Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Councillors Ernie Clark, Sarah Gibson, Christopher Newbury, Tony Trotman

Councillor Clark was substituted by Councillor Graham Wright. Councillor Trotman was substituted by Councillor Ian Blair-Pilling.

It was also noted that Councillor David Jenkins had resigned from the Council, and therefore also the Committee.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meetings held on 20 March and 24 April 2019. (Copies attached)

The minutes of the meetings held on 20 March 2019 and 24 April 2019 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.

Councillor Derek Brown OBE declared a non-pecuniary interest in both items by virtue of being a Salisbury City Councillor. He would debate and vote on both items.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Through the Chair it was announced that application 18/09473/WCM - Revision of the layout and design of Advanced Thermal Treatment Facility permitted under consent 14/12003/WCM at Northacre Renewable Energy, Stephenson Road, Northacre Industrial Estate, Westbury – which the Committee resolved to approve at its meeting on 23 January 2019, had received confirmation that the Secretary of State would not call in the application following his initial Section 31 holding direction. The permission for the application was therefore confirmed.

The Committee was informed that four technical conditions relating to efficiency, emissions, feedstock and de-commissioning had been added to the permission, under delegated authority exercised by the Executive Director, Growth, Investment and Place. These conditions were similar to ones imposed by a Planning Inspector for a site in Swindon, and so were imposed to ensure consistency in decision making.

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 by phone, email or in person no later than 10.20am on the day of the meeting.

The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are detailed 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 will have had the opportunity to make representations on the planning applications and to contact and lobby their local member and any other members of the planning committee prior to the meeting. Lobbying once the debate has started at the meeting is not permitted, including the circulation of new information, written or photographic which have not been verified by planning officers.

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 12 June 2019 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 14 June 2019.  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 speaking was noted.

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

The appeals update was noted.

A report by Alistair Cunningham, Executive Director, Growth, Investment & Place is attached.

Public Participation

Steve Fear, spoke in objection to the Masterplan

Dr Jeremy Howell, Three Chequers Medical Practice, spoke in objection to the Masterplan.

Mrs Caussmaker, spoke in objection to the Masterplan

Cllr Tom Corbin, on behalf of Salisbury City Council, spoke in support of the Masterplan.

Richard Walters, Head of Service, Major Projects, presented the Maltings and Central Car Park, Salisbury Masterplan and accompanying report. The history of desired masterplans for Salisbury was noted, along with the need for any plan to be developer led in order to be deliverable. Key principles within the plan included the creation of a focused cultural quarter, a green corridor along the river, while allowing overall flexibility. It was stated that the Environment Agency had updated their model for flood risk following flood events in recent years, and this had had a significant impact upon the deliverability of some developments within the site areas.

The details of the public consultation from 15 April 2019 to 24 May 2019 were noted, along with the public exhibition day on 23 April 2019. Over 200 representations had been received, reporting 350 issues, and each issue received a response in the accompanying report. Issues raised had included concerns over the relocation of the library where the existing location was felt to be superior, support for the concept of a green corridor, objection to new retail units and concerns regarding city centre parking and the future of the Young Gallery, and support for enhancement of coach parking facilities.

In response to the comments more detail had been included on ecology, there had been further assessment of the cityscape, a new access plan, detailed added on the future planning process and a section on engagement with voluntary groups, and revision of the delivery details. Details were also provided on representations received since the publication of the agenda.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions on the Masterplan. Details were sought regarding flood classification and future medical provision, where it was confirmed one potential site was not suitable for that purpose.

Three questions from Sarah Prinsloo and Mike d’Apice, Extinction Rebellion, had been received and answered in written responses as detailed in Agenda Supplement 1. Supplementary questions were asked seeking the Committee to commit the council to no development unless it was carbon neutral or carbon net negative, noting the recent declaration of the Council on climate change. In response it was stated the Committee was required to follow planning regulations and could not commit the Council as a whole.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

Councillor John Walsh, Salisbury Fisherton and Bemerton Division, made a statement, appreciating the work that was being done but questioning what he consdidered to be the apparent rush and lack of detail within the Masterplan.

The Committee then debated the Masterplan. Issues raised included the long history of attempted visions and masterplans to regenerate the area which had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

A report by the Case Officer is attached.

Public Participation

Judy Howles spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Oubridge spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Tom Corbin spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr John Farquhar, on behalf of Salisbury City Council, spoke in support of the application.

Andrew Guest, Major Projects and Performance Manager, presented a report recommending permission be granted for demolition of the existing building at 30-36 Fisherton Street, currently used as retail and erection of new building for library, gym and 86 room hotel.

Key issues included the design of the proposed new building, the sustainable economic benefits of the proposal, and the character of the area. Following its approval under the last agenda item, the Maltings and Central Car Park, Salisbury Masterplan, was a significant consideration. Overall, the view of the planning officer was that the proposal was compliant with policy, the impact of the design was neutral or even beneficial compared to the existing building, the character of the area was a mixture of styles, and the height of the building met the exception test to exceed the skyline policy, with no harm to views to and from the cathedral and delivering wider economic benefits.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions. Details were sought on drainage and materials.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to put their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

Councillor Atiqul Hoque, Salisbury St Edmund and Milford Division, then made a statement. He noted the concerns expressed over the design, but also the economic benefits and that the Civic Society had supported the proposals.

The Committee then debated the application. It was stated that the proposal was the first phase of the Maltings and Central Car Park regeneration, and that there were significant economic benefits to the development. It was also noted that the design had been amended, following which the City Council had changed its view from opposing to supporting the proposal. However, other members considered the design of the building unacceptable, and that particularly for the first phase of the regeneration it was not appropriate for the area. The views of the Conservation officer were noted, and it was discussed whether the design was harmful to the character of the area, and if this was outweighed by the economic benefits.

A motion to approve the application in accordance with the officer recommendation, having been moved by Councillor Derek Brown OBE and seconded by Councillor Andrew Davis, was voted upon and lost.

A motion to refuse the application as contrary to Core Policies 57 and 58 in relation to the design was then moved by Councillor Graham Wright, seconded by Councillor James Sheppard. At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

The proposed development, by reason of its form, bulk and design, would detract from the character and appearance of established development in the locality, notably in Fisherton Street, neither conserving nor enhancing its status as a conservation area and neither conserving nor enhancing the setting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

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.