Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 10^th March 2021.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 10^th March 2021 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest received.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 21/00236/HOUSE in respect of a single storey rear extension.

Ms Donna Toms introduced the report and highlighted the key points. There had been over ten letters of objection to the proposal and Officers were recommending approval of the application.

Removal of Speaking Rights

As resolved at the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 29 April 2020, public speaking rights were removed for virtual Council meetings. This right was replaced with the ability to make written submissions. This decision was made in accordance with The Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panels Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

The above changes to speaking rights were subsequently amended at the Council meeting on 10 September 2020. It was agreed that parties making written submissions in relation to a planning application would be invited to attend the Remote Meeting of the Planning Committee to answer any questions that Members of the Committee might wish to ask in order to seek clarification on any part of their statement.

In accordance with the Extraordinary Council resolution, a written submission relating to this application was received from Mr Anthony Cogan, Agent.

Agent Representation

The written submission of Mr Anthony Cogan was read out by the Clerk to the Committee as follows:

·         Your Officer’s report comprehensively sets out the planning considerations and associated planning balance. This proposal is supported by Officers with an unequivocal recommendation to approve this application.

·         The site is located within the settlement boundary of Upper Basildon, a location washed over by the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Your Officer’s report confirms that the proposal complies with the relevant Development Plan policies and thus the principle of developing the site is acceptable.

·         Neighbour and Parish Council representations are noted. The thrust of objectors comments relate to the alleged impact on the amenity of immediate neighbours.

·         Considering the scheme design, land uses and separation distances I submit that this proposal will not result in neighbouring properties been overlooked or overshadowed. The proposed extension is a single storey extension located adjacent to the boundary wall with the neighbouring property.

·         Windows serving the proposed extension face into the private garden of the application site. The proposed development is a single storey extension within the existing rear garden, which, due to the slope of the original land, is set down well below the neighbour fence lines. The garden is bounded by high walls, fences and soft landscaping, all of which effectively screens the site from all neighbouring properties. There are no views out of the site due to the height of the boundary enclosures surrounding the existing garden.

·         It is also noteworthy that the neighbouring property of 3 Bethesda Street has a similar single storey extension projecting along the common boundary between the application site and 3 Bethesda Street. This existing neighbouring extension affords additional screening and amenity protection for the neighbouring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.(1)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 20/02849/FUL in respect of the proposed replacement storage shed for use to store tools and equipment to maintaining land.

Mr Bob Dray introduced the report and highlighted the key points. There had been ten letters of objection to the application and Planning Officers were recommending approval.

Mr Dray referred to some of the concerns raised by objectors regarding the use of the proposal and clarified that there was no change of use proposed and the proposed shed would be used for ancillary storage only. If a change of use was to occur then this would be a matter for Planning Enforcement.

The update sheet provided an update to paragraph 6.13 (Character and Appearance) of the Planning Officer’s report as well as an updated recommendation, which was subject to the amendment of condition five regarding the demolition of existing outbuildings on the land.

Removal of Speaking Rights

As resolved at the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 29 April 2020, public speaking rights were removed for virtual Council meetings. This right was replaced with the ability to make written submissions. This decision was made in accordance with The Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panels Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

The above changes to speaking rights were subsequently amended at the Council meeting on 10 September 2020. It was agreed that parties making written submissions in relation to a planning application would be invited to attend the Remote Meeting of the Planning Committee to answer any questions that Members of the Committee might wish to ask in order to seek clarification on any part of their statement.

There were no written submissions received for the application.

Councillor Graham Pask as Ward Member addressed the Committee on the application.

Ward Member Representation

Councillor Graham Pask in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         The application was for a shed and therefore the question needed to be asked as to why there were ten letters of objection. Councillor Pask noted from the Planning Officer’s presentation that other uses of the land would be subject to enforcement and he stated that Enforcement Officers knew the site very well.

·         Going back a number of years there had been a (now removed) chalet style building, where it was alleged the applicant’s mother lived. Councillor Pask stated that he had been told by the residents of a neighbouring property that there were coming and goings from the site at all times of day and night, including mini diggers at the north end of the site after 10pm at night. This was why there were concerns about the application.

·         Councillor Pask stated that other law enforcement agencies had been required to have an interest in the site up until very recently. None of issues mentioned were however, planning matters.

·         Councillor Pask reiterated that it was an application for a shed however, it was particularly large in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.(2)