Browse

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Online Meeting

Contact: Jessica Croman  Democratic Services Officer

Media

Items
No. Item

90.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

There were no apologies.

91.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2020.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2020 were presented.

 

Resolved:

 

To approve as a true and correct record and sign the minutes.

 

92.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

93.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Minutes:

There were no Chairman’s Announcements.

94.

Public Participation

During the ongoing Covid-19 situation the Council is operating revised procedures to permit remote attendance of meetings. The procedure for the Western Area Planning Committee including public participation is attached.

 

Access the online meeting here

 

Public guidance for accessing meetings online is available here

 

Statements

 

Members of the public who wish to submit a statement in support of or in

objection to an application on this agenda should submit it to the officer named on this agenda no later than 5pm on 12 June 2020.

 

Those statements in accordance with the Constitution will be included in an

agenda supplement. Those statements must:

 

·         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

·         If read aloud, be readable in approximately 3 minutes

 

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 9 June 2020 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 12 June 2020. 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.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

No questions had been received from councillors or members of the public.

 

The Committee noted the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

95.

Planning Appeals and Updates

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

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The Committee noted the contents of the appeals update.

96.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered the following applications:

 

97.

Application to Register Land Known as 'Great Lees Field' Off Pound Lane, Semington, as a Town or Village Green

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public participation

 

Dr William Scott, in support of the application to register the land as a town or village green.

 

William Stuart Bruges, in support of the officer’s recommendation.

 

Peter Smith, Vice Chairman of Semington Parish Council, neither in support for or objection to the officer’s recommendation.

 

The Definitive Map Officer, Janice Green, introduced a report which recommended accepting the Inspector’s recommendation and to refuse the application by ‘The Friends of Great Lees Field, under Sections 15(1) and (3) of the Commons Act 2006, to register land off Pound Lane, Semington, known as Great Lees Field’, as a town or village green for the reasons as set out in the Inspector’s report.

 

Members of the Committee resolved in December 2017 to appoint an independent Inspector to preside over a non-statutory public enquiry and to make a recommendation to Wiltshire Council as the Registration Authority. A public enquiry was held in October and December 2019 at which the Inspector heard evidence from all parties and subsequently produced a report and recommendation to the Registration Authority.

 

Key issues highlighted included the evidence of the exercise of lawful sports and pastimes over the whole of the application land, where the majority of users had been walking and dog walking and the alleged ploughing of the land in 2000, which would lead to significant interruption to the qualifying 20-year user period.

 

The Definitive Map Officer informed the Committee that there had been one amendment to the original report due to be brought to the meeting in March 2020, which was subsequently cancelled. Paragraph 21 referenced the joint applicant’s dispute over paragraph 78 of the Inspector’s report regarding the Inspector’s perception of the joint applicant’s role in the application process. The Inspector stated at paragraph 78 of the report that this was only the Inspector’s impression and it was not for the Registration Authority to amend the Inspector’s report, but for members of the Committee to note the comments.

 

The Democratic Services Officers, Jessica Croman and Craig Player, read out the public statements that had been submitted prior to the meeting, as detailed above. All statements were also available to view in the Agenda Supplement 2, published prior to the meeting.

 

The Definitive Map Officer addressed the main point raised by members of the public, focusing on the main parties’ joint request to adjourn the inquiry and the Registration Authority’s refusal to grant this request, which had been addressed in the Inspector’s report and in Agenda Supplement 3, published prior to the meeting.

 

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Cllr Trevor Carbin, seconded by Cllr Edward Kirk to refuse the application as detailed in the report and the officer’s recommendation.

 

Resolved

 

That Wiltshire Council, as the Registration Authority, accepts the Inspector’s recommendation and that the application by ‘The Friends of Great Lees Field, under Sections 15(1) and (3) of the Commons Act 2006, to register land off Pound Lane, Semington, known as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

98.

19/09800/FUL - 12A Frome Road, Bradford On Avon, Wiltshire BA15 1LE

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public participation

 

Michael Simpson, in objection to the application.

 

Meryl Phillips, in objection to the application.

 

Tim Mellor, in support of the application.

 

Tara Maizonnier, the agent, in support of the application.

 

Bradford on Avon Parish Council, in objection to the application.

 

The Planning Officer, Mike Wilmott, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the demolition of an existing dwelling and outbuilding and the erection of five residential dwellings with alterations to the existing boundary wall to accommodate a widened vehicular access.

 

Key issues highlighted included: the principle of development; heritage matters; highways impacts; neighbouring impacts; tree impacts and sustainability and biodiversity matters.

 

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions

of the officer which focused on: the pinch point and the site boundaries; covered cycle stores for residential use; parking and vehicular access.

 

The Democratic Services Officers, Jessica Croman and Craig Player, read out the public statements that had been submitted prior to the meeting, as detailed above. All statements were also available to view in the Agenda Supplement 2, published prior to the meeting.

 

Cllr Sarah Gibson, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on: the principle of development; the design of the proposal; vehicular access and parking; traffic concerns; lack of private amenity space and the impact on neighbouring properties.

 

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Cllr Sarah Gibson, seconded by Cllr Stuart Palmen to refuse planning permission contrary to the officer recommendation.

 

During the debate the main points raised were: the Bradford-on-Avon Neighbourhood Plan; vehicular access and parking; traffic concerns and lack of private amenities.

 

Following the debate, the motion was defeated.

 

A proposal was then moved by Cllr Trevor Carbin, seconded by Cllr Sarah Gibson, to defer consideration of the application pending negotiations with the applicant to secure additional parking and a turning head for visitors.

 

This motion was carried.

 

Resolved

 

To defer consideration of the application pending negotiations with the applicant to secure additional parking and a turning head for visitors.

99.

20/00059/FUL Bishop's Folly, No. 2 Ireland, North Bradley, BA14 9RW

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public participation

 

Emma Brown, in objection to the application.

 

Mr and Mrs Hawketts, in support of the application.

 

North Bradley Parish Council, in objection to the application.

 

The Planning Officer, Mike Wilmott, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the erection of a two-storey extension, double garage, alterations and associated access works. 

 

Key issues highlighted included: the lawful use of the land for the erection of the garage; the impact on a public footpath; the impact on highway safety; the impact on a non-designated heritage asset; the impact on neighbour amenity and the impact on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and wider area.

 

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions

of the officer which focused on: vehicular access and parking; the historic turning area; the impact on the public footpath and the residential curtilage.

 

Cllr Horace Prickett, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on: the settlement boundary; traffic concerns; vehicular access and parking; the residential curtilage and the lack of private amenity space.

 

The Democratic Services Officers, Jessica Croman and Craig Player, read out the public statements that had been submitted prior to the meeting, as detailed above. All statements were also available to view in the Agenda Supplement 2, published prior to the meeting.

 

The Planning Officer addressed some of the issues raised by the local member and members of the public with the main point focusing on the officer’s view that the construction of the garage on the residential curtilage would not harm the character and appearance of the countryside, nor the amenity of residents of nearby properties.

 

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Cllr Andrew Davis, seconded by Cllr Jonathon Seed to grant planning permission as detailed in the report.

 

Resolved

 

That planning permission is approved 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.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 

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

Existing Site Plan - DWG No - 13327/5000B - Received 06.01.2020

Existing Ground Floor Plan - DWG No - 13327/5001B - Received 06.01.2020

Existing First Floor Plan - DWG No - 13327/5002B - Received 06.01.2020

Existing Elevations - DWG No - 13327/5011A - Received 06.01.2020

Location Plan - DWG No - 13327/5100A - Received 06.01.2020

Proposed Site Plan - DWG No - 13327/6000L - Received 04.05.2020

Proposed Ground Floor Plan - DWG No - 13327/6001H – Received 04.05.2020

Proposed First Floor Plan - DWG No - 13327/6002G - Received 06.01.2020

Proposed South East & North East Elevations - DWG No - 13327/6012D – Received 06.01.2020

Proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

100.

19/12153/VAR McDonald's Restaurant 235 Bradley Road Trowbridge BA14 0AZ

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public participation

 

Ian and Jane Robinson, in objection to the application.

 

The Planning Officer, Mike Wilmot, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the variation of condition 3 of W/96/00587 to modify the opening hours to 6:00 - 23:00 Monday to Saturday.

 

Key issues highlighted included: the principle of development and impact on neighbouring amenity.

 

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions

of the officer which focused on: impact on neighbouring amenity; highways concerns and waste and litter concerns.

 

The Democratic Services Officers, Jessica Croman and Craig Player, read out the public statements that had been submitted prior to the meeting, as detailed above. All statements were also available to view in the Agenda Supplement 2, published prior to the meeting.

 

Cllr Andrew Bryant, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on: highways concerns; noise pollution; waste and litter concerns and impact on neighbouring amenity.

 

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Cllr Edward Kirk, seconded by Cllr Peter Fuller to refuse planning permission contrary to the officer recommendation.

 

During the debate the main points raised were: impact on neighbouring amenity; noise pollution and waste and litter concerns.

 

Following the debate, this motion was defeated.

 

A proposal was then moved by Cllr Andrew Davis, seconded by Cllr Trevor Carbin, to grant planning permission as detailed in the report.

 

This motion was also defeated.

 

A proposal was then moved by Cllr Jonathon Seed, seconded by Cllr Pip Ridout, to defer consideration of the application pending further evidence regarding litter and noise impact on nearby properties.

 

This motion was carried.

 

Resolved

 

To defer consideration of the application pending further evidence regarding litter and noise impact on nearby properties.

101.

19/10471/FUL 3 A Church Lane Limpley Stoke BA2 7GH

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public participation

 

Nick Brindley, in objection to the application.

 

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

 

Francis Firmstone, Limpley Stoke Parish Council, in objection to the application.

 

The Planning Officer, Mike Wilmott, introduced a report which recommended granting planning permission, subject to conditions, for the erection of two dwellings and associated landscaping and access works (amended design).

 

Key issues highlighted included: the principle of development; impact on the area and wider landscape; heritage matters; highways impacts; neighbouring impacts and biodiversity matters.

 

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions

of the officer which focused on: the Limpley Stoke Neighbourhood Plan; highways concerns and visual impact on the Church of St. Mary.

 

The Democratic Services Officers, Jessica Croman and Craig Player, read out the public statements that had been submitted prior to the meeting, as detailed above. All statements were also available to view in the Agenda Supplement 2, published prior to the meeting.

 

Cllr Johnny Kidney, Division Member, spoke regarding the application with the main points focusing on: the visual impact on the surrounding area and in particular the Church of St Mary; conflict with the Limpley Stoke Neighbourhood Plan; infill development and ecological concerns.

 

At the start of the debate a proposal was moved by Cllr Sarah Gibson, seconded by Cllr Pip Ridout to grant planning permission as detailed in the report.

 

During the debate the main points raised were: conflict with the Limpley Stoke Neighbourhood Plan; infill development; the visual impact on the surrounding area and ecological concerns.

 

Resolved

 

To defer consideration of the application pending a site visit.

102.

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.