Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllr Brian Mathew who was substituted by Cllr Bob Jones MBE. Apologies were also received from Cllr Chuck Berry who was substituted by Cllr Jacqui Lay.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 14 June 2016.

The minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 14 June 2017 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a true and correct record and sign the minutes.

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

Cllr Toby Sturgis declared an interest in agenda item no 7b)- 17.03545.FUL - Land at Frog Lane, Great Somerford, Chippenham. The Committee were advised that he had a family connection to the application. Cllr Toby Sturgis announced that he would leave the room during the application and not participate in determination of the item.

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 by phone, email or in person no later than 2.50pm 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 5 July 2017 in order to be guaranteed of a written response. In order to receive a verbal response questions must be submitted no later than 5pm onFriday 7 July 2017. 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 completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.

The Committee noted the contents of the appeals update.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Attention was drawn to the late list of observations provided at the meeting and attached to these minutes, in respect of applications 7b 17.03545.FUL - Land at Frog Lane, Great Somerford, Chippenham, 7c 17.03123.FUL - Nos 8 to 10 Brokenborough, Malmesbury and 7e 17.04117.FUL - Upper Studley Farm, Swindon Road, Royal Wootton Bassett, as listed in the agenda pack.

Members of the public Ian Dunbar, Shawn Bialley and Mrs Tree spoke against the application. The applicants’ agent Richard Harlow spoke in favour of the application. Cllr Richard Banbury from Chippenham Town Council spoke against the application.

The Team Leader introduced the application for a new dwelling with associated access and landscaping. It was explained that the dwelling would be a bungalow of limited scale in terms of height and would be constructed to reflect the form and materials of the existing dwelling. Photographs of the existing site were shown along with detailed plans of proposed development. It was clarified that the legally use of land was defined under a recently granted Certificate of Lawfulness, and so was in effect a private garden to the existing dwelling and not public open space. It was also confirmed that conditions had been proposed to prevent further development, including withdrawing Permitted Development Rights. The Officer’s recommendation was for permission to be granted subject to conditions.

Members were invited to ask technical questions and Officers clarified that withdrawal of Permitted Development Rights would not prevent some forms of lightweight non-permanent sheds being installed in the gardens. Officers advised that in this circumstance it was not considered that a condition to remove permitted development rights for the creation of hard surfacing which could be used for parking purposes; and the erection of boundary fencing was necessary or reasonable in all respects and so not in accord with planning policy. It was also confirmed that a Construction Method Statement could be conditioned if required.

Local Member Cllr Clare Cape was not present in the meeting but had provided Cllr Gavin Grant with a statement to read. Emphasis was given to the fact that this site was previously public open space and that the Town Council had supported the application for a Certificate of Lawfulness, on the condition that it would not be built upon. The statement also referred to the significant levels of objection from neighbours, based on the impact on parking, access and amenity of the area.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above. Officers advised that the refusal of an application for a fence on a nearby site did not set a precedent for refusal of the application before the committee which raised different considerations as part of the planning balance assessment.

In the debate that followed, Cllr Peter Hutton explained that he has previously fought hard against building on amenity areas. He proposed that the application be refused on the grounds of Core Policy 57(3). This was seconded by Cllr Gavin Grant. Some Members expressed support for this motion, stating that the site was amenity space that was never intended to be built upon. However, others voiced concerns that the Committee were not there to decide the validity of the Certificate of Lawfulness but had to deal with the application in front of them. This motion was voted against by the majority.

Cllr Tony Trotman proposed the Officer’s recommendation for approval, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61a

As announced under Declarations of Interest, Cllr Toby Sturgis left the Committee Room, prior to commencing this item.

Members of the public Mr Hardwick spoke against the application. The applicant’s agent Ben Pearce spoke in favour of the application.

The Team Leader introduced the application for the erection of two detached dwellings with ancillary garaging and associated landscaping. Attention was drawn towards the updates in the Late Items. Photographs were shown of the existing site, along with the proposed plans. It was explained that the application related to land that had been used for storage of motor vehicles and informally as a turning- circle at the gift of the landowner but that this informal turning space could be closed at any time. Objections had been raised, regarding a lack of turning provision if the site was developed but the Planning Officer explained that this was not wholly a responsibility of the applicant in terms of existing adjacent dwellings and their requirements. It was also noted that a previous application for permission, which had been refused, was 17 years ago, and there were material considerations, such as policy changes, for the Officer’s recommendation for approval, subject to conditions, including a Construction Method Statement, which was added in the Late Items, mentioned above. Policy changes included the adoption of the NPPF; Wiltshire Core Strategy and preparation of the emerging neighbourhood plan which proposed to allocate the site for residential development.

Members were invited to ask technical questions and Members sought clarity on what matters could be added to the Construction Method Statement. Possible options were discussed such as no burning of fires on site, during construction, and an impact assessment to be carried out on the road after construction with an obligation on the developer to address any issues. Officers advised that both matters could be addressed.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

In the debate that followed, Cllr Peter Hutton proposed the Officer’s recommendation for approval, with two additional elements were added to the Construction Method Statement: no burning on site, during construction, and an impact assessment to be carried out on the road, before and after construction, with an obligation on the developer to address any issues identified. This was seconded by Cllr Mollie Groom and passed by the majority.

Resolved:

To GRANT planning permission, as per recommendation and additional condition included in late items, subject to amendment to inclusion of the additional two matters as follows:-

-           No burning of fires on site during construction

-           Survey of the condition of the access road prior to and post construction, the developer to address any harm/impact to the road identified through this survey.

Subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 No development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61b

Cllr Toby Sturgis returned to the Committee room before the commencement of this Agenda Item.

Members of the public Anthony Hole and the applicant Bruce Griffin spoke in favour of the application. Member of the public Bob Tallon spoke against the application.

