Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

There were no apologies for the meeting.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 13 May 2020.

The Committee considered the minutes of the last meeting, as detailed

on pages 5-20 of the agenda.

The Chairman moved that the minutes be approved and signed as a true and

correct record. Councillor Derek Brown seconded the motion.

Members were asked if there were any objections to the motion, there

being none, it was:

Resolved:

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 May 2020.

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

There were no declarations of Interest made at the meeting.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Should the committee need to take a short break the broadcast would continue with a holding slide.

During the ongoing Covid-19 situation the Council is operating revised procedures to permit remote attendance of meetings. The procedure for the Strategic Planning Committee including public participation is attached.

Access the online meeting here

Public guidance for accessing meetings online is available here

Statements

Members of the public who wish to submit a statement in support of or in

objection to an application on this agenda should submit it to the officer named on this agenda no later than 5pm on 21 May 2020.

Those statements in accordance with the Constitution will be included in an

agenda supplement. Those statements must:

·       State whom the statement is from (including if representing another person or organisation)

·       State clearly whether the statement is in objection to or support of the application

·       If read aloud, be readable in approximately 3 minutes

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 19 May 2020 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 21 May 2020. 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.

At the beginning of the meeting the Chairman confirmed with each Member of

the Committee that they could see and hear all relevant materials.

The procedure for the meeting was set out on Pages 15-18 of the agenda.

For the benefit of those listening the Chairman summarised how each planning application to be determined would be debated.

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

The Head of Development Management, Mike Wilmott, briefed the Committee on the update report attached to the agenda.

Resolved:

The Appeals Update report was noted.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Mike Wilmott, Head of Development Management, provided a summary of the current situation of the 5-year housing land supply for Wiltshire, which was relevant to both applications to be determined.

Government had set an objective to significantly boost the supply of new homes and expected Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to meet the requirement and need for each area, which was what the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2006 – 2026 (WCS) and supplementary planning documents sought to do.

However, sites identified in the WCS did not always come forward as quickly as anticipated or desired. To ensure the supply of new homes LPAs were required to identify a supply of specific developable sites to provide a minimum of a 5-year land supply.

Until recently the calculation of housing land supply was based on the Housing Market Area with three housing market areas, Eastern, Southern & North & West, as identified in the WCS.

The local plan in the context of WCS was five years old in January 2020, so now the LPA was required to calculate the housing land supply across the whole of the Wiltshire Council area.

During a February 2020 appeal a Planning Inspector determined the land supply was less than 5 years (4.42-4.62 years equating to approximately 800 houses).

The housing supply had fallen short due to some large sites allocated in the WCS which had yet to obtain planning permission to be built. There were 4 sites which together were identified in the development plan to deliver over 5000 new homes. However, three of those were held up on developers not yet completing S106 agreements and one not having reached the planning stage yet.

Government advice through the National Planning Policy Framework was that therefore the ‘tilted balance’ then applied. This did not mean that every application received had to be approved or that existing policies had no weight, but that a different balancing of policies and factors had to be applied. The council would need to restore the 5-year housing land supply, including through consideration of applications on sites which under other circumstances may not be considered suitable.

It was explained that it was not considered probable that the 5-year housing land supply situation would be resolved in the short term without additional approvals. It was also explained that the items were before the Committee for determination because the 5-year housing land supply situation was a strategic issue for the council area as a whole.

Outline planning application (all matters reserved except means of access only in relation to a new point of access into the site) for residential development, including the construction of up to 71 dwellings, the creation of new vehicular access with footways and cycleways and ancillary road infrastructure, public open spaces, children's play area, landscape planting, surface water attenuation and associated infrastructure.

Public Statements

Helen King – Objection

Andy Dawson, Jess & Ed Phillips, Jo English, Graeme Young Hay & Simon Blake, Kay O’Neil – Objection

Roy Poulton – Objection

Malmesbury TC - Objection

The Committee then received a presentation from Mike Wilmott, Head of Development Management, which set out the main issues in respect of the application. The purpose of the report was to assess the merits of the proposal against the policies of the development plan and other material considerations, and to consider the recommendation that the application was approved subject to conditions and prior completion of a S106.

