To approve the preferred options Tewkesbury Borough Plan for consultation purposes.

42.1           The report of the Head of Development Services, circulated at Pages No. 65-283, sought Council approval to publish the Preferred Options version of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan for public consultation under Regulation 18 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

42.2           In introducing the report, the Head of Development Services explained that the Tewkesbury Borough Plan was a second tier plan that sat under the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) which provided the higher level strategic plan. The Borough Plan set out more locally specific policies, and proposed smaller scale development. The policies in the Plan were required to ensure sustainable development in the Borough and covered a wide range of issues including employment, housing, retail and town centres and rural and urban areas. The Head of Development Services explained that the Plan was a planning framework to provide further growth aspirations and a positive plan for the future development of the area at the same time providing a wide and sufficient choice of housing and a prosperous and competitive rural and urban economy which helped to sustain vital urban areas. The full consultation process would be held through October and November with all representations being considered and, where appropriate, changes made. The pre-submission version of the Plan would be the final stage before submission to the Secretary of State for the examination in public.

42.3           The Chair of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan Working Group indicated that the Group had worked with Officers to oversee the development of the Plan and had undertaken detailed discussions as well as site visits. Members felt the Plan was the right way to ensure sustainable development throughout the Borough and, on behalf of the Working Group, he proposed that the Plan be approved for public consultation. The Lead Member for Built Environment seconded the proposal.

42.4           A Member indicated that there was no reference in the report to specific consultation with the ‘un-housed generation’ of 25-40 year olds and he felt this was of concern as a lot could be learnt from their view and what they expected the Council’s future housing policy to be. In response, the Planning Policy Manager explained that this was a good point and one of the things the Borough Plan sought to do was provide a range of sites with anywhere from 10 to 110 dwellings at varying locations across the Borough but also provide flexibility for other areas to grow. Policies on housing mix were important in terms of the size of dwellings to meet future demographics. The consultation would be open to all and it was the intention that the message would be circulated as widely as possible, including to the younger generation to get their views. Another Member expressed concern that the document she had seen previously had contained numbers of dwellings attached to Service Centres and Villages and she questioned whether this would be attached to the background papers if not directly to the Borough Plan. In response, the Planning Policy Manager advised that the table was contained in the background papers but there was also reference to it within the Plan itself and this would be published as part of the consultation. In terms of Bishop’s Cleeve, the Member questioned why sites were still being put forward in the Borough Plan when it had already been identified as being over-prescribed. Additionally, in referring to the consultation, she questioned how many people were on the consultation database and whether there would be events in local areas so the public could see the plans and talk to Officers and Members in a similar way to the JCS consultation. In response, the Planning Policy Manager explained that the Plan had recognised the significant growth already in Bishop’s Cleeve but it also identified all opportunities in the Borough and, where deemed sustainable, they had been included. Of the two sites identified in Bishop’s Cleeve one already had permission and the other was for 35 dwellings so was seen as relatively modest. The key benefit was that having flexibility to meet the housing supply put the Council in a robust position so it could better defend against unwanted development. In respect of the consultation database, it currently contained around 250 people; however, anyone could sign up to it at any time. Whilst those were the people the Council would contact directly, there would be plenty of opportunities for people to get involved and it was intended that there would be events out in the Borough as well. Another Member requested reassurance that the Borough Plan was not looking for strategic-sized sites and, in response, the Planning Policy Manager confirmed that this was the case. It was not the role of the Borough Plan to meet the shortfall identified in the JCS as that would be done through the review of the JCS.

42.5           A Member proposed, and it was seconded, that an amendment be made to the wording on Page No. 101 of the Plan in respect of Table 1 – Policy RES1, Site Specific Development Principles, Shurdington Option A to read: ‘As part of any access proposals from Badgeworth Lane, parking arrangements must be provided for Shurdington Primary School to ensure adequate and safe two-way traffic movements along Badgeworth Lane, particularly during school drop-off/pick-up times. Proposals must consider the provision of new school parking spaces on site A as an integral part of the development in the first instance’. Generally Members felt this was a sensible amendment which would help ensure the access to any development in the area of Shurdington Primary School would be adequate. Another Member proposed that the “need to ensure small settlements thrived” through Policy RES4 was firmed up to indicate that small scale was no greater than 5% of existing dwellings; however, that proposal was not seconded.

42.6           Upon being put to the vote, it was

                  RESOLVED          1. That the Preferred Options Tewkesbury Borough Plan be                                        APPROVED for public consultation under Regulation 18 of                                   the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England)                                     Regulations 2012, as set out in Appendix 1, subject to an                                      amendment as follows:

Table 1 – Policy RES1, Site Specific Development Principles, Shurdington Option A to read: ‘As part of any access proposals from Badgeworth Lane, parking arrangements must be provided for Shurdington Primary School to ensure adequate and safe two-way traffic movements along Badgeworth Lane, particularly during school drop-off/pick-up times. Proposals must consider the provision of new school parking spaces on site A as an integral part of the development in the first instance’,

2. That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services, in consultation with the Lead Member for Built Environment, for the correction of any minor errors such as spelling, grammar, typographical and formatting changes that do not affect the substantive content of the plan.