Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from:

Cllr Jerry Kunkler

Cllr Stuart Dobson

Cllr Kunkler was substituted by Cllr Philip Whitehead.

Cllr Dobson was substituted by Cllr James Sheppard.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 27 August 2015.

Resolved

To approve and sign as a true and correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 27 August 2015.

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

Cllr Paul Oatway declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 7a. Cllr Oatway had shot on land owned by the applicant a number of years ago. Cllr Oatway stated that he had not met the applicant for seven years and would consider the report before him with an open mind.

Cllr Nick Fogg declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 7a. Cllr Fogg had met the applicant previously, but had not discussed the application. Cllr Fogg stated that he would consider the application with an open mind.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no 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 in person no later than 5.50pm 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 no later than 5pm on Thursday 10 September 2015. 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.

None.

To receive details of the completed and pending appeals.

None.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Public Participation

Mrs Jayne Baker spoke in opposition to the application.

Mr David Backer spoke in opposition to the application.

Elizabeth Cooper spoke in opposition to the application.

Mr Richard Cosker spoke in support of the application.

Mr Jeremey Browne spoke in support of the application.

Mr Will Harley spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Justin Cook spoke in opposition to the application on behalf of Marlborough Town Council.

The senior planning officer introduced the report which recommended that the decision to grant outline planning permission be deferred and delegated to the Area Development Manager subject to the favourable outcome of archaeological investigations and completion of the necessary legal agreements (to include the effective variation of the existing two S52 agreements), and subject to conditions.

Key issues for consideration were noted as including the principle of the proposed residential development, visual impact, highway safety, and residential amenity.

There were no late items.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. It was clarified that Marlborough was close to meeting its housing requirements, but there was a shortfall in the wider community area. It was noted that Thames Water had not objected to the application, but that they had stated they would require conditions should permission be granted. It was explained that a transport statement was not needed for the application, unless stated by the Highways Officer that one was needed for them to make their response. A management company was noted as being set up to maintain the hedge and open spaces if the application was approved. The multiple use games area (MUGA) was clarified as being an enclosed hard surface area for all-year usage.

In regards to the water meadow it was explained that drainage would be improved to create a suitable area for recreation purposes. The change of use for the water meadow would be dealt with as part of the application. Condition 7 was noted as dealing with the allegations of munitions present in the area.

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

A debate followed where the drainage policy was considered, with particular note to the existing water meadow area. Worries were expressed regarding the effect of the drainage from the water meadow. Issues of possible flooding resulting from the removal of the water meadows was discussed, and the possible need for them to be preserved.

The differences between the previous application and the current application were discussed; particular attention was given to the MUGA. The quality of grass on the casual play space, and whether it would be available for all-year usage was considered. Paragraph 74 of the NPPF was referenced, noting the need for a replacement provision to be equivalent or better in terms of quality and quantity and in a suitable location. The effect of the application on highways was also discussed.

Resolved

After a resolution to approve the application in line with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

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.