If you are reading this page using a screenreader, we support ARIA landmarks for quick navigation too

Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Alamein Suite, City Hall, Malthouse Lane, Salisbury, SP2 7TU

Contact: Lisa Moore  Email: lisa.moore@wiltshire.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

44.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

Apologies had been received from:

 

·       Cllr Ian McLennan

·       Cllr George Jeans

45.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 19th September 2019 were presented.

 

Resolved:

 

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes.

46.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

There were none.

47.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Minutes:

The Chairman explained the meeting procedure to the members of the public.

48.

Public Participation

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 Thursday 7th November, 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 Monday 11th November. 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.

Minutes:

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

49.

Planning Appeals and Updates

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate for the period of 06/09/2019 to 01/11/2019.

 

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The committee received details of the appeal decisions for the period of 06/09/2019 to 01/11/2019, as detailed in the agenda.

 

Resolved:

To note the Appeals Report for the period of 06/09/2019 to 01/11/2019.

 

50.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

51.

19/04863/FUL - Land at Ringwood Avenue, Amesbury, SP4 7PZ

Erection of 19 affordable dwellings, creation of access, landscaping, parking and associated works.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Russ Champ spoke in objection to the application

Adam Pitt spoke in objection to the application

Nikki Cook spoke in objection to the application

Adam Bennett (Agent) spoke in support of the application

 

The Senior Planning Officer Georgina Wright presented the application for the erection of 19 affordable dwellings, creation of access, landscaping, parking and associated works on land at Ringwood Avenue, Amesbury. The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions, as set out in the report.

 

The Officer advised that Amesbury Town Council now supported the application.

 

The scheme proposals included mixed units on the site, with the main vehicular access via Ringwood Road. 

 

Previous planning history was also detailed on page 31 of the report, however the last decision pre-dated the Core Strategy and Planning Policy Framework guidance. Page 32 provided the previous reasons for refusal.  Members have to assess whether previous reason for refusal has been addressed.

 

Officers recommend that it has.  The proposed number of units had reduced from 20 to 19.  Large areas of hard standing has been reduced, and parking spaces now generally inbetween the properties they serve. Bungalows proposed in the western part of the site. 10 metre back gardens are identified

 

S106 funds would be secured from this development. There was a mixture of semi and detached properties, in brick and render.

 

The Committee was then able to ask technical questions of the Officer, where it was clarified that there was no density threshold set out in policy but 20 dwellings (38 dwellings per hectare) had previously been accepted by the last inspector on this site. The garages at the entrance to the site were part owned by the applicant and part were in private ownership. The applicant had confirmed that they could secure a pedestrian link through the garage blocks, despite not having control over all of them.

 

The housing estate was former MoD land which had been sold off. Policy required 6 units to be affordable housing, the proposals were for all 19 units to be affordable housing.

 

If the application was approved and the applicant later came back to request a reduction in affordable housing units on the site, the application would be assessed on its own merits at that time. But the current scheme is for 100% affordable units and this would be secured by the subsequent S106.

 

The width of the vehicular access was marginally narrower than had originally been requested by Highways, however the proposal had been accepted by Highways (requested 7m width and accepted 6.5m width). It is also the same as was accepted by the inspector previoulsy

 

Each of the properties surrounding the perimeter of the site, had a back gate into the field. But the field is privately owned. Village green status had been applied for in the past, this had not been successful. The site was not Council owned, and not in the Open Space Strategy, therefore must be considered as a private site.

 

The residents had been using  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

52.

19/00211/FUL - 124 Wilton Road, Salisbury, SP2 7JZ

Demolition of existing unused building and erection of 5 residential dwellings with associated access, parking and amenity.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Benji Goehl spoke in objection to the application

 

The Senior Planning Officer Lucy Minting presented the application for the demolition of an existing unused building and the erection of 5 residential dwellings with associated access, parking and amenity, at 124 Wilton Road Salisbury.

 

The building was owned by Wiltshire Council, and was previously in use as a youth centre. The surrounding area included a mix of uses and dwellings.

 

The scheme included four 3 bed and two 2 bed semis with a total of 8 parking spaces. Each with front garden and garden to rear.

