Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from:

·       Cllr Kelvin Nash – substituted by Cllr Dominic Muns

·       Cllr Tony Pickernell

·       Cllr Dr Brian Mathew

·       Cllr Paul Oatway QPM

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 22 February 2024.

(document to follow)

On the proposal of the Chairman, seconded by Cllr Adrian Foster, it was:

Resolved

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 22 February 2024 as a true and correct record.

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

In relation to Item 8, Cllr Iain Wallis made an additional declaration that he worked for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. He emphasised that he would be speaking in a personal capacity and any views expressed were not necessarily representative of the department.

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 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 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 Thursday 14 March 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 Monday 18 March 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 Committee noted the rules on public participation.

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

On the proposal of the Chairman, seconded by Cllr Iain Wallis, it was:

Resolved

To note the appeals report for the period between 9 February and 8 March 2024.

Demolition of the existing buildings and construction of 28 affordable homes together with associated parking, access and landscaping

Public Participation

• Mr Dave Crucefix had a statement read out in opposition to the application

• Mr Hugh Tapper made a statement highlighting concerns he had about aspects of the application, including the party wall of the Grade II listed adjoining property.

• Mr Matt Holmes (Spruce Town Planning) spoke in support of the application

• Mr Paul Backhouse (Aster Communities) spoke in support of the application

The Senior Planning Officer, David Millinship, introduced a report which recommended that the application for the demolition of the existing buildings and construction of 28 affordable homes together with associated parking, access and landscaping, be approved subject to conditions and a legal (s.106) agreement. Key details were stated to include the principle of development, parking, preservation of the historic environment and impact upon neighbouring amenity.

It was noted that the existing 1970s building was constructed as a development of 32 units for people over the age of 55. The site was owned by the applicant, Aster Group, who were a Registered Provider Partner (housing) of Wiltshire Council. The replacement building, if approved, would include 13 one bedroomed units and 15 two bedroomed units, all of which would be affordable.

Attention was drawn to the location of the proposed development in a conservation area. When the existing building was built around 1972 it was constructed in a modern style that contrasted with the existing buildings, many of which were listed. The existing structure shared a party wall with the Grade II listed, 51 St Martins Place and, as such, a listed building application and party wall agreement would be required before the development could proceed.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the Senior Planning Officer. Details were sought about whether concerns had been raised about the construction of a taller structure towards the rear of the site where a terrace of bungalows were currently located. The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the size of gable wall facing the Rectory dwelling to the south of the site had been reduced to reflect concerns about overlooking. It was noted that there would be some indirect overlooking of this property but the majority of the windows that could be impacted were in non-habitable rooms. The majority existing trees on the site boundary would be retained.

Further information was sought about the potential party wall agreement and listed building consent required and their relationship to the planning application. The Senior Planning Officer noted that Paragraph 200 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) required local planning authorities to identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal. He explained that demolition of York Place presented a high likelihood of direct impact upon historic fabric of 51 St Martins Place as part of the roof support would be lost once York Place was demolished. However, the Senior Planning Officer explained that the Committee could be satisfied that there were technical solutions to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Temporary Agricultural Workers Dwelling (Retrospective)

Public Participation

• Mr Jon House had a statement read out in opposition to the application asking that it be deferred until the completion of a mobility report.

• Mr Chris Powell spoke in support of the application

• Mr Mark Wightman spoke in support of the application

• Mr Miles Elderfield spoke in support of the application

• Cllr Lewis Cowen (Stert Parish Council) spoke in opposition to the application

The Senior Planning Officer Jonathan James introduced a report which recommended that the retrospective application for a temporary agricultural worker’s dwelling, for a period of three years, be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report. Key details were stated to include the principle of development, the landscape and visual impact, environmental and ecological impacts and the impact on neighbouring amenity.

Attention was drawn to the reference on page 69 of the agenda pack to permitted development rights for additional structures on the site. The Senior Planning Officer recommended that an additional condition be added to restrict permitted development for outbuildings.

It was noted that the site was located in open countryside outside of the village of Stert, south of an area of priority habitat. Although there was a presumption against new residential development outside of the defined limits of development, Core Policy 48 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy did allow an exception if they were required to meet the needs of a rural worker who was required to live permanently at or near their place of work. The Senior Planning Officer explained that, although a retrospective application, the subject mobile home was intended to be moved and would be located outside of an area of priority habitat adjacent to an approved stable block. The mobile home provided single storey, two bedroomed accommodation and dark brown timber cladding would be added to the exterior to mitigate the visual impact of the building. Planting nearby would also be conditioned to provide screening. The Senior Planning Officer believed that the proposed development generally complied with Core Policy 57 (Ensuring High Quality Design and Place Shaping) of the Wiltshire Core Strategy as it would not intrude into the landscape or diminish the scenic beauty of the surroundings. 

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the Senior Planning Officer. Details were sought on whether the proposed development would be a temporary structure. It was confirmed that the permission applied for was for a period of three years but that it would be possible to seek planning consent for a permanent dwelling in the same location if it had been demonstrated that a financially viable enterprise had been established. Permission for a permanent dwelling would have to be sought through a new, albeit related, application.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee as detailed above, including a written statement read out on behalf of Mr House.

The Chairman, Cllr Philip Whitehead, did not speak in his capacity as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

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.