The following planning decisions were made by Wiltshire Council, recently:

Urchfont: Charlie Cook of Margaret’s Cottage, 3 Bulldog Lane has won planning permission to build a timber-frame garden outbuilding with pitched clay pan tile roof.

Urchfont: Nearly 20 solar panels will soon be installed in Urchfont following a successful planning bid.

Simon Clayton sought permission from Wiltshire Council to install 18 solar panels at 14 Manor Farmyard.

The parish council had put in objections to the plans saying that “it would spoil the appearance of the building within the Conservation Area”.

It added: “I should perhaps also mention that a lot of concern was expressed by councillors that if this application is approved then it could set a precedent leading to the proliferation of solar panels more widely in the Conservation Area within Urchfont.”

However, The Urchfont, Wedhampton & Lydeway Neighbourhood Plan (2017) states “alternative energy sources will be encouraged” and “the use of slimline roof-integrated photovoltaic panels in discreet locations will be encouraged”.

Five letters of objection and three supporting letters were sent in to the council for consideration with some residents expressing disdain for what they dubbed an “eyesore”.

Other objections were raised because all the nearby houses were already fitted with “environmentally friendly and efficient heating systems”.

Ben Cooper, said he was in favour of the plans, adding: “This, and subsequent applications (as there will undoubtedly be many in the future) must be seen as opportunities for the village to be proactive in supporting such initiatives to combat climate change.”

Wiltshire Council’s planning officers decided that the bid would not erode the character or appearance of the area, and approved the bid.

Easton Royal: Permission has been granted to Lucinda Lindsay to build a three-sided gazebo at The White House in The Street.

Wilton: Graeme Mcnulty sought permission to build a single-storey garden room extension to his family home at Bulbridge Farm in 21 Bulbridge Barns.

Melksham: Permission has been given to Wessex Water to build a “construction compound” to help with the installation of new sewers to alleviate sewer flooding in the area.

The building would be constructed on an existing hardstanding at Melksham Forest Community Centre, and will likely be up for around three or four months while the works continue.

Chippenham: Planning permission has been given to Mike Rees to build a two-story extension at his home at 53 Kings Avenue.

Great Bedwyn: James Vaughan and Hayley Kane have won planning permission to build a two-storey rear and side extension, and to enlarge the garage to side at 3 Rosemary Close. This decision, however, is contentious. The parish council had objected to the extension plans, in consultation it stated: “We object due to the main wall being actually on the boundary with the neighbours at 4 Rosemary Close and we cannot see how construction will be facilitated as the building is directly on the boundary.”

Mr and Mrs Seest, of 4 Rosemary Close said: “As a consequence of the new construction the roof-overhang will protrude over the boundary line. This will, supposedly, give No 3 further rights to enter our property for future maintenance of the extension, which we do not find acceptable.

“ Scaffolding will almost certainly be required and given the location of the proposed extension will block access to the rear of our property, including our backdoor. We believe that this part of our property would become a building site.

“Our backdoor is in constant use and it would be a huge loss of amenity during the duration of the build if we could not use it.”

Responding, planning officers wrote: "Due to the natural sun path, and this part of the rear elevation of the neighbouring property protruding further north that the only window and door would be affected by the proposal, it is considered that the window and doors in question would already be overshadowed by the neighbouring property and then later in the day by the existing application site, as such there would be no increase to the current impact. The proposed extension is modest in footprint and would not appear any more overbearing than the existing property."