 

The proposals also included a landscaping strip along the Wilton Road side, to protect a mining bee habitat in the bank. There had also be a revision to the boundary acoustic fencing, it was now in keeping with the character of the area.

 

The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions, as set out in the report.

 

The Officer drew attention to late correspondence circulated at the meeting which detailed questions from a third party.

 

The Committee was then able to ask technical questions of the Officer, where it was clarified that there would be a condition to protect the bank with the mining bees.

 

The fence along Wilton Road was proposed to be 2.5m from the ground.

 

Members of the Public were then given the opportunity to present their views as indicated above. The main points were on the impacts of Climate Change and whether this scheme should be setting an example to others by including things such as electrical charging points and solar panels, as it was a Wiltshire council application and in an Air Quality monitoring zone.

 

The Division Member Cllr John Walsh was not in attendance.

 

Cllr Devine then moved the motion of approval in line with Officer recommendation. This was seconded by Cllr Westmoreland.

 

Cllr Devine felt the scheme was not over cramped, and although there was no visitor parking space, there were options for parking along the road. The mining bees were important and would be protected during construction. He felt this was a good use of the land and fits in well.

 

A debate followed where the key points raised included that the Council’s declaration of a climate emergency, should see its applications taking the lead, however it was noted that the Core Strategy would be including aspects to support climate change initiatives. The Committee requested an informative on the inclusion of solar panels.

 

It was felt that the duty of the Committee was to consider applications as they were presented, it could not say what it would like to see instead. Decisions need to be made on planning terms. 

 

The height level of the fence would be quite intense, above the bank.

 

The Committee then voted on the motion of approval in line with Officer recommendations.

 

Resolved:

That application 19/00211/FUL be approved with conditions:

 

(1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

53.

19/06176/FUL - 34 Park Lane Salisbury

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Mr Weaver spoke in objection to the application

Darryl Howell spoke in support of the application

Rodney Job spoke in support of the application

 

The Planning Team Leader Richard Hughes presented the application to demolish the existing bungalow and erection of 3 townhouses with a detached triple garage, associated parking and vehicular access (resubmission of 18/06402/FUL), at 34 Park Lane, Salisbury, as detailed in the report.

 

The Officer clarified that a response from Highways had been received, they had agreed the amended layout of parking, and requested a condition be applied.

 

The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions, as set out in the report.

 

It was noted that part of Park Lane had already been developed to the south.

 

The site had previously been given planning permission for the development of 2 bungalows with a garage. The application for consideration only related to the front of the site.

 

Issues raised with neighbouring amenity, relating to concerns over reduced daylight as a result of the development. The plan showed the proposed scheme would be positioned forward from the neighbouring property, with an element of single story at the rear.

 

There was already a block of flats adjacent to the site.

 

 An outline plan had previously been approved on the site. This scheme included a total of 9 parking spaces.

 

The Committee was then able to ask technical questions of the Officer, where it was clarified that the approximate height of the proposed development was relatively the same as what had been approved in the outline application. 

 

There was not a full list of proposed materials on the application, if desired by the Committee this could be included on the conditions. 

 

The existing flats position sat slightly in front of the proposed development, with the neighbouring house sat slightly further back in a stepped style along the row.

 

Members of the Public were then given the opportunity to present their views as indicated above. The main points raised included that the development would impact on the levels of light received by neighbouring house and would there would be an element of overlooking.

 

 

The previously approved Outline consent had not indicated the height of the previous scheme. The new scheme was considered to be overdevelopment for the size of this site, as the footprint was 20% larger.

 

The development would provide three family homes which would be highly sustainable and have access to local amenity. The Outline permission was for a block of 4 flats. The style of the new scheme had a Georgian influence and would complement other properties in Park Lane.

 

The scheme had the support of the Tree Officer.

 

The overlooking from the townhouses would be minimised by the use of oblique glass in the windows.

 

This scheme was superior in design than the previous outline application. 

 

The Division Member Cllr Mary Douglas then spoke on the application noting that she had called the application in to enable a full debate at Committee. 

 

The number of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

Urgent Items

Any other items of business which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be taken as a matter of urgency 

 

Minutes:

There were no urgent items

 

Actions

Search

This website