Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

There were no apologies

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 13^th June 2018.

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2018 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.

There were no declarations of interest.

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 4^th July 2018 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 Friday 6^th July 2018. 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 receive an update on the Former Wiltshire College development, Chippenham.

The Planning Officer, Simon Smith, introduced a report which provided an update of the actions taken by officers in relation to the Section 106 Agreement since the application was granted by the Committee on 21^st March 2018.

The Planning Officer explained that there was a slight delay in the formal completion of the Section 106 Agreement, and the reasons for this were detailed in the report. He confirmed that the Agreement had now been completed and the decision issued.

Following a proposal by Councillor Peter Hutton, to note and approve the update, subsequently seconded by Councillor Gavin Grant, the meeting;

Resolved

That the update on the S106 Agreement for the Former Wiltshire College, Cocklebury Road, Chippenham, be noted and approved.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

To consider and determine the following planning applications:

Public Participation

Natasha Inzani, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Alison Bone, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor Dave Wingrove, Chairman of Ashton Keynes Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer, Simon Smith, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the change of use of land from agriculture to a dog exercise / training area, the erection of a 1.9m deer patrol fence and the creation of a car parking area.

Key issues highlighted included: the location and orientation of the proposal in relation to the settlement framework boundary and within the conservation area; that some works had already been undertaken; the height of the fencing; the access to the site; the views from the site; the impact of the proposals regarding the amenity of residents and noise generated by the use on the site; that officers proposed a temporary permission to be able to assess the impact of the proposals; whether the plan was consistent with the neighbourhood plan; the views of the highways officer and how concerns had been addressed by a mitigation; collection of dog waste is conditioned if permission is granted.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer which focused on: that the conditions don’t control paraphernalia but could be added; the arrangements for addressing noise concerns; that the sand carpark development did require permission but that the existing fencing was permitted development; that four dogs could be using the paddocks and that they could see each other; that a person in charge of a dog and is deemed to be in charge and is referred to legally as the responsible owner.

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

Councillor Chuck Berry, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on the impact of the neighbourhood plan, that the development is outside the settlement boundary, and whether the use proposed on the site was appropriate.

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Councillor Chuck Berry and seconded by Councillor Gavin Grant that permission be refused by reason of the nature of the activities being proposed and its sensitive location within the Ashton Keynes Conservation Area as well as its proximity to surrounding residential properties, it is considered that the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the locality and would adversely impact upon the amenities of residents.  The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of Policies CP57 (vi) and (vii) and CP58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy as well as Policy ENP3 of the Ashton Keynes Neighbourhood Plan 2015-2026

Resolved

That planning permission be refused for the following reason:

By reason of the nature of the activities being proposed and its sensitive location within the Ashton Keynes Conservation Area as well as its proximity to surrounding residential properties, it is considered that the proposal would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Public Participation

Sue Upton, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Clare Wallace, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Kevin Hamilton, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Simon Chambers, planning agent, spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Maggie Bawden, Chairman of Hullavington Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer, Simon Smith, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the erection of 2 new dwellings.

Key issues highlighted included: the location of the proposals within the settlement boundary and that the emerging plan agrees that the settlement boundary would mean that the site would be outside of that boundary but that the adopted plan should be given greater weight than the emerging plan; that the highway officer had not made an objections; the design and elevations of the proposals; the material to be used; the additional drainage conditions; the distances of the proposals in relation to existing proposals.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer which focused on: the arrangements for accessing the site; the arrangements for bins and refuse collections; the relevance of permitted development rights.

Specific advice was sought from officers regarding the weight that could be given to the proposed new settlement boundary adopted into the draft Wiltshire Housing Site Allocation Plan. The officers view was that Wiltshire Housing Site Allocation Plan still carries relatively limited weight and the application should be determined against the current adopted plan.

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

Councillor Baroness Jane Scott of Bybrook OBE, Division Member, spoke in objection to the application with the main points focusing on the concerns over access to the site, the difficulties of waste facilities for the proposal, the location of the proposal in relation to the settlement boundary, and the allocation of housing land existing for the village.

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Councillor Sturgis and seconded by Councillor Gavin Grant to refuse planning permission as the proposal results in the access road being routed through the open countryside, falling out side of the current settlement boundary for Hullavington village.  Further, the Wiltshire Housing Site Allocations Development Plan Document, now formally approved by the Full Council on 10/07/18, substantively excludes the application site from the settlement boundary, and can therefore be given considerable weight in decision making.  For the above reasons, the proposal would take place in the open countryside, outside of the village settlement boundary and would adversely impact upon the character and appearance of locality contrary to the provisions of Policies CP57 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy.

Prior to the vote, the Planning Officer reiterated his previous advice that only limited weight could be given to the emerging Wiltshire Housing Site Allocation Plan and that the application should be determined against the policies within the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy.

At the conclusion of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Public Participation

Callan Powers, planning agent, spoke in objection of the application on behalf of one of the local residents.

Laura Glynn-Jones, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Dave Wingrove, Chairman of Ashton Keynes Parish Council, applicant, spoke in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer, Victoria Griffin, introduced a report which recommended refusing planning permission, for the erection of a two bedroom holiday cottage with mostly natural stone elevations and a natural slate roof above.

Key issues highlighted included: the location of the plan, and its location within the conservation area; the current buildings on the site; the orientation of the proposals and their elevation on the site; the views of the site from the highway; the proposed floorplan; the materials proposed to be used; the relationship of the proposals to existing buildings; the size of the proposals and their impact on the character of the conservation area;

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer which focused on: the views from different angles and the existing properties that had previously been on the site.

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

Councillor Chuck Berry, Division Member, spoke in relation to the application with the main points focusing on the relevance of the neighbourhood plan.

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Councillor Chuck Berry and seconded by Councillor Hutton for refusal as detailed in the report.

Resolved:

That Planning Permission be refused for the following reason:

The proposal would create a large dominant detached dwellinghouse within a modest plot which would cause an unacceptable level of visual and physical harm to the wider historic setting and setting within the Conservation Area contrary to policies CP58 & CP 57 (i) of the Wiltshire Core Strategy, policy HCP1 of the Ashton Keynes Neighbourhood Plan (2017) and the aims and requirements of Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and Section 12 'Conserving and enhancing the historic environment' of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Public Participation

Anthony Dixon, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

The Planning Officer, Rose Fox, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for a phased 8 classroom extension with ancillary rooms, new main entrance, enlarged staff room and associated external works.

Key issues highlighted included: the phased developments for the plan; that the proposals would allow the school to take more pupils; the improvements to parking, classrooms, access and sports facilities; the elevations of the proposals; the impact on the proposals on the neighbours; that public protection officers had no objections in relation to increased noise arising from the developments; phase two may only be required if more housing was brought forward, but that phase one would meet current housing coming forward; seeking to relocate trees.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer which focused on:  the loss of trees from the proposal; whether an advisory regarding a traffic management plan could be added.

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

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Councillor Gavin Grant and seconded by Councillor Peter Hutton to grant planning permission as detailed in the report with the addition of a condition regarding travel planning.

Resolved:

Delegate to office approrpaite plan on tree planning and on landscaping and school travel plan.

To Grant planning permission, subject to the following conditions:

Time limit:

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.

Approved plans:

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

Plans as received by the LPA 04/04/2018:

Site Location Plan (0001 Rev: A, dated: 29/03/18)

Existing Site Plan (0002 Rev: B, dated: 13/04/18)

Existing First Floor Plan (0202 Rev: A, dated: 29/03/18)

Existing Roof Plan (0206 Rev: A, dated: 29/03/18)

Plans as received by the LPA 29/06/2018:

Proposed Phase 1 Site Plan (0003 Rev: D, dated: 29/06/2018)

Proposed Phase 2 Site Plan (0004 Rev: E, dated: 29/06/2018)

Contractor access plan (0005 Rev: C, dated: 29/06/2018)

Children’s Centre Boundary (0006 Rev: C, dated: 29/06/2018)

Existing Ground Floor Plan (0201 Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 1 Ground Floor Plan (0203 Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 2 Ground Floor Plan (0204 Rev: C, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 1 & 2 First Floor Plans (0205 Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 1 Roof Plan (0207 Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 2 Roof Plan (0208 Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Existing Elevations (2001 Rev: B, dated 13/04/18)

Proposed Phase 1 Elevations (2002 Rev: C, dated: 27/06/18)

Proposed Phase 2 Elevations (2003, Rev: B), dated: 27/06/18)

Existing and Proposed Site Section A-A (3001, Rev: B, dated: 27/06/18)

Existing and Proposed Site Section  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

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.