Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from:

·       Cllr Brian Dalton who was substituted by Cllr Trevor Carbin

·       Cllr John Smale who was substituted by Cllr Robert Yuill

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 30^th May 2019, as attached to the agenda.

The minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 30^th May 2019 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes.

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

Cllr George Jeans declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 6 – Mere Footpath No. 78 – Definitive Map and Statement, due to his local involvement and for item 6 Cllr Jeans opted to sit with the public during the public representations, and nominated Cllr Tony Deane to read his statement as Local Member. During debate and for the vote on this item, Cllr Jeans chose to leave the room, although he was aware that this was not a required procedure.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

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 (4 clear working days, e.g. Wednesday of week before a Wednesday meeting) 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 (2 clear working days, eg Friday of week before a Wednesday meeting). 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.

To consider six objections and three representations of support to The Wiltshire Council Mere Path No.78 Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order 2019 made under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Officer recommendation:

that the Order be forwarded to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (SoSEFRA) for determination with Wiltshire Council taking a neutral stance.

Public participation

Graham Sams spoke in objection to the recommendation.

Mrs Seward spoke in objection to the recommendation.

Adrienne Howell spoke in objection to the recommendation

Clive Hazzard spoke on behalf of the Mere Town Council

Due to his declared interest, Cllr George Jeans removed himself from the committee table to sit with the public.

Craig Harlow, Definitive Map Officer presented the Wiltshire Council Mere Path No.78 Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order 2019 made under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 198, as detailed in his report attached to the agenda.

He noted that on 24 April 2018 Wiltshire Council received an application for an Order to record a public footpath over land north of The Square, Mere in the parish of Mere.

The claimed route led from The Square, Mere north through an archway and across a private car park to North Street, Mere, having a length of approximately 57 metres.

This application was supported by 26 representations, with 21 meeting the criteria as valid claims.

The iron gates depicted were still in place, however the wooden gates were no longer in place. Photographs of the wooden gates in place during 2006/7 and 2009 were shown to Committee.

The statements of use were in conflict with the evidence given by the landowner, who had stated that the gates were closed and padlocked during some periods, but was unsure of exact dates of some of those occurrences.

A letter was sent to users asking for their awareness pre- 1970s, asking for any knowledge of locked gates. At that stage some evidence was withdrawn and other statements were changed to reflect lesser use than was originally stated.

Officers believed that the gate was blocked during 2007, which would alter the continual 20-year period of use.

As objections have been received to the Modification Order it must now be referred to the Secretary of State for a public enquiry.

The Officer recommendation was that the Order should be determined by SoSEFRA with Wiltshire Council taking a neutral stance.

The options available to the Committee were provided in the report.

The Officer drew attention to the late correspondence which was circulated at the meeting, as supplement 1, which detailed a photograph showing the gates open in 1928, and an email from a business owner in Mere stating the continual use of the path during 2007.

The Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the Officer, where it was clarified that the time of continual use looked for was a period of 20 years and the application for a Modificaiton Order had been made by a Member of the Public where the test was a lower test - ‘reasonable allegation’ – however the test to confirm the Order was a higher test being the ‘balance of probabilities’.  Due to conflicts in the evidence submitted to the Council, the Order must be referred to the Secretary of State.

The report mentioned that there were three routes from the square  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate for the period of 17^th May 2019 to 6^th September 2019, as detailed in the attached report.

The committee received details of the appeal decisions as detailed in the agenda.

Resolved

The Committee noted the Appeals update for the period of 17^th May 2019 to 6^th September 2019.

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

Demolish black barn and rebuild using brick and cladding to create annexe within curtilage of Rowdens Farm house.

Public Participation

Whiteparish Parish Council – Trevor King

For clarity, Cllr Leo Randall noted that he was a member of Whiteparish PC, however was not in attendance at the parish meeting when the matter was discussed.

The Senior Planning Officer Becky Jones presented the application to demolish the black barn and rebuild using brick and cladding to create an annexe within the curtilage of Rowdens Farm house. The application was recommended for approval with conditions.

It was noted that the barn on the left was agricultural and was excluded from the red line area as it was still currently in use.

The barn was of a fairly historic construction, however, was not of concern to the Conservation Officer.

An application originally came in for a change of use, however this was   withdrawn due to the domestic storage underneath. The application for consideration today was then submitted.

The design was approximately 30cm taller than the existing barn, and included a dormer and balcony on the roof. The footprint had not changed and the proposal included 2 bedrooms, each with ensuites. Appendix 4 detailed personal reasons why that arrangement was needed.

The main dwelling was for agricultural workers. Any occupant of the annex would also need to be a dependent or relative of the agricultural dwelling occupants.

The Officer drew attention to the other case laws which had been included in the report for guidance.

The Panel were then able to ask technical questions of the Officer, where it was clarified that condition 4 set out the restriction on the sale of the annex as a separate dwelling.

Members of the public were then given the opportunity to present their views as detailed below.[ED1] 

Trevor King spoke on behalf of Whiteparish parish council. He urged the committee to refuse the application. The parish council did not believe the proposed development was an annex in any way, as it was 17.5m away from main dwelling.

He queried the statement in the report which suggested there was insufficient room to extend Rowdens Farm house, noting that there was plenty of room for an extension.

The condition is understood very well, however there were ways to get around them, as in 5/6 years’ time, he suggested that the applicant would come back to the committee for a certificate of lawfulness, and then the condition would be removed. At that point, would it also remove the condition from Rowdens farm house? The Parish was seeing annexes being sold away from the main dwellings with land registry.

The Division Member, Councillor Richard Britton then spoke in objection to the application, noting that Core Policy (CP) 48 was not engaged because it referred to a conversion and to existing buildings, yet the proposed development was accepted as a new build. He queried how then they could continue to argue that CP24 applied. He suggested that the development was not an extension or an addition to a building, therefore CP24 was not engaged.

The report argued  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

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