Agenda item

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27.2           It was noted that this application for the erection of a single detached dwellinghouse had been WITHDRAWN.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 raised was that the building would be used as a separate dwelling and the applicant’s agent stressed that was certainly not the case and was not what was being proposed.  It was always intended that the building would be ancillary to the residential enjoyment of Crab Tree Cottage and, whilst the garage door had been replaced by a window, the use of the building remained as ancillary living accommodation in association with the cottage.  It should be borne in mind that, even if a garage door was provided, there was no requirement for the space behind it to be used for parking of a vehicle or for storage purposes – it could feasibly have been used as a guest sitting room, or for any other use, provided that it remained as ancillary accommodation.  Notwithstanding this, to provide Members with some assurances on the matter, the applicant was happy for a condition to be attached to the planning permission to ensure that the building was not used as separate accommodation and a condition was recommended in the Officer report on that basis.  In summary, the applicant’s agent advised that the changes to the proposal were relatively minor in the context of what had previously been granted planning permission; the building was still of an acceptable size, scale and design and had an acceptable impact on neighbouring properties.

27.7           The Chair indicated that 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.  In response to a query, the Technical Planning Manager confirmed that a condition had been included on the previous planning permission - and was recommended for inclusion in relation to this application - that the development was only used in conjunction with, and ancillary to, the residential enjoyment of the adjoining cottage.  In his view, it was highly unlikely separate residential use would occur given the layout of the scheme and its relationship with the driveway and the existing house; nevertheless, it was felt prudent to include the condition.

27.8           Upon being put to the vote, it was

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

18/00396/FUL – Aldi Stores, Gloucester Road, Tewkesbury

27.9           This application was for change of use of land to additional car parking and landscaping.

27.10         The Technical Planning Manager advised that discussions had been ongoing between Tewkesbury Borough Council, Gloucestershire County Council, the applicant and the residents’ association in terms of the proposed off-site mitigation scheme and it was now necessary to get to a point where there was a properly costed mitigation scheme,  and then securing Section 106 obligations to mitigate for the loss of green infrastructure resulting from the application.

27.11         The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent explained that, when the opportunity to purchase the land from Tewkesbury Borough Council arose, it was recognised that the proposed car park extension would only be supported by residents and Officers if all parties worked closely together.  Prior to submitting the application, the applicant’s representatives had met with residents and Officers to discuss their concerns and to identify ways to mitigate the inevitable loss of trees which was clearly a sensitive subject.  Following comments from residents, the applicant had identified on-site planting and a financial contribution which would provide compensatory provision along Lincoln Green Lane; this included the possibility of public art.  The applicant had agreed to enter into a legal agreement to secure this funding and that would commit the applicant to pay £10,000 prior to commencement of the development for the provision of trees and/or artwork which could be agreed between residents, Tewkesbury Borough Council and other stakeholders.  The applicant was grateful to local residents, and the residents’ association, for working with them to identify an acceptable solution for all parties and was pleased that Officers had recommended the application for approval.  The applicant’s agent pointed out that there was an article in the local press about the potential impact of the proposal on Tewkesbury Battlefield and he referred Members to the response from the County Archaeologist who had been consulted as part of the application.

27.12         The Chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was that authority be delegated to the Technical Planning Manager to permit the application, subject to the completion of a Section 106 obligation to secure a scheme for the provision of additional off-site mitigation, and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that authority be delegated to the Technical Planning Manager to permit the application in accordance with the Officer recommendation and, upon being taken to the vote, it was

RESOLVED          That authority be DELEGATED to the Technical Planning Manager to PERMIT the application, subject to the completion of a Section 106 obligation to secure a scheme for the provision of additional off-site mitigation.