Agenda, decisions and minutes

When the continuous alarm sounds you must evacuate the building by the nearest available fire exit. Members and visitors should proceed to the visitors’ car park at the front of the building and await further instructions (during office hours staff should proceed to their usual assembly point; outside of office hours proceed to the visitors’ car park). Please do not re-enter the building unless instructed to do so.

In the event of a fire any person with a disability should be assisted in leaving the building.

23.1           The evacuation procedure, as noted on the Agenda, was advised to those present.

23.2           Members were reminded that, at its meeting on 17 May 2016, the Council had confirmed the Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committee as a permanent arrangement.  The Chair gave a brief outline of the scheme and the procedure for Planning Committee meetings. 

24.1          Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M A Gore, T A Spencer and P N Workman.  Councillors R A Bird and M G Sztymiak would be acting as substitutes for the meeting. 

25.1           The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council on 26 June 2012 and took effect from 1 July 2012.

25.2           The following declarations were made:

25.3          With regard to Item 4 of the Planning Schedule – 18/00396/FUL – Aldi Stores, Gloucester Road, Tewkesbury – the Technical Planning Manager advised that Tewkesbury Borough Council was the landowner for the application and Members may have considered the sale of the land in another forum; however, Members must look solely at the planning merits of the application before them and determine it on that basis.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2018.

26.1          The Minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2018, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. 

Click Here To View

Click Here To View

Click Here To View

Click Here To View

27.1           The Technical Planning Manager submitted a Schedule comprising planning applications and proposals with recommendations thereon.  Copies of this had been circulated to Members as Appendix A to the Agenda for the meeting.  The objections to, support for, and observations upon the various applications as referred to in Appendix 1 attached to these Minutes were presented to the Committee and duly taken into consideration by Members prior to decisions being made on those applications.

18/00057/FUL – Land Near Wharf Office, The Wharf, Coombe Hill

27.2           It was noted that this application for the erection of a single detached dwellinghouse had been WITHDRAWN.

18/00630/FUL – 4 Abbey Court, Gloucester Road, Tewkesbury

27.3           This application was for the replacement of four timber-framed windows with aluminium at the front of the property. 

27.4           The Chair indicated that there were no public speakers for this item.  The Officer recommendation was to permit the application and he sought a motion from the floor. It was proposed and seconded that the application be permitted in accordance with the Officer recommendation and, upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED          That the application be PERMITTED in accordance with the Officer recommendation.

18/00730/FUL – Crab Tree Cottage, Laverton

27.5           This was a retrospective planning application to change the garage doors to a window on the detached garage/annexe.

27.6           The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent welcomed the recommendation to permit the application and believed it was the correct one; however, he was mindful of some of the comments made by a few local residents, and the Parish Council, throughout the course of the application and felt it was necessary to provide some clarification and reassurance to Members.  As could be seen from the Officer report, planning permission had originally been granted for a detached garage and annexe in March 2016.  That permission had detailed a traditional barn-like outbuilding with single storey eave height and accommodation in the roof space.  The accommodation had comprised a garage and studio on the ground floor and a bedroom and bathroom on the first floor.  Externally, the only change proposed in this application was the replacement of the garage door with a four light timber casement window – other than this minor change, the building was exactly the same i.e. the same size, in the same location and with the other windows and doors in the same position.  The overall character and appearance of the building had not changed and, in any event, the building was set far back within the site and the minor change to the front elevation was not apparent when viewed from the road.  In terms of amenity, the first floor window in the side elevation serving the bedroom had been fitted with obscure window film and a window restrictor in accordance with the details agreed on the previous planning permission.  A further condition would ensure that the window was retained in this manner.  Perhaps the biggest concern that had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27a

To approve the response to Wychavon District Council in respect of application 18/00771/OUT and to delegate authority to the Head of Development Services, in consultation with the Lead Member for Built Environment, to make minor spelling, grammatical, cross-referencing or typographical errors and presentational changes prior to final submission. 

28.1           Attention was drawn to the report of the Head of Development Services, circulated at Pages No. 22-33, which set out a draft consultation response to Wychavon District Council in respect of application 18/00771/OUT – Land East of Bredon Road, Mitton.  Members were asked to approve the draft response for submission on behalf of Tewkesbury Borough Council and to delegate authority to the Head of Development Services, in consultation with the Lead Member for Built Environment, to make minor spelling, grammatical, cross-referencing or typographical errors and presentational changes prior to the final submission.

28.2           A Member proposed that Tewkesbury Borough Council’s draft response is not approved and that instead the response is that the application was premature and should be presented with other strategic sites in the review of the South Worcestershire Development Plan.  There was no seconder for this proposal.  It was subsequently proposed and seconded that the draft response, attached at Appendix 1 to the report, be approved for submission on behalf of Tewkesbury Borough Council and that authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services, in consultation with the Lead Member for Built Environment, to make minor spelling, grammatical, cross-referencing or typographical errors and presentational changes prior to the final submission, in accordance with the recommendation on the papers. 

28.3           A Member indicated that he could not support a draft response when it undermined the planning process required for strategic development sites, particularly one with serious implications for the health and safety of local residents regarding flooding, traffic, medical care and educational provision.  He felt that the applicant had sought to circumnavigate the need to provide an Environmental Impact Assessment by presenting a phased application of 500 houses - land under the applicant’s control could result in 1,000 dwellings and, if this proposal was allowed, another 500 would surely follow.  An application for 1,000 dwellings would have triggered the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment which would have further highlighted the extent of the issues that would affect Tewkesbury town.  Whilst Tewkesbury Borough Council had a duty to co-operate across borders, this did not mean it should disregard strategic planning processes.  The site was not named as a strategic planning site in the South Worcestershire Development Plan – Wychavon District Council’s equivalent of the Joint Core Strategy – but it should be a strategic site and subject to the same investigation as those in the Joint Core Strategy otherwise it would be allowed to slip through without proper consideration or consultation.  Furthermore, he felt that the draft response undermined the Bredon Parish Neighbourhood Plan which had been adopted in July 2017 with huge support from residents.  The applicant had made the intention to build houses on the site known long ago so the Bredon Parish Neighbourhood Plan had been prepared with that knowledge.  He questioned how Tewkesbury Borough Council would feel if the situation were reversed and pointed out that the Joint Core Strategy was due for periodic review so the site should be considered as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

To consider current planning and enforcement appeals and Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) appeal decisions.

29.1          Attention was drawn to the current appeals and appeal decisions update, circulated at Pages No. 34-38.  Members were asked to consider the current planning and enforcement appeals received and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government appeal decisions issued.

29.2          It was

RESOLVED          That the current appeals and appeal decisions update be NOTED.