Agenda item

The meeting adjourned at 17:10 for five minutes.

The Chairman permitted Michael Sutton to speak in objection to the application, prior to the planning officer’s presentation.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the outline planning application wither all detailed matters reserved for a later stage, except for the means of access to serve up to 58 dwellings. Members were informed that the submission was supported by several plans which illustratively identified landscape treatment, provisions of public open space, housing and internal road layout on the site of the former Westbury and District Hospital. It was recommended that the Committee delegate authority to the Head of Development Management to grant outline planning permission, subject to the completion of a s106 agreement within 6 months (taken from the date of the committee resolution) to cover the developer obligations as summarised within section 9.14 of the report and planning conditions and informatives as listed in the report, and to consider the late observations (contained in the agenda supplement) made by the Council’s archaeologist.

The Senior Planning Officer presented a parameter plan and illustrative landscape plan, explaining that the number of houses and density of development had materially reduced since the pre-application and initial application stages. An indicative layout showed where affordable housing could be located within the development, which factored in the vacant building credit implications alongside the provision for public open space. A series of extensive photographs of the site, and perspectives from nearby locations were shown and referenced.

The Committee was advised there was no photograph taken from Orchard Road in the officer’s presentation. There were no other technical questions.

Erica Watson and Michael Pearce spoke in objection to the application.

Chris Beaver (the applicant’s agent) and David Tout spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Ian Cunningham, Westbury Town Council, spoke in objection to the application.

The Chairman said he felt he should point out that he lived in Leighton Green, Westbury, not far from the site, and that in taking part in the debate and the vote he came to the matter with an open mind.

The local member, Cllr Gordon King, spoke in objection to the application since he considered there to be insufficient infrastructure in the town to support a further increase in population. The councillor considered there was sufficient housing supply already in Westbury, with substantial housing numbers and applications having been approved recently. The councillor also raised concerns in respect of drainage, highways, unsustainable development, limited affordable housing and conflict with Core Policy 43.

Cllr Gordon King, seconded by Cllr Magnus MacDonald, moved that the application be deferred to a future meeting to allow for a member’s site visit.

In the debate that followed it was suggested that members could assess the potential highways concerns raised by the local member at a site visit. Members also commented this would allow more time for officers to supplyfurther information on the highways impact of the developmentand its effect on school places.

Resolved:

To defer determination until a future meeting date to allow for a site visit to assess the impact of the development on highways, and to allow for further information to be provided on the impact of the development on highways and education.