Agenda item

Public Participation

Mr Norman May, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Mark Staincliffe, the Area Team Leader, introduced the report which recommended permission be granted for extensions in relation to two properties in Ebor Paddock, Calne. Key issues were stated to include the principle of the development, impact upon the appearance of the dwellings and the wider area and parking and access.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. It was confirmed the single storey aspect of the proposed extensions fell within permitted development rights but the extension over the garage necessitated permission. It was clarified the application was a joint venture by the separate owners of the respective properties.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to address the committee with their views, as detailed above.

The unitary division member, Councillor Alan Hill, then spoke, detailing the character and appearance of the area, issues of parking, and asking the committee to consider the matter carefully.

A motion to approve the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor Toby Sturgis and seconded by Councillor Chuck Berry. At the conclusion of discussion, it was,

Resolved:

That Planningpermission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1                The developmentherebypermittedshall be begun before the expiration of threeyearsfrom thedate ofthispermission.

REASON:  To complywith theprovisionsofSection 91 of theTown and Country PlanningAct 1990 as amended bythe Planningand Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2                  The developmentherebypermittedshall becarried out in accordance with the followingapproved plans:

Location Plan, Existing &ProposedSite Plans 01, Existing& ProposedFloorPlan 02(bothreceived 10 May 2016), Existing& Proposed Elevations 03 (received 14 June 2016)andSite Plan (showing treecanopyprotective fencing) 04(received12 July2016)

REASON:For theavoidance of doubt andin theinterestsofproper planning.

3                  The materialsto be usedin theconstruction of the external surfaces of thedevelopmentherebypermittedshallmatch inmaterial,colour andtexturethose usedin the existing building.

REASON:   Inthe interestsofvisual amenity andthe character and appearance of the area.

4                  Allworksshall becarriedout in strict accordance with theapproved ArboriculturalMethod Statement (AMS) received 12 July2016.

Reason: Toensurethe saferetention of existing treeson and adjoining the site.

5                  INFORMATIVETO APPLICANT:

Anyalterationsto the approved plans,brought aboutby compliance with Building Regulations or anyother reasonmustfirst be agreed in writingwith theLocal PlanningAuthoritybeforecommencement ofwork.

6                  INFORMATIVETO APPLICANT:

The applicantisrequested tonotethat thispermission does notaffect anyprivatepropertyrightsand therefore does not authorisethe carrying outofany workon landoutside their control.Ifsuch works arerequired it will be necessary forthe applicant to obtain thelandownersconsentbeforesuch workscommence.

Ifyou intend carrying out works in the vicinity ofthe siteboundary,you arealsoadvised that it maybe expedientto seekyourown advice with regard totherequirements ofthe PartyWall Act 1996.

7                  INFORMATIVETO APPLICANT:

Please notethat Councilofficesdo nothavethe facilityto receive material samples.Please deliver material samplesto site andinform the Planning Officer wheretheyare to befound.

8                  INFORMATIVETO APPLICANT:

Theapplicantshouldnote that the grantofplanning permission doesnot include anyseparatepermission which may beneededto erecta structurein thevicinity ofa publicsewer.  Suchpermission should be soughtdirect fromThames WaterUtilitiesLtd /Wessex Water Services Ltd.Buildingsare notnormallyallowed within 3.0 metresofa PublicSeweralthoughthismay vary depending onthe size,depth, strategicimportance, available access andthe groundconditionsappertaining tothe sewer inquestion.

Councillor Tony Trotman abstained from voting.