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

Agenda and draft minutes

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

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

Items
No. Item

96.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from:

 

·         The Chairman, Cllr Andy Oliver – Vice-Chairman Cllr Sven Hocking chaired the meeting in his absence.

·         Cllr George Jeans – who was substituted by Cllr Graham Wright

·         Cllr Nick Errington

·         Cllr Nabil Najjar

·         Cllr Charles McGrath

97.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2022.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2022 were presented.

 

Resolved:

 

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes.

98.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

There were none.

99.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Minutes:

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

100.

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 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 Thursday 16 June 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 Monday 20 June 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.

 

 

Minutes:

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

101.

Planning Appeals and Updates

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

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

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

 

Resolved

 

That the appeals update be noted.

 

102.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

103.

APPLICATION NUMBER: PL/2022/00560 - 27 The Oakbournes, Bishopdown

Single storey front extension

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Karen Stokes (Applicant), spoke in support of the application

Trudi Dean spoke on behalf of Laverstock & Ford PC

 

The Planning Officer, Tom Collins, presented the application for the single storey front extension.

 

The Officer summarised an update from Laverstock & Ford parish council to reiterate its objection.

 

The application was recommended for Approval with conditions, as set out in the report attached to the agenda.

 

Material considerations detailed in the report included:

·         Principle of development

·         Scale and design, impact to character and appearance of area

·         Neighbour amenity

 

It was noted that the dwelling was set back from the neighbouring property and road with a mix of styles of architecture along the Streetscene. The extension would be shielded by the side gable of the neighbouring property.

 

Members then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the Officer,

where the position of the proposed extension was clarified in relation to the neighbouring properties.

 

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

the application.

 

The applicant would require disabled adaptations to her property in the future, having the proposed extension would enable her to continue living in her home in the ground floor rooms. The extension was of a similar size to two other dwellings in the neighbourhood and not considered to be detrimental to the neighbouring properties

 

The parish council representative noted its objection based on the large scale to the front of the property, the sloping nature of the site and over development of the plot.

 

Local Member Cllr Ian McLennan spoke on the application noting the already built large extension at the rear, the affected view of the other neighbouring properties, amounting to a loss of amenity.

 

He drew attention to the covenant which applied to the estate but noted that it was a civil matter and not a planning consideration.

 

Cllr McLennan then moved the motion of Refusal for the reasons as stated. This was seconded by Cllr Dalton.

 

The Committee discussed the application, the main points included clarification from the presentation slides on the extent of the extension in comparison to the side wall of the neighbouring property. The support of the neighbour subject to conditions was also noted.

 

After discussion, the Committee voted on the motion of Refusal. The motion failed. 

 

The Chairman, Cllr Hocking then moved the motion of Approval in line with Officer recommendation, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

 

This was seconded by Cllr Wayman.

 

An amendment to add a condition restricting the hours of construction was made by Cllr Dalton this was supported by Cllr Hocking and Wayman.

 

The Committee voted on the motion of Approval with the added condition to restrict the hours of construction, as set out by the Officer.

 

It was,

 

Resolved:

 

That application PL/2022/00560 be Approved in line with Officer recommendation, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years

from the date of this permission.

REASON: To  ...  view the full minutes text for item 103.

104.

APPLICATION NUMBER: PL/2022/01048 - Land Adjacent to 2 Old Sarum Cottages, Portway, Old Sarum, SP4 6BY

Erection of 4 terraced dwellings with parking, amenity areas and new access road

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Caroline Everette (Agent) spoke in support of the application

Trudi Dean spoke on behalf of Laverstock & Ford PC

 

The Senior Planning Officer, Lynda King, drew attention to the late correspondence circulated at the meeting, giving a summary of the content before presenting the application for the erection of 4 terraced dwellings with parking, amenity areas and a new access road.

 

There were no objections from the statutory consultees, however Ecology, had requested an amended condition, and Highways, had requested a southern drop kerb be included.

 

The application was recommended for Approval with conditions, as set out in the report and late correspondence.

 

Material considerations detailed in the report included:

 

·         Principle

·         Highway safety

·         Drainage

·         Layout

·         Impact on residential amenities of adjacent commercial operation

 

It was noted that it was a brown field site, just outside of the urban area, suitable for redevelopment.

 

The land sloped down at the rear, with a section of the site to be retained for continued use as a coach business, with office and parking. A section of coach parking would be removed, and the two existing dwellings would be retained.

 

The proposal was of a contemporary design, in keeping with the other development on the Old Sarum development. It was noted that the site would not be particularly visible from the road.

 

There was existing approval for a development of 6 dwellings, granted in 2021.

 

Members then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the Officer,

where it was clarified that the previously granted permission for 6 dwellings was still valid. If this application was granted, the applicant would have the option to build either permission.

 

The footpath between plots 1 and 2 would allow access to the rear of the properties.

 

Electric charging points were included on each of the new parking spaces as well as on the spaces for the existing two properties.

 

The current application was for four 3 bed units, whereas the previously approved was for six 4 bed units.

 

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

the application, some of the main points related to the design, quality of materials, retained employment use, protection of the amenity area, comparison to other local mixed-use sites.

 

It was noted that the flooding concerns raised related to fields which were in the ownership of a local farmer, and not part of the development site.

 

The Laverstock & Ford parish council representative spoke in objection, noting flooding, access, design, and the impact of mixed use on residents.

 

The statement of Local Member Cllr Andy Oliver, who had given apologies, was read by Cllr Hocking. It focused on the areas of objection which had been put forward by Laverstock & Ford PC, which were noise, design, safety, and flooding.

 

Cllr Hocking then moved the motion of refusal for the reasons given above. This was seconded by Cllr Mclennan.

 

The Committee then discussed the application where it was noted that the reasons for refusal had been addressed by means  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

105.

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

Late correspondence

Supporting documents:

 

Actions

Search

This website