have been taken into account, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable, subject to suitable mitigation in the form of various restrictive conditions and a legal agreement. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be in line with national and local planning policies, as outlined in the report.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of officers. Details were sought on the set of external steps to the western end of Green Lane, parking control companies and the height of the car park lighting columns.

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

Cllr Charles McGrath, Unitary Division Member for Salisbury Milford, then spoke in support to the application. Cllr McGrath felt that his views had been misrepresented by the press and he has no opposition to the application as it delivers much of what Salisbury needed. He welcomed the level of communication from the applicant, commented on the level of support from local residents and felt that the development would complement independent retailers in the city centre. However, he was disappointed that the Committee had not met in Salisbury to consider the application.

Cllr Ian McLennan, Unitary Division Member for Laverstock then spoke in support of the application. He commented on the history of the site and the importance of biodiversity and referred to detail in the report which indicated that the applicant had worked with the Council’s ecologist to produce a scheme which provides significant landscaping on the site which also provides a high quality biodiversity infrastructure. He commended the work undertaken by officers on the application, explained his concerns about a low railway bridge in the vicinity of the site, welcomed the electric vehicle charges points and that these could be increased dependant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

Construction of elderly care home (Use Class C2) with associated access works, landscaping and drainage.  Improvements to site access and Longleaze Lane/Snowberry Lane junction.

Public Participation

Andy Shepley agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the application.

Gen Collins, Senior Conservation/Planning Officer presented the report which recommended that planning permission be approved subject to first completion of a planning obligation/Section 106 agreement covering the matters set out in the report, and subject to the planning conditions detailed in the report for the construction of elderly care home (Use Class C2) with associated access works, landscaping and drainage. Improvements to site access and Longleaze Lane/Snowberry Lane junction.

The main issues detailed in the report were explained which included the principle of development, design and visual amenity, impact on the significance of heritage assets, residential amenity, ecology, highway matters – including road safety/parking, drainage and Section 106. The officer concluded that there were no adverse impacts arising from the proposal and listed the benefits. The proposals related well to the spatial form of Melksham and the eastern urban extension using existing road infrastructure and offer accessible walking and/or cycling routes into the town and its services and facilities.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of officers which included concerns about the number of parking spaces, impact of parking restriction in the vicinity of the site, highway safety of access, details of the settlement boundary, details about ground water flooding, evidence for the demand of additional appropriate care home accommodation up to 2030, the proportion of beds required for specialist care, availability of staff to provide specialist care and concern about access onto Longleaze Lane.

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

Cllr Mike Sankey, Unitary Division Member for Melksham East, then spoke about his concerns of the scale of the development. He commented on existing local health care facilities supplying sufficient capacity, car parking arrangements, comments from the Town Council, Core Policy 15 and 46, and highway issues.

Cllr Nick Holder, Unitary Division Member for Bowerhill then spoke about his concerns relating to the lack of car parking on site, the uncontrolled pedestrian crossing, the number of staff on site at any one time, the HNS contribution of £37,062 towards the capital cost of delivering additional primary care floorspace required to serve residents of the new development, the design and character being inappropriate, and concern at the size and scale of the development.

In response to queries raised by local Division members, the Planning Officer (with input from the Council’s Senior Highways Engineer and Adult Social Care Commissioning Director) explained that the scale and type of development is in keeping with the surrounding area and appropriate to the nature of the settlement and will respect the character of that settlement, the proposal meets the future care home provision needs, the contribution from the NHS has been subject to extensive discussions and would not stand up as a refusal reason at appeal, the proposals are based on evidence, and the access and parking areas are designed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Hybrid (full and outline) planning application descriptions (i) & (ii)

(i) Outline planning application: the erection of up to 284 dwellings, erection of a convenience store (Class E), erection of up to 872 sqm of new commercial floor space (Class E); and associated access, public realm; and landscaping works.

(ii) Full planning application: Erection of convenience store (333 sqm GIA) and 12 No. apartments, part demolition and external works to Innox Mills and change of use to Class E; external works and extension (180 sqm GIA) to Innox Place and change of use to (Class E); external works to Dyehouse and Brewery for as bat mitigation and change of use to a dual use internal market/Class E; demolition of former Cloth Factory Building; and associated access, public realm and landscaping work in commercial courtyard and along the Stallard Street frontage.

The listed building consent application proposes internal and external works and part demolition of Innox Mill; internal and external works, and extension to Innox Place. Although a separate application, the issues relevant to the impact upon the listed buildings (Innox Place and Innox Mill) are considered under this report.

