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

Agenda item

APPLICATION NUMBER: PL.2021.07817 - (FUL) Church View, High Street, Hindon, Salisbury, SP3 6DJ

Full Application - Proposed single storey extension to rear to provide ground floor bedroom.



Public Participation

No public speakers were registered.


The Planning Officer Hayley Clark presented the application which was for a single storey extension to rear to provide ground floor bedroom.


The application was recommended for Refusal as set out in the report attached to the agenda. It was noted that the property was grade 2 listed and was one of many listed buildings which form the High Street in Hindon.


There were no technical questions of the Officer.


Local Member, Cllr Bridget Wayman, who was not on the Committee, spoke in support of the application noting that she was in attendance on behalf of the applicant, who had two serious degenerative medical conditions.


It was reported that the applicant has lived in the community since 1985. The rear extension was required to house a hospital bed on the ground floor, which would be required as the applicant’s condition worsened. The applicant currently struggled to access the upstairs of the property. The extension would enable the applicant to access the downstairs facility and house all that was required for her medical needs.


It was noted that the Council supported assisting residents to remain in their own homes.


The rear extension was designed to match another neighbouring rear extension on the property pictured in the slides. Cllr Wayman noted that she felt there had been unnecessary remarks from the Conservation Officer regarding other alterations in the property which had been carried out under approval.


The Applicants had been made aware of the difference between what was permitted under Building Regulations as opposed to Planning Permission and had no plans to do anything untoward.


The ‘hip solution’ put forward by the Conservation Officer would be more harmful in appearance. The rear extension would not be visible from the road.


As Cllr Wayman was not on the Committee, the Chairman invited the Committee to put forward a motion for debate.


Cllr Najjar then moved the motion of approval against Officer’s recommendation. Based on the support of the local member and parish council and the limited impact on the property.


This was seconded by Cllr A Oliver




The Committee was invited to discuss the application, the main points included the existing extension on a neighbouring property, the lack of visibility from the road.


Cllr McLennan was not in support of the motion which he noted went against the regulations of Listed Buildings and requested his decent be recorded.


The Committee then voted on the motion of Approval against Officer recommendation for the reasons discussed above.




That application PL.2021.07817 be Approved against Officer recommendation with the following conditions:


Conditions: (3)


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:


Application form received 09/08/2021

Design and access statement received 09/08/2021

Heritage Statement received 09/08/2021

Location and block plan Drg no 100 received 09/08/2021

Proposed joinery details Drg no 103 received 25/08/2021

Proposed plans, section and elevations Drg no 102 received 25/08/2021


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


3 No development shall commence on site until the exact details and samples to be used for the external walls and roof have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.


REASON: The application contained insufficient information to enable this matter to be considered prior to granting planning permission and the matter is required to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before development commences in order that the development is undertaken in an acceptable manner, in the interests of visual amenity and the character and appearance of the area and listed building.


Informatives: (1)

The applicant is requested to note that this permission does not affect any private property rights and therefore does not authorise the carrying out of any work on land outside their control. If such works are required it will be necessary for the applicant to obtain the landowners consent before such works commence. If you intend carrying out works in the vicinity of the site boundary, you are also advised that it may be expedient to seek your own advice with regard to the requirements of the Party Wall

Act 1996.

Supporting documents:




This website