Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Nic Puntis, Steve Bucknell and Martin Smith.

It was noted that Councillor Nic Puntis had arranged for Councillor Peter Hutton to attend the meeting in his absence. In addition, Councillor Martin Smith had arranged for Councillor Ruth Hopkinson to attend the meeting in his absence.

To approve as a true and correct record the minutes of the previous meeting held on 3 August 2022.

Councillor Gavin Grant thanked Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman for his helpful discussions that had taken place with Bloor Homes since the previous Committee meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 August 2022 were presented for consideration, and it was;

Resolved:

To approve and sign as a true and correct record of the minutes of the meeting held on 3 August 2022.

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

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

The Chairman informed those in attendance of the procedures in place if there was to be a fire alarm.

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 5 October 2022 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 7 October 2022. 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.

No questions had been received from councillors or members of the public.

The Chairman welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

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

Councillor Elizabeth Threlfall moved that the Committee note the contents of the appeals report included within the agenda. It was seconded by Councillor Gavin Grant. 

Resolved:

To note the Planning Appeals Update Report for 17 October 2022.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

The Committee considered and determined the following planning applications:

Proposed change of use from Café/Wine Bar (sui generis) to a dwelling (Class C3) and associated works.

Public Participation

Cllr Kevin Assinder spoke on behalf of Christian Malford Parish Council.

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman presented a report which outlined the proposed change of use from Café/Wine Bar (sui generis) to

a dwelling (Class C3) and associated works.

Details were provided of the site and issues raised by the proposals, including the principle of development; loss of community asset; impact on the character, appearance, visual amenity of the locality; impact on the character and appearance of the Grade II Listed Building. In addition, the impact on residential amenity; access and parking; drainage.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were sought on, but not limited to whether any conditions had been placed in relation to the use of the area at the front of the building for storage. It was clarified that PD removal would not be necessary give the proposals and site constraints and that previous interest in the property had been withdrawn by a party once they had been provided with estimated costs for refurbishment. It was also clarified that the property had not been specifically marked for community use and that it had been vacant for 11 years with no expressions of community interest or proposals tabled.

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

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Howard Greenman then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Greenman raised the following points, including that the application had been called in to Committee due to being a loss of community asset and that the application was in conflict with the Christian Malford Neighbourhood Plan. Cllr Greenman stressed the importance of Neighbourhood Plans and the use of the building being consistent with it in order to maintain and manage the size of the community.

At the start of the debate a motion to accept both of the officer’s recommendations for planning permission and listed building consent was moved by Councillor Peter Hutton and seconded by Councillor Tony Trotman.

During the debate, issues were raised, but not limited to that it was a shame that the building had not been registered as a community asset as it could have provided such a function as a community café or community fridge considering the current economic situation. Reference was drawn to the minor variations that had taken place over the course of the planning history of the building since 2011 and whether these had been applied for with reason. In addition, it was stated that the application was an opportunity to improve the current condition of the building and that from a licensing perspective prior to Covid many venues and pubs had been struggling.

Further issues that were debated included that though neighbourhood planning has importance the building had been vacant for years and might not have been an integral part of revisions of the Neighbourhood Plan. The importance of preserving the building was stated and that in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

Proposed new dwelling and associated works.

Public Participation

John Cull spoke in objection to the application.

Charlotte Watkins spoke in support of the application.

Tom Newman spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Stuart Suter spoke on behalf of Lea and Cleverton Parish Council.

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman presented a report which responded to the Committee’s previous deferral and information sought.

Details were provided that the application had been reported to the 3rd of August 2022 committee meeting following call in by Councillor Elizabeth Threlfall to consider the proposal’s visual impact upon the surrounding area & environmental/highway impacts in particular drainage. Following the conclusion of the discussion by members at the committee meeting, the application had been deferred to enable the applicant to provide additional information in respect of drainage matters.