This application was previously considered on 29 November 2023. The recommendation before the Committee is from Pages 132-149 of the agenda.

Public Participation

There was no public participation for this item.

Richard Hughes, Development Management Team Leader presented the report and provided an update on changes occurring following publication of the revised NPPF in December 2023 that may have a material impact on this planning application. The Committee were asked to consider the recommendation that the application still be granted planning permission subject to completion of the legal agreement.

Members of the Committee did not ask any technical questions of officers, there were no members of the public in attendance to address the Committee, and the Unitary Division Member for Trowbridge Central, Cllr Stewart Palmen moved a motion to continue to support the Committee’s previous decision as detailed in the report. This was seconded by Cllr Ernie Clark, and it was then,

Resolved:

That the Head of Development Management continues to be authorised to grant planning permission and listed building consent, subject to first completion of the planning obligation / Section 106 agreement currently in preparation covering the matters set out below, and subject also to planning conditions listed below.

Planning Obligations

·       Securing a review of the viability of the scheme prior to occupation of the 200th dwelling

·       Safeguarding the provision of the Station Car Park link road and access to ensure no ransom strip is formed and that any land required to facilities it is transferred to the Council at nil cost.

·       The setting up of a management company to manage all the public open space and strategic landscaping within the site as well as ensuring it is managed in accordance with the approved LEMP details.

Full and Outline Planning Conditions

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission, or, where relevant, before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.    With regard to those elements of the application in outline form, no development shall commence on those parts of the site until details of the following (in respect of which approval is expressly reserved) have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority:

a.    The scale of the development;

b.    The layout of the development;

c.    The external appearance of the development;

d.    The landscaping of the site;

e.    The means of access to the site.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: The application was made in part for outline planning permission and is granted to comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Article 5 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

3.    With regard to those elements of the application in outline form, an application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Outline application for residential development of 55 houses including creation of new access from Frome Road and removal/demolition of all existing buildings (all matters aside from access reserved).

This application was previously considered on 22 February 2023. The recommendation before the Committee is from Pages 246-253 of the agenda.

Public Participation

There was no public participation for this item.

Richard Hughes, Development Management Team Leader presented the report and provided an update on changes occurring following publication of the revised NPPF in December 2023 that may have a material impact on this planning application. The Committee were asked to consider the recommendation that the application still be granted planning permission subject to completion of the legal agreement. The Committee were also informed of an additional letter of representation which raised issues about two listed buildings adjacent to the development site. The Development Management Team Leader explained that this issue had been dealt with previously with other representations.

The Chairman read a statement provided by Cllr David Vigar, Unitary Division Member for Trowbridge Grove, who was unable to attend the meeting.

Members of the Committee did not ask any technical questions of officers, there were no members of the public in attendance to address the Committee, Cllr Stewart Palmen moved a motion to continue to support the Committee’s previous decision as detailed in the report. This was seconded by Cllr Carole King, and it was then,

Resolved:

That the Head of Development Management continues to be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to first completion of the planning obligation / Section 106 agreement currently in preparation covering the matters set out below, and subject also to planning conditions listed below.

S106 matters –

·       Affordable housing – at 30%

·       Education – Requirement to be confirmed at reserved matters. Based upon up to 55 homes as follows:

£122,654 for early years,

£300,128 for primary and

£252,340 for secondary.

o   The formulae for re-calculations at Reserved Matters are as per the Education S106 Methodology.

o   All payment is required in full, upon or prior to commencement of development. Phasing of payments is not applicable here, and in view of that, no bond is required. All contributions are to be subject to indexation to the BCIS All In Tender Price Index from date of completion of agreement until payment.

o   The Council require 10 years from the date of receipt of the contributions by the Council, in which to spend/commit in accordance with the S106, before they qualify to be returned.

o   Since the abolition of the CIL pooling limit for S106s the Council does not quote the names of individual schools.

o   A 30% discount is applied to the affordable housing element of an application. This is applied as a reduction to the number of AH units proposed/approved, as part of the process of calculating the number of places generated by the development from the qualifying properties. It is therefore reflected in the standard formulae.

·       Open space – to be confirmed at Reserved Matters stage based upon:

o   1 dwelling = 34.93m² public open space and 1.77m² equipped play. Once calculated the amount must be secured in perpetuity. Wiltshire Council will not adopt the POS.

o   If, once calculated, the requirement does not meet the minimum for a LEAP (400m²) that Trim Trails  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

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.