Agenda item

Part retrospective change of use of section of agricultural land to residential.

Public Participation

Bob Nicholls in objection of the application.

Peter Birch in objection of the application.

Councillor Derek Harden spoke on behalf of Lydiard Millicent Parish Council.

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman, presented a report which outlined the part retrospective change of use of section of agricultural land to residential.

Details were provided of the site and issues raised by the proposals, including the principle of development, impact on the landscape & character and appearance of the area, impact on residential amenities and other matters. Reference was made to an omission within the report, which should have referred to consent in the planning history, which approved alternations to the garage for part use of residential purposes.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application, however no questions were asked.

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

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Steve Bucknell then spoke regarding the application. Councillor Steve Bucknell stated that a current Bing aerial map would show a clear encroachment onto the field before the depicted red area within the block plan. With aerial views having shown that the applicant had set up football goalposts as well as parking a vehicle on the field. Councillor Bucknell also noted that before it was previously removed, the hedge line was the parish boundary between Lydiard Millicent and Purton. Therefore Councillor Bucknell argued that this was contrary to CP1.

Councillor Bucknell also cited that the development would breach CP51 (i) (ii)(ii) (v) (vii) on the grounds that there had been evidence of the disregard of neighbouring amenity with the removal of the hedgerow, the erection of goal posts and the parked vehicle. In particular, Councillor Bucknall noted that CP51 seeks that developments protect, conserve and enhance landscapes through sensitive developments; whilst also referencing the separate identity of settlements, in relation to the removed hedgerow. Furthermore in relation to the hedgerow, Councillor Bucknell, drew upon CP57 (i) (ii) (iii) (vi) (vii), stating that the parish boundaries create a strong sense of place as well as contributing to the character of Wiltshire.

At the start of the debate a motion to move and reject the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor Steve Bucknell and seconded by Councillor Gavin Grant. On grounds that the development undertaken and proposed for the change of use of land is out of character with the immediate locality and the existing features and characteristics of the settlement and adjoining areas. The proposals would not maintain, reflect and respond positively to the existing landscape character and were thereby in conflict with Wiltshire Core Strategy (Jan 2015) Core Policies CP51 (i) (ii)(ii) (v) (vii) & CP57 (i) (ii) (iii) (vi) (vii).

During the debate the issues were raised such as the permitted development rights of the land in question and the nature of the size of the land in question; however it was advised by the enforcement team that permitted development rights do not apply.The paraphernalia currently on the land was also referenced in discussion. Further reference was made to the CPs referenced by Councillor Bucknell, in particular the transition to man-made and natural settlement. Additionally, it was referenced that though in the report, harm caused was listed as minimal, the Committee shouldn’t be content to allow breaches and if the amendment was to be successful it would be a matter of enforcing the CP principles.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was,

Resolved:

That contrary to the Officer recommendation the application be refused for the following reason:

The development undertaken and proposed for the change of use of land is out of character with the immediate locality and the existing features and characteristics of the settlement and adjoining areas. The proposals would not maintain, reflect and respond positively to the existing landscape character and are thereby in conflict with Wiltshire Core Strategy (Jan 2015) Core Policies CP51 (i) (ii)(ii) (v) (vii) & CP57 (i) (ii) (iii) (vi) (vii).