Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from:

Cllr Ian McLennan

Cllr Charles McGrath

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2024 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.

There were no declarations of interest.

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 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 and others will have had the opportunity to make representations on planning applications and other items on the agenda, and to contact and lobby their local elected member and any other members of the planning committee, prior to the meeting.

Those circulating such information prior to the meeting, written or photographic, are advised to also provide a copy to the case officer for the application or item, in order to officially log the material as a representation, which will be verbally summarised at the meeting by the relevant officer, not included within any officer slide presentation if one is made. Circulation of new information which has not been verified by planning officers or case officers is also not permitted during the meetings.

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 9 May 2024, 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 13 May 2024. 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 receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.

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

It was;

Resolved:

To note the Update Report

Change of use of land and building adjoining Newhaven, Larkhill Road, Durrington from a vehicle repair workshop to a mixed use of a vehicle repair workshop and for the storage and distribution of logs.

Public Participation

Mr Steven Morley spoke in objection to the application

Mr Jonathan Hook spoke in support of the application

The Planning Officer, Hayley Clark, introduced a report which recommended that the application for Change of use of land and building adjoining Newhaven, Larkhill Road, Durrington from a vehicle repair workshop to a mixed use of a vehicle repair workshop and for the storage and distribution of logs be approved.

Key details were stated to include the principle of development including planning history, design and scale, impact to the amenity of the area, parking/highway safety.

The Officer noted that it was a retrospective application, as logs were already being stored on site.

There were no technical questions of the officer by members.

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

The Unitary Division member was not in attendance to make a statement to the Committee.

Cllr Sven Hocking then moved a motion of Approval, in line with Officer recommendation. This was seconded by Cllr Rich Rogers. 

A debate followed where the issue of creeping industrialisation, the current permissions for use of the site, the mixture of residential and industrial in the area and the reason why the application was retrospective, in that the owners had already started storing and processing logs on the site prior to a change of use.

It was clarified that the site currently has permission for use as a vehicular garage.  

The Committee discussed the conditions at length, specifically those which would restrict the hours of operation, the amount of lorry deliveries and external lighting.

There was no objection from Highways due to the restriction on deliveries.

It was confirmed that log processing has stopped on site and that only storage and distribution of the logs was now taking place. The Committee requested that if approved, Condition 8 be amended to clarify that no log processing was to take place on the site.

The original mover of the motion, Cllr Sven Hocking agreed to the amended condition 8. This was seconded by Cllr Rich Rogers.

At the close of debate, the Committee voted on the motion of Approval in line with Officer recommendation, subject to additional wording to Condition 8 to state there would be no log processing on site.

It was;

Resolved

That planning permission for application PL/2024/00694 be Granted as per the 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 comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Location plan received 23/01/2024

Design and access statement received 31/01/2024

Plan showing area of log storage received 07/05/2024

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

Provision of car parking facility close to station to support redevelopment of forecourt to front of Salisbury Railway Station, providing a temporary car park facility for maximum of three years for use by passengers, with creation of 89 no. parking spaces for passenger use and 8 no. spaces marked out for Royal Mail use.

­­Public Participation

No registered speakers.

The Senior Planning Officer, Joe Richardson, introduced a report which recommended that the application forProvision of car parking facility close to station to support redevelopment of forecourt to front of Salisbury Railway Station, providing a temporary car park facility for maximum of three years for use by passengers, with creation of 89 no. parking spaces for passenger use and 8 no. spaces marked out for Royal Mail use be approved.

Attention was drawn to the access to the site via Fisherton Street, with vehicles exiting on to Spire View and back round on to Fisherton Street.

The application was for a 3-year period to facilitate the station forecourt works in conjunction with highways and southwest railway.

Key details include the principle of development including planning history, design and scale; Impact to the amenity of the area, ecological Impact including the River Avon SAC and New Forest SPA; parking/highway safety; drainage/land contamination;

Members of the committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on the Master Plan for the station works, in relation to whether a 3 year temporary permission was enough time for the redevelopment of the station forecourt to be completed. 

The Officer also set out the planning history of the site, confirming that there was no planning permission on the site at present.

It was noted that there were no objections from the Landscaping Officer and that if approved, after the 3-year period expired the applicant would be required to reinstate the land to a brown site, with a scheme to be provided to the council for reinstatement.

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

The unitary division member, Councillor Paul Sample then spoke in objection to the application, noting areas of concern which had been raised by local residents to the site.

The main issues noted included the impact on residents due to the clearing of the site of established flora and fauna, and the wildlife living within. It was stated that until recently the growth had acted as a buffer from the site and from what would subsequently occur if planning permission was approved.

If the application was approved, the Division Member asked whether amendments could be made to require the applicant to reinstate the removed planting and fence to the north of the site.

Cllr Sven Hocking moved the motion of approval in line with officer recommendation with an amendment to the conditions which would increase the implementation of larger more substantial planting and the re-installation of the fence to the northern boundary of the site.

The Officer clarified that the site was a derelict brown field site which had previously left to become overgrown, there had not been any associated planting on the site. The application also included the reinstatement of a fence to the northern boundary.

The motion was seconded by Councillor Nabil Najjar.

A debate followed where the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

(Revised) Erect 86 dwellings together with garages, car barns, and refuse/cycle stores. Lay out gardens and erect means of enclosure. Creation of new vehicular access to Odstock Road. Lay out internal roads, including drives and pavements. Provision of associated public open space, play areas and landscape planting.

Public Participation

There were none.

The Planning Team Leader, Richard Hughes, introduced a report which recommended approval of the revised application for the erection of 86 dwellings together with garages, car barns, and refuse/cycle stores. Lay out gardens and erect means of enclosure. Creation of new vehicular access to Odstock Road. Lay out internal roads, including drives and pavements and provision of associated public open space, play areas and landscape planting.

The Officer gave an update on changes that had occurred following the resolution to grant approval of the scheme in April 2022. This included the publication of the revised NPPF in December 2023, and changes to the Council’s nutrient neutrality scheme.

It was noted that the recommendation of officers remained of approval of the scheme, subject to a suitable S106 agreement and conditions.

Attention was drawn to two letters of representation received since the publication of the agenda, relating to swift bricks and biodiversity net gain.

The Officer confirmed that the applicant had agreed to an amendment to the application to include one swift brick per property, which was beyond what was required.

Members of the committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on the biodiversity net gain matter, which was then explained further.

The Officer noted that a legal agreement was in the final stages and discussions were underway with Ecology regarding the payment amount.

The initial understanding was that a Council scheme would cover the phosphate mitigation for the development. However, the mitigation scheme had now changed, and developers would need to provide towards that mitigation.

Condition 9 relating to Bee homes, bat roosting, hedgehog homes was discussed in relation to whether there would be a fair distribution across all types of properties on the development site, or whether they would be applied solely to the social housing properties.

The Officer confirmed that condition 9 could be amended to state that they were evenly distributed across the site with no distinction.

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

The unitary division member, councillor Sven Hocking then spoke in support of the application, noting the application was for 86 dwellings not 95. During previous consideration, the number of houses had been reduced and the layout amended to move dwellings away from the treeline.

Councillor Sven Hocking then moved the motion of approval in line with Officer recommendation, subject to an amendment to Condition 9 relating to an even distribution across the site.

This was seconded by Councillor Nabil Najjar

The Committee then discussed the application, some of the key points raised included the management of the open space land and whether this could be taken on by Salisbury City Council or a management company.

The Committee recognised that the application had previously been approved, noting that due to two technical matters the application had been brought back for consideration, and as such it was felt to be unnecessary to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

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