Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from:

·       Cllr Dennis Drewett – substituted by Cllr Russell Hawker

·       Cllr John knight – Substituted by Cllr Jerry Wickham

·       Cllr Pip Ridout – Substituted by Cllr Fleur De Rhe-Philipe

·       Cllr Roy While

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2016.

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 216 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2016.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no Chairman’s Announcements.

The Chairman gave details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

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

In respect of Application 16/05078/FUL, Councillor Ernie Clark stated he drew attention to his register of interest.

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.

The Chairman welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

The Chairman referred to the supplement agenda which included questions received from councillors and member of the public and answers from officers.

Cllr Ernie Clark asked a supplementary question -

“Would the E1A site be most suitable for the relocation of the house hold recycling centre?” 

Mr Ernie Clark spoke in objection to application 16/05078/FUL.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Prior to the meeting convening, the elected members undertook an officer-led site visit following the deferment of the application at the meeting on 28 September 2016.

The case officer presented the report which recommended that permission should be granted for a change of use of existing stable block at the rear of Rosefield House to form 2 residential units and the erection of a two-storey side extension to form one additional residential unit.

The key planning issues identified in the officer’s presentation were outlined and comprised: the principle of the proposed development, the means of access, the impacts on neighbours and the impact upon the character of the conservation area.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, key points included; an email stating the applicant would agree to amend the plans should members of the committee resolve not to support the application.  Although it was noted that no formal amended plans had been receive.  Consideration and debate also centred on the potential loss of light the development would have upon the neighbouring property. Members were informed that a loss of light calculation had not been undertaken.

Public Participation

Pat Hayes spoke in objection to the application.

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

A debate followed where a motion was then moved to refuse the application.

Key points of the debate were; loss of light, amenity and overlooking, the relationship to the adjoining property and the proposed insertion of obscure glazing for a habitable room window in the new development.

The motion for refusal was lost and a new motion was then moved to defer the application and instruct the case officer to obtain revised plans from the applicant removing the side extension and third residential unit.  The committee also requested that a 25 degree window light survey be undertaken and reported upon.

Resolved:

To defer the application to obtain revised plans from the applicant and to conduct a 25 degree light survey.

Cllr Ernie Clark left the room before the application began.

The case officer presented the report which recommended that outline permission be granted for the erection of 6 apartments and associated access works following the demolition of the existing dwelling. The key planning issues identified in the officer’s presentation were outlined and comprised: the principle of the proposed development, highway access, the impacts on the Conservation Area and the amenity of neighbouring properties and future occupants.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought regarding the amount of parking space that wold be provided and access for emergency vehicles.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views as detailed below

Public Participation

Albert Aird spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs Doreen Williams spoke in objection to the application.

James Pike, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Chris Beaver, agent, spoke in support of the application.

An issue of land dispute, raised as part of Mrs Williams oral representation was discussed by members; and Mr Felton, the Council’s Solicitor, advised the Committee that the issue was a civil matter and not a matter for the consideration of the Committee.

Cllr Graham Payne read out a statement for the local member Cllr Nick Blakemore with the key points focusing on: the access to the development, congestion, illegal parking, lack of provision for visitor parking, narrow entrance in close proximity to the access of neighbouring properties, lack of a suitable access for emergency vehicles, inadequate access for construction vehicles, lack of visibility when exiting the property, danger to pedestrians, with the only entrance and exit onto a main road, overdevelopment of the site and the development being built too close to neighbouring properties.

A motion was moved and seconded to approve the officer’s recommendation. Main points of the debate included; that there had been no objection from highway authority or the emergency services about access. A proposed condition was discussed about the need for a construction management plan and to restrict any construction fires on the site.

Resolved

 To Grant planning permission 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 materials to be utilised in the development hereby permitted shall accord with those annotated on the approved drawing AL(1)02 REV D registered on 20 June 2106.

REASON; In the interest of the appearance of the Conservation Area.

3.       No part of the development shall be first occupied until the improvements to the junction of the access with Timbrell Street, shown on the approved plan A095925 - GA01 A, have been completed.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

4.       The parking spaces as shown on the approved plans shall be provided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91b

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

The Planning Appeals Update Report for 16/9/2016 – 30/9/2016 was received.

The chairman requested that the issued appeal decision for the Shurnhold site (land off the A365) in Melksham (14/11919/OUT) be reported to the next Strategic Planning Committee.

Resolved:

To note the Planning Appeals Update Report.

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