The Outline application (all matters reserved except means of access only in relation to a new point of access into the site) proposed a residential development, including the construction of up to 71 dwellings (40% affordable), the creation of new vehicular access with footways and cycleways and ancillary road infrastructure, public open spaces, children's play area, landscape planting, surface water attenuation and associated infrastructure.

The application was a resubmission of a previous application for the same scheme (16/07288/OUT). Following refusal in 2016 the applicants subsequently appealed but withdrew the appeal in 2017.

Key points included that the site was outside of the Malmesbury limits of development and land to the south had been identified for a primary school, and the status of the neighbourhood plan. In the context of a shortfall in housing land supply, Officers considered that the proposal did not have adverse impacts that significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, including the provision of new homes including new affordable homes. It was noted that Malmesbury had been identified in the WCs as a market town settlement that had potential for development. 

The Chairman then invited Members to ask any technical questions of the Officer. Details were sought on site allocations, reviewing core policies of the council, that there was not a specific level of community engagement set out for applicants, and details of local speed limits.

Public statements which had been submitted in accordance with

the procedure as detailed above were read. All other statements submitted within the deadline were also available in the agenda supplement online along with the presentation to the meeting.

The Local Member, Councillor Gavin Grant, then spoke in objection to the application, noting the history of refused applications on the site and its unsuitability for development, that approval was recommended only because of government changes, that Malmesbury had over delivered on its housing requirements and should not be punished for being early in creating a Neighbourhood Plan and that all parishes with neighbourhood plans would be negatively affected, and there were concerns regarding road safety and school places, and that the council was only slightly below the required housing land supply level.

The Head of Development Management then responded to the points raised by noting that lots of the Neighbourhood plans in Wilts were not affected by the government decision due to when they were approved and whether they allocated land for new homes. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

Outline planning application (all matters reserved except means of access only in relation to a new point of access into the site) for residential development of up to 50 dwellings and provision of land for D2 use; including the creation of new vehicular access, public open space, landscape planting, pumping station, surface water attenuation and associated infrastructure.

Public Statements

Stephanie Palmer – Objection

Michael & Susan Hunt - Objection

Richard Marshall - Objection

Tina Goodhart – Support

Lyneham and Bradenstoke Parish Council – Objection

The Committee received a presentation from Mike Wilmott, Head of Development Management, which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  The purpose of the report was to assess the merits of the proposal against the policies of the development plan and other material considerations, and to consider the recommendation that the application was approved subject to conditions and completion of a S106 within six months of the date of the resolution.

The Outline application (all matters reserved except means of access only in relation to a new point of access into the site) proposed a residential development of up to 50 dwellings (of which 40% would be affordable)and provision of land for D2 use; including the creation of new vehicular access, public open space, landscape planting, pumping station, surface water attenuation and associated infrastructure.

Key points included the position of the nearby housing developments; Pound Close and Webs Court, and proposed footpath links, and the Old Vicarage which was a listed building. The proposed development would have a less than substantial impact on the setting of the old vicarage. The 5-year housing land supply situation was a material consideration.

Lyneham was designated a large village in the WCS, the site was adjacent to the set limits of development. In the context of a shortfall in housing land supply, Officers considered that the proposal did not have adverse impacts that significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, including the provision of new homes including new affordable homes.

The Chairman invited Members to ask any technical questions of the Officer. Details were sought on the extent of the application.

Public statements which had been submitted in accordance with the procedure as detailed above were read. All other statements submitted within the deadline were also available in the agenda supplement online along with the presentation to the meeting.

The Local Member, Councillor Allison Bucknell, then spoke in objection to the application, noting the proposed development was to be built on a greenfield area in Lyneham, stating that  the balance of relevant considerations had not been applied correctly, that there was a lack of need for such housing in Lyneham and that a lack of housing in the south of the county should not negatively impact the north, that the village lacked sufficient facilities, noting concerns regarding doctors, dentists and schooling.

The Head of Development Management then responded to the points raised,

noting there were issues with housing delivery across all areas of Wiltshire, not just the south of the county.  There was no neighbourhood plan for Lyneham and the council needed to look at developments on a case by case basis; Lyneham had more facilities than other villages of its scale and that a development of this size was acceptable here in the circumstances outlined in the report whereas a larger scale development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

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