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman drew attention to the report, which covered the technical competencies of the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) report authors, apparent discrepancy between the site survey and FRA report topographical survey, proposed finished floor levels and overall height of the dwelling as well as consultation with Wessex Water in respect of the drainage strategy including presentation and consideration by them of representations and flooding evidence by interested parties and Parish Council comments.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were clarified on, but not limited to that permitted development rights had been removed and that a condition had been placed in regard to hard and soft landscaping. It was also clarified that within the previous report the Environment Agency had been consulted and no objections had been raised.

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

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Elizabeth Threlfall then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Threlfall raised the following points including that the main issue for consideration had been drainage and that the Committee had been right to previously defer deciding as Wessex Water had since suggested additional conditions which the application had agreed with. Cllr Threlfall recognised the problem faced by the Committee, that experts from statutory consultees had provided an analysis however this was contrast to views of other experts who were non-statutory consultees. Reference was drawn to how the pluvial flooding from the fields combines with the sewage from Lea north sewage station however it would not be the place of the Committee to improve a pre-existing problem. In addition, Cllr Threlfall stated that she saw both the concern of residents in relation to flooding but also the benefit to the applicant who could provide a home for a family.

At the start of the debate a motion to accept the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor Peter Hutton and seconded by Councillor Tony Trotman.  

During the debate, issues were raised, but not limited to that the Committee now had the answers which it requested at the previous meeting and that it would not be recommended to go against Wessex Water as they are experts.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

To receive the following conservation area statements.

The Committee received the following Conservation Area Statement:

To receive a presentation on the Consultation Statement on the Pickwick Conservation Area.

The Northern Area Planning Committee received a presentation from Tony Clark on the Pickwick Conservation Area. The presentation covered the reasoning why the Pickwick Association had gone ahead with an appraisal, with it stated that such a plan would allow greater protection of the Pickwick Conservation Area. It was outlined that the Association had looked at the geographical and physical setting of Pickwick, identified each listed building as well as suggested a detailed management plan as an annex. The work described how the Pickwick Conservation Area aligned with the Corsham Conservation area as well as identifying three important character areas (the area round Middlewick Lane/A4 Junction, Pickwick Manor and its neighbours, Beechfield). The association also made a number of suggestions as to how the Conservation Area should be managed in the future, which would be matters for Wiltshire Council to consider. It was concluded that the existing Conservation Area is fit for purpose, with positive feedback having been received.

Following the presentation, there was an opportunity for the Committee to raise any questions or statements. The following points were raised including that it would be positive for the document to be shared with Chippenham Town Council, with Cepen Park South being the nearest community to Pickwick. The Pickwick Association was praised for its work, with it acknowledged that though on the Conservation Areas Page on the Wiltshire Council website there are a number of management plans and appraisals completed from 2005-2019, only a few of the areas have got up to date plans. The importance of planning committees knowing the criteria for Conservation Areas was stressed in order to gain value from the time and effort invested into producing appraisals and plans.

Other areas for discussion included that Conservation Management Plans and Neighbourhood Plans have an important inter-relationship, however sometimes the focus on Neighbourhood plans can lead to Conservation Plans being given less attention. It was asked who would own the management plan, which would be a responsibility of Corsham Town Council, Wiltshire Council as well as the trustees. In addition the examples of Neighbourhood Plans and Conservation Plans were cited, where in the case of dry-stone walls Parish Councils had requested that residents repair them.

Development Management Team Leader, Simon Smith congratulated the Pickwick Association as well as Councillor Belcher and Councillor Hopkinson for their work. Simon outlined that the document would not be part of a development plan but would rather fit into the category of being a material consideration, which would be considered when determining a planning application.

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Helen Belcher then spoke regarding the presentation. Cllr Belcher thanked the Committee as well as Tony Clark for his presentation. Cllr Belcher stated that the document had been produced by a learned community group with expertise and that over past decades Corsham had been subject to development, almost doubling the size of the town, with boundaries going beyond Pickwick which was separate. So far the document has been useful in supporting the Neighbourhood Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

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.