The Planning Officer introduced the application for demolition of existing properties and erection of a residential property. A presentation was delivered showing photographs of existing site and proposed plans. Details were given explaining how the applicant had sought to address any issues and objections raised. The Committee were also advised that materials in keeping with the area would be used, such as Cotswold stone. The updated conditions, as included in the Late Items, were highlighted.

Members were invited to ask technical questions and it was clarified that the property would be “cut-in” so to level the build with its neighbouring properties. It was also confirmed that Permitted Deployment Rights would be removed from the site.

Local Member Cllr John Thomson spoke in regards to the application, he explained that he had previously supported an application for the site, but that he could not support the current application. He thought the design was too modern for a village such as Brokenborough and referred to Core Policy 57 in his objection.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

In the debate that followed Members remarked on the fact that it was a modern design, which was to some peoples taste and not others, however it was discussed that there are a variety of properties in that area already and it would not be out of keeping. Cllr Gavin Grant proposed the Officer’s Recommendation of approval, subject to an additional condition, requiring slab levels to be agreed prior to commencing the build. This was seconded by Cllr Hurst and passed by the majority,

Resolved:

To GRANT the planning permission, as per officer recommendation and the updated list of conditions contained in late items. Subject to an additional condition as follows:-

No development shall commence on site until details of the proposed ground floor slab levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved levels details.

REASON: The application contained insufficient information to enable this matter to be considered prior to granting planning permission and the matter is required to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before development commences in order that the development is undertaken in an acceptable manner, in the interests of visual amenity.

Subject to following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing No.s

Proposed Location Plan 1629.P.100 Rev C

Proposed Block Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61c

The applicant’s agent Andrew Miles spoke in favour of the application.

The Team Leader introduced the application for the erection of two 10 metre high chimneys. A presentation was delivered showing photographs of the existing site and proposed plans. It was explained that the site already had permission for waste transfer use but that the application being considered by the Committee was for the installation of chimneys only. The Officer stated that an enhanced informative was attached to the application, stating that any use of the chimneys could constitute a change of use and require further planning permission.

Members were invited to ask technical questions and Members asked about the enforceability of the enhanced informative and raised questions surrounding the applicants original application, which was withdrawn.

Local member Alan Hill spoke against the application. He stated that the Planning Committee was not equipped to deal with the application, maintaining that it was a waste application on a waste site. He explained that the nearest waste site is Hill’s Lower Compton site and that that site specifically excludes the burning of waste. He said that it was improper to look at granting permission for the chimneys, without knowing what they would be used for. He urged a stronger more assertive informative along with the need for an environmental assessment. Discussion also took place as to the appropriate committee to determine the application under the scheme of delegation and officers clarified that the North Area Committee could determine the application.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

In the debate that followed, Cllr Toby Sturgis stated that the Committee were being asked to approve two decorative features, no use prescribed to them, and questioned what grounds there were to refuse. He proposed the Officer’s recommendations for approval, which was seconded by Cllr Peter Hutton. This was voted against by the Committee.

Cllr Gavin Grant proposed that the application be deferred, pending further information as to the use of the chimneys, seconded by Cllr Howard Greenman. However, in the debate that followed, this motion was withdrawn and Cllr Gavin Grant proposed that the application be refused for insufficient information on grounds of CP55-air quality and CP57- amenity, noise and smoke. This was seconded by Cllr Howard Greenman and passed by the majority.

Resolved:

REFUSED contrary to Officer recommendation for the following reason:-

Insufficient information and detail has been submitted within the application as to the intended use to which the proposed chimneys are to be put and to assess any potential environmental impacts derived from their use.  In the absence of such information and detail, the proposal must be considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policies CP55 and CP57(vii) of the Wiltshire Core Strategy.

The applicant Steve Bucknell spoke in favour of the application.

The Planning Officer introduced the application for Crematorium with access road, car parking, Garden of Remembrance, landscaping, ecological enhancement, sustainable drainage system and associated works. A presentation was delivered showing the existing site and proposed plans. It was explained that the plans included tree cover and screening planting, along with ecological mitigation.

Members were invited to ask technical questions and it was confirmed that the application did not require any s.106 contribution. Attention also focussed on the Highways implications. It was explained that a left-turn only exit road could be conditioned, along with ancillary measures, if required.

Local Member Cllr Mollie Groom, expressed her concerns for the Highways arrangements and said that she felt the site needed a roundabout.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

In the debate that followed, after first proposing and then withdrawing a proposal for approval including a mandatory turn- left condition, Cllr Bob Jones proposed the Officer’s recommendation, with an additional condition, requiring a safety audit on the Highways impact, and to address any issues identified. This was seconded by Cllr Mollie Groom and passed by the majority.

Resolved:

To GRANT planning permission, as per recommendation and the conditions contained in the report as amended by the updated conditions contained in Late items. Subject to an additional condition to require the submission and assessment of a road safety audit, including a requirement for the applicant to address any issues identified by the Audit. The wording of the condition delegated to Officers.

Subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

03 rev F - Site Plan

04 rev E - Site Plan

05 rev B - Floor Plan Single Chapel

06 rev A - Roof Plan Single Chapel

07 rev B - Elevations Single Chapel

08 rev B - Site Sections

10 rev A - Floral Tribute Plans and Elevations

Received 20 April 2017

2827.01A - Proposed Site Access

Received 22 June 2017

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 No development shall commence on site until a scheme of hard and soft landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the details of which shall include :

* location and current canopy spread of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land;

* full details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development;

* a detailed planting specification showing all plant species, supply and planting sizes and planting densities;

* finished levels and contours;

* means of enclosure;

* car park layouts;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61e

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.