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

Agenda and minutes

Venue: The Guildhall, Market Place, Salisbury, Wiltshire, SP1 1JH. View directions

Contact: Lisa Alexander  Email: lisa.alexander@wiltshire.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

21.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from:

 

·       Cllr Charles McGrath who was substituted by Cllr Robert Yuill

·       Cllr Andy Oliver

 

22.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 19 August 2021.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 August 2021 were presented.

 

Resolved:

 

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes.

 

23.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

In relation to Item 7c – Application PL.2021.03958, it was noted that the Applicant Amanda Newbury was known to most of the Committee members due to her various roles within the community.

 

24.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chairman.

Minutes:

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

25.

Public Participation

The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public. During the ongoing Covid-19 situation the Council may need to operate revised procedures and timescales.

 

Statements

Members of the public who wish to make a statement in relation to an item on this agenda should contact the officer named on this agenda no later than 5pm on 13 October 2021 to register.

 

Statements should:

 

·       State whom the statement is from (including if representing another person or organisation);

 

·       State clearly whether the statement is in objection to or support of the application;

 

·       Be readable aloud in approximately three minutes (for members of the public and statutory consultees) and in four minutes (for parish council representatives – 1 per parish council).

 

Up to three objectors and three supporters are normally allowed for each item on the agenda, plus statutory consultees and parish councils.

 

Those making statements would be expected to attend to read the statement themselves, or to provide a representative to read the statement on their behalf.

 

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 electronically to the officer named on the front of this agenda no later than 5pm on 8 October 2021in order to be guaranteed of a written response.

 

In order to receive a verbal response questions must be submitted no later than 5pm on 11 October 2021.

 

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 members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website. Questions and answers will normally be taken as read at the meeting.

Minutes:

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

26.

Planning Appeals and Updates

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate for the period of 06/08/2021 to 01/10/2021.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

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

 

Resolved:


That the Appeals Report be noted.

 

27.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

28.

PL.2021.06492 - Land Adjacent to The Bowman Centre, Shears Drive, Amesbury, Wiltshire, SP4 7XT

To erect a new church with day nursery.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Samantha Covington spoke in objection to the application

A statement of Objection from Caroline Pollard was read by Samantha Covington

A statement of Objection from Michael Holloway was read by Samantha Covington

Simon Rutter (Agent) spoke in support of the application

 

Attention was drawn to additional information which had been published in Supplement 1 to the agenda, which detailed the Town Council objection and no objection from the MOD or Public Protection. One further letter of objection had been received and summarised and a revised recommendation was set out.

 

The Senior Planning Officer, Georgina Wright, presented the application which was for the erection of a new church with day nursery, on land adjacent The Bowman Centre, Shears Drive, Amesbury, Wiltshire, SP4 7XT.

 

The main issues which had been considered to be material in the determination of the application were listed as Principle, Character & Design, Neighbouring Amenities, Highway Safety, Waste Management, and Archaeology.

 

The site consists of one parcel within the local centre at the Kings Gate residential development, which was secured in line with the strategic allocation of the wider site as an urban extension to the Market Town of Amesbury.

 

The local centre which had been subdivided into a number of parcels, of which applications had been approved and, in most cases built out, for various uses on these parcels. This application involved the last remaining parcel (parcel D).

 

The Officer outlined two previous applications for the parcel of land, and the outcomes of those in 2016 and 2019. The amendments were shown and explained, these included additional car parking spaces on site and the use of additional public spaces around the site, and the height of the proposed building in comparison to the surrounding properties. 

 

The application was recommended for Approval with conditions as set out in the report.

 

Members then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, where it was clarified that the remit for the site included use as a church so there was no requirement for a needs assessment.

 

The town council objection had been received in time, but had been missed off the original report, which was why it was later uploaded as an update (Supplement 1) to the agenda.

 

Conditions for ventilation, solar panels and electric charging points could be added if the Committee was minded to approve.

 

Members of the public as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

 

Some of the main points in objection were focused around the size and scale of the development. Parking issues associated with a large congregation travelling from Tidworth and Bulford and the impacts on the road network.

 

The suitability of the site for a development with an associated high footfall and whether the new application sufficiently addressed previous concerns.

 

Noise concerns relating to highly amplified singing and whether it would be intrusive to residents. 

 

Some of the points in support included the intention for the church to be a part of the local community centre,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

29.

PL.2021.04201 - Land Previously Occupied by Alderbury Football Club

All outstanding Reserved Matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for the erection of 50 residential units, pumping station and replacement guide hut with associated infrastructure, parking, landscaping, open space and works, all pursuant to permission 17/04001/OUT.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Chris Harmon spoke in objection to the application

Nick Billington (Agent) spoke in support of the application

Cllr Elaine Hartford (Chair) spoke on behalf of Alderbury PC

 

Attention was drawn to additional information which had been published in Supplement 2 to the agenda, which detailed additional conditions and informative notes.

 

The Senior Planning Officer, Lynda King, presented the application which was for all outstanding Reserved Matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for the erection of 50 residential units, pumping station and replacement guide hut with associated infrastructure, parking, landscaping, open space and works, all pursuant to permission 17/04001/OUT.

 

It was noted that Highways was not a matter for consideration due to having been decided by the inspector at outline stage. In 2018 there had not been a 5-year land supply, this was still the case.

 

The main issues which had been considered to be material in the determination of this application were listed as Principle, Highway Safety, Drainage, Layout and House Design.

 

The site was a generally level area of open land to the west of Alderbury and West Grimstead Primary School and was bordered by Junction Road along it’s western boundary and a footpath leading from Junction Road and Firs Road along it’s southern boundary.

 

The land was currently used by Alderbury Football Club, along with the new
facilities for the club on land immediately to the north of the site granted under ref no. S/2011/0029. The site also housed the existing Guide Hut, which would be replaced on a different section, as part of the proposals.

 

Access was also previously approved as part of the outline application.

 

The footpath was not part of the application site and therefore improvements to this could not be requested.

 

The proposals included a significant amount of contributions and the site was in a sustainable location on edge of the village. There was also an affordable housing contribution. 

 

Members then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, where it was clarified that whilst the affordable housing on the site was under the usual 40% requirement, at 22%, this had been approved by the Inspector at the outline stage of the appeal.

 

The site was also liable for CIL at the usual contribution rate. The 106 had already been written and could not be added to at this stage.

 

 

An informative for the provision of fibre broadband to the properties could be added, should the Committee be minded to approve.

 

The provision of a pre-school was part of a separate application.

 

Members of the public as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

 

Some of the main points in support included the urban appearance in a rural landscape, excess water run-off. 

 

Some of the main points in support included the changes made to alleviate concerns raised, including materials, a shared surface area, a more formal street layout, and a redesigned drainage scheme.

 

The Parish Council (PC) representative spoke in objection to the development on this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

30.

PL.2021.03958 - 29 and 29A Brown Street, Salisbury, SP1 2AS

Demolition of existing building with retention of existing façade with minor modifications and use of land as a hospitality area (Description revised following changes to the proposed frontage – previously “Demolition of existing building, erection of gates and railings as modification to front facade to facilitate use of land as a hospitality”).

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Dr Roger Frost (Charter Court Management Company) spoke in objection to the application

Jonty Newbury spoke in support of the application

Amanda Newbury spoke in support of the application

Cllr Atiqul Hoque spoke in support of the application

 

Attention was drawn to additional information which had been published in Supplement 3 to the agenda, which detailed the response of the Environmental Health Noise Officer in relation to the requirement and position of the noise barrier.

 

The Planning Team Leader, Adam Madge, presented the application which was for Demolition of existing building with retention of existing façade with minor modifications and use of land as a hospitality area (Description revised following changes to the proposed frontage – previously “Demolition of existing building, erection of gates and railings as modification to front facade to facilitate use of land as a hospitality”). The application had been deferred at the last meeting to allow discussions to take place and a plan for a noise barrier to be formed.

 

The main issues which had been considered to be material in the determination of this application were listed as demolition of the existing building and impact on the Conservation Area, Principle of the proposed use, Impact on residential amenity and noise/disturbance.

 

Officer recommendation was for a noise barrier in a set location, of at least 4m in height.

 

Members then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, where it was clarified that the final specifications of the barrier were not yet determined, however a condition was suggested that approval of materials was delegated to Officers prior to the installation of the barrier. The noise barrier would also need to comply with any conditions relating to the conservation area.

 

Members of the public as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

 

Some of the main points in objection included that the closest dwelling was 35 yards. The application had been opposed as it was felt there would be inadequate noise protection, however since the last meeting there had been discussions between the residents, the applicant and the Council to remedy the noise concerns.

 

Haze McKenzie were appointed to assess the site and had suggested a noise barrier be erected and noise be restricted to 65dbs.

 

Residents agreed with the barrier, however felt this should be a minimum of 5m in height and be in place by spring of 2022.

Some of the main points of those in support included that a Noise Consultant had been contracted to advise on a solution. Discussions with resident and the council had been held to find a solution as it was important to the applicant to work with her neighbours.

 

The applicant was supported by the city council ward councillor who spoke in support, noting that the applicant was known for her good work in the community.

 

Local Member Cllr Sample who was not on the Committee, spoke to the application, noting that the identified gap had been acting as a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

31.

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