Accessibility settings

In order to remember your preferences as you navigate through the site, a cookie will be set.

Color preference

Text size

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Contact: Democratic Services, Tel: (01684) 272021 Fax: