Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies and no membership changes.

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 April 2013 were presented and it was

Resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 April 2013 be approved as a true and correct record.

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

The following declarations were made:

1.    Councillor Watts declared that in relation to agenda item 6 – Land at Showell Farm, Patterdown Road, Chippenham, he was the Chippenham Area Board representative on the Chippenham Vision Board. Councillor Watts declared that he would consider the application on its merits and debate and vote with an open mind.

2.    Councillors Trotman  and Ansell declared that in relation to agenda item 7 – Marden Farm Cottages, Rookery Park, Calne, they were Calne Town Councillors, however they would consider the planning application on its merits and debate and vote with an open mind.

The Chairman made the following announcements:

1.    That the Service Director for Development Services, Brad Fleet had recently been successful in applying for voluntary redundancy and had left the Council.  The Chairman on behalf of the Committee thanked Brad for his help and advice over the years and wished him well for the future.

2.    That there would be an additional meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee on Wednesday, 25 September, 2013 to consider the planning application for Hills Waste Solutions proposed waste recovery facility at Lower Compton, Calne.  The Chairman confirmed the following programme for the day:-

·         10:30am – Site Visit of the facility at Lower Compton.  Members to assemble on site at 10:15am

·         12:00noon - Buffet lunch at the Council offices, Monkton Park, Chippenham

·         2:00pm – Special Strategic Planning Committee to start

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 in person no later than 10.20am on the day of the meeting.

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

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 (acting on behalf of the Director of Resources) no later than 5pm on Tuesday 23 July 2013. 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 Committee noted the rules on public participation and the manner in which the meeting would be held.

Members of the public addressed the Committee as set out in minute No 25 and 26, as detailed below.

The Committee received the following question from Tony Peacock, Co-ordinator of the Showell Protection Group:

‘Section 9.5 of ‘Protocol 4, The Planning Code of Good Practice for Members of Wiltshire Council’, as published on the Wiltshire Council web site states:

9.5. Site Visits – Councillors will be expected to be familiar with the site and the issues surrounding the decision when they arrive at a committee meeting. It is acceptable to visit the site and, if necessary, surrounding properties that may be affected by the proposal, as an individual councillor before the meeting, although councillors should not enter onto a site without the consent of the owner.

Given the supposed strategic importance of the site in the Wiltshire Core Strategy, please can you confirm how many of the Strategic Planning Committee members attending the planning meeting on the 30^th July 2013 will have visited the proposed site at Showell Farm and the surrounding properties prior to the meeting.’

The Chairman asked the members to indicate by show of hands, how many had either informally visited the site or were aware of the site.

A report by the case officer is attached.

Public Participation:

•      Tony Peacock, Co-ordinator of the Showell Protection Group, spoke in objection to the application

•      Jane Browning, Corsham Civic Society, spoke in objection to the application

•      Anne Lock, , spoke in objection to the application

•      Owen Inskip, Chippenham 20/20 and CSJ Planning, spoke in objection to the application

•      Des Dunlop, D2 Planning Ltd, applicant, spoke in support of the application

•      Marilyn McKay, ECOS, spoke in support of the application 

•      AnnabellCessford, Lacock Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application

The Planning Officer introduced the report which recommended that planning permission be Delegated to Officers to allow the signing of an appropriately worded S106 agreement.  She explained that the planning application was for an outline application for Employment Development Comprising 50,000sqm, Incorporating Class B1(b), Class B1 (c), B2 with Ancillary B1 (a), B8 and Ancillary B1 (a) Uses Including Means of Access, Car Parking, Servicing, Associated Landscaping and Works. 

Members of the Committee were informed that the site was allocated via policy CP10 as part of the South West of Chippenham Strategic site and was the employment element of that scheme; That the Core Strategy was at an advanced stage (going through the Examination in Public) which carried significant weight.

It was noted that the only outstanding issue was the potential conflict of the new roundabout onto the A350 with Core policy 62, and Highways stance that new roundabouts should not be permitted onto the primary network route unless an overriding need could be demonstrated.  In this case officers considered that the benefit of providing quality employment on an allocated site outweighed the potential to cause a traffic slowing in the locality and that the positives of economic development should be cited as the “overriding need”.

Members then raised a number of technical issues in relation to access to the site from Patterdown Road; the necessity of a further roundabout on the A350 and that any decision taken prior to the publication of the Inspectors report on the Core Strategy was premature.

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

The local member, Councillor Dick Tonge, then spoke in objection to the application. He felt that as the Core Strategy was at an advanced level and there was only a short time until the Inspector published his report, that the application should be deferred until that time.  Councillor Tonge also explained his concerns about highway issues and the effect of the application on traffic flows on the A350.

The Committee then considered the application and debated a number of issues.  Some members supported the view of the local member in that the application was premature and should be deferred until the Inspectors report was made available.  There were also concerns about highways issues.  However, there were a number of members who felt that sufficient safeguards were in place to make a decision on the application.

The Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

A report by the case officer is attached.

Public Participation:

•      Anne Henshaw, spoke in objection to the application

•      Derek Warnett, representing a local residents association, spoke in objection to the application

•      Mark Jackson, planning agent, spoke in support of the application

Members of the Committee were informed that the application was contrary to the adopted development plan and core policy 2 of the emerging core strategy in relation to the outline element of the application.  However, the element of the application relating to the nursing home accommodation was considered to be consistent with emerging Core Policy 46.  It was noted that the Council could not separate the application into components by granting permission for the nursing home element whilst refusing permission for the new dwellinghouses. 

Members then raised a number of technical issues in relation to a letter from the applicant that referred to a 119 bed nursing home.  The officer confirmed that the application received was for an 85 bed nursing home.

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

The local members, Councillor Christine Crisp and Councillor Alan Hill, then spoke in objection to the application.  They stressed that the site was a green field site, was outside the defined Settlement Framework Boundary and contrary to Policy H4 of the adopted North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011; There was a lack of local infrastructure and the need for an 85 bed nursing home in Calne had not been proved and there were similar facilities were available in other local towns.  

The Committee then considered the application and debated a number of issues.  There was concern that the application was not sustainable on the south side of Calne, that it raised issues of more than local importance, that the infrastructure of Calne was not adequate to keep up with the development of more new homes, the high level of local objection, the proposed entrance to the site was not adequate and the effect of additional traffic on air quality.    

Resolved: