Sample email: the same email was sent to all councillors scheduled to attend the meeting on 20th March 2025
From: Jeremy Edwards <edwardsjde@gmail.com>
Subject: Southern Area Planning Committee: Planning Application PL/2023/09615: Making sure decisions are soundly based on planning policy
Date: 17 March 2025 at 14:17:20 GMT
To: Andrew.oliver@wiltshire.gov.uk
Dear Cllr Andrew Oliver,
On 20th March, you will be considering the application for permanent consent to change the use of the Southern part of the Close from tennis courts into a car park. It also includes provision for a standpipe and other works in Marsh Close. The standpipe will sit alongside the two electrical/data cabinets already installed (without planning consent) and facilitate intensification of inappropriate use of Marsh Close.
The Chapter owns and has stewardship of the landscape and buildings of the Close. However, this landscape is a part of all of our cultural heritage and is much-loved by the many Salisbury residents who use and traverse it daily, enjoying its beauty and tranquillity.
Historic England’s listing describes the Cathedral and Close:
The setting of the Cathedral is probably the finest in England. The grouping and splendid character of the houses of the Close, all in sites laid down at the time of the Foundation of the Cathedral, make all the buildings inside the close wall, including the Close Wall itself a group of the first importance.
The Cathedrals Measure 2011, which has the force of law, states that, with the exception of the Cathedral itself and a small area round it (ie within the “red line”), the remainder of the land and buildings owned by the Chapter in the Close (ie within the “green line”) are subject to secular planning and listed building requirements and the high standards to be expected of developments within the setting of a Grade l-listed Cathedral, adjacent to the Grade 1-listed Harnham Gate and Close Wall.
The Salisbury Cathedral Close Preservation Society is concerned that neither the application, nor the evaluations carried out by planning and conservation officers, give sufficient weight to planning policy given the extreme sensitivity of the site. Accordingly, the trustees of the Society commissioned a professional planning consultancy, Whaleback, to provide advice, which is attached. The key points made in the advice are:
- Neither the application nor the case officer’s evaluation take adequate account of the landscape character nor the impact of the scheme as required by Wiltshire Core Strategy, Core Policy 51 (“Landscape”)
- Similarly there is a failure to consider, not just the impact of the cycle shed and EV charging points, but other aspects of the design, such as the need to use high-quality materials and contextually-appropriate, permeable hardstanding as required by Wiltshire Core Strategy, Core Policy 57 (“High Quality Design and Place Shaping”)
- The application and officer’s report fails to address the requirements of Core Policy 7 of the Salisbury Neighbourhood Development Plan in two particular respects:
o There is no demonstration of how the proposed design would integrate with the specific local context and landscape setting; nor is there any demonstration of any understanding of the key features of the setting.
o There is no reference to how the proposal would be compatible with a low traffic environment.
- The National Planning Policy Framework is relevant:
o para 131 looks for a recognition of the importance of high-quality design, which is not evident in this proposal. Nor is there evidence of effective engagement with local communities.
o Para 187 deals with environmental protection. The car park lies within 50m of a channel leading directly to the River Avon SSSI. The designs lack adequate measures to deal with surface water and pollution protection. There is no provision for maintenance of any type. Historic England describes the car park’s current appearance as “degraded”.
As it stands, this is essentially a rundown tennis court with some painted lines to demarcate parking bays. The temporary consent for use as a car park has lapsed and the burden of proof lies with the applicant to demonstrate use as such. In the absence of proof, the area remains tennis courts.
If this area is to be granted consent as a car park in perpetuity then we urge you to refuse this application and to seek a revised application which displays the excellence and protection demanded by this exceptional setting. Spreading a layer of tarmacadam on top of the tarmac, unless the current tarmac is removed and replaced with taramcadam (even then, the high water table means its often not possible for rainwater to soak into the soil) and planting a few rowan trees and a hedge (neither of which take account of existing planting in the Close) shows no evidence of respect for the setting at all.
Yours sincerely,
Jeremy Edwards
Chair, Salisbury Cathedral Close Preservation Society