Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllr Chuck Berry, Cllr Brian Matthew and Cllr Ashley O’Neill.

Cllr Chuck Berry was substituted by Cllr Jacqui Lay, Cllr Brian Matthew was substituted by Cllr Bob Jones and Cllr Ashley O’Neill was substituted by Phillip Whalley.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 30^th January 2019.

The minutes of the meeting held on 30^th January 2019 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 Gavin Grant declared an interest in agenda item nos. 7a and 7b (member of Malmesbury Town Team). He declared he would participate in the debate and vote for each item with an open mind.

Cllr Toby Sturgis and Cllr Chris Hurst declared an interest in agenda item no. 7b (both have an account with A.C Nurden Ltd). Both declared they would participate in the debate and vote for each item with an open mind.

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 27^th February 2019 in order to be guaranteed of a written response. In order to receive a verbal response questions must be submitted no later than 5pm on1^st March 2019. 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 18.02180.FULand 18.06980.FULas listed in the agenda pack.

The Committee considered the following applications:

Public participation

Richard Morison, on behalf of the Cooperative Group, spoke in objection to the application.

Nicola Earl, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Susan McGill, local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Glen Stidever, the applicant, spoke in support to the application.

Nigel Roberts, the landowner, spoke in support to the application.

Daniel Wheelwright, the agent, spoke in support to the application.

Cllr John Gundry, Malmesbury Town Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr Roger Budgen, Chairman of St Paul Without Parish, spoke in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer, Lee Burman, introduced a report which recommended refusal of planning permission, for Erection of a New Lidl Store and Associated Works Including Car Parking and Landscaping on Land East of the A429, Malmesbury, Wiltshire.

Key issues highlighted included: principle of development; retail impact and the sequential test; impact on the character, appearance and visual amenity of the locality including trees; impact to heritage assets including the conservation area for the town and archaeology; highways impact and parking; drainage & flood risk; impact on ecology; noise and S106 matters.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions

of the officer which focused on: Highways access, improvements to cycle and pedestrian access and the lack of a light control system for pedestrian crossing.

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

detailed above. The representations of St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish and Malmesbury Town Councils, as detailed in the report, were also noted.

Cllr John Thomson, Division Member for Sherston, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on the development of greenfield sites; the location of the proposal; the desire for a discount retail store; the landscaping of the site; highways issues and the need to preserve the countryside.

Cllr Gavin Grant, Division Member for Malmesbury, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on the historical importance of the Malmesbury area; the unique character of the locality; the public concern for the proposal; the risk of taking urban development into the open countryside and the location of the proposal.

The Planning Officer addressed some of the issues raised by the public and local members with the main points focusing on: noise harm; heritage assets; that the application must not be considered in isolation and that planning policy has undergone significant change since similar applications were previously brought to Committee for determination in 2012 and that other material circumstances and considerations have changed significantly in the intervening period including major residential development toward the north of the town.

At the start of the debate the Chairman moved the officer’s recommendation, seconded by Cllr Peter Hutton, to refuse planning permission as detailed in the report.

During the debate the main points raised were: the character and history of the locality; the importance of maintaining the functionality of the bypass; breaching the physical boundary between town and agricultural land; the Neighbourhood Plan; highways concerns and the location  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Public participation

Richard Morison, on behalf of the Cooperative Group, spoke in objection to the application.

Daniel Wheelwright, the agent for 18.02180.FUL, spoke in objection to the application.

Barbara Bowman, local resident, spoke in support to the application.

Simon Glover, the applicant, spoke in support to the application.

Barry Lingard, local resident, spoke in support to the application.

Dan Templeton, the agent, spoke in support to the application.

Cllr Roger Budgen, Chairman of St Paul Without Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr John Gundry, Malmesbury Town Council, spoke in objection to the the application.

The Planning Officer, Lee Burman, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions and the completion of a section 106 planning obligation within 6 months of the date of the meeting, for Full Approval for the Demolition of Existing Buildings and the Erection of a Class A1 Foodstore (1,782 sq m Gross Internal Floor Area) with Associated Access, Car Parking and Landscaping; and Outline Approval for a Replacement Garden Centre and/or Class B1/B2/B8 Employment Uses. Conditions as revised in late items.

Key issues highlighted included: principle of development; retail impact and the sequential test; impact on the character, appearance and visual amenity of the locality including trees; impact on heritage assets including archaeology; highways impact and parking; drainage & flood risk; impact on ecology; noise & residential amenity and section 106 matters.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer which focused on: landscaping improvements; roadside screening and tree planting.

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

detailed above. The representations of St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish and Malmesbury Town Councils, as detailed in the report, were also noted.

Cllr John Thomson, Division Member for Sherston, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing possible employment opportunities; the desire to develop the site in question; the low level of objections to the proposal; the development of brownfield sites and highways and traffic issues.

Cllr Gavin Grant, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on the desire for a discount retail store; the need to ensure a garden centre will remain on the site; possible employment opportunities; highways issues; the desire for the proposal to enhance the retail experience across the Malmesbury area and the need for the applicant to take local needs into consideration and engage with those that live in the vicinity.

The Planning Officer addressed some of the issues raised by the public and local members with the main points focusing on: the robustness and appropriateness of the assessments undertaken; that there is scope for voluntary contribution to S106 from the applicant; pedestrian access; highways issues and the impact to residential amenity.

At the start of the debate the Chairman moved the recommendation of the officers, seconded by Cllr Howard Greenman, to grant planning permission as detailed in the report.

During the debate the main points raised were: possible employment opportunities; the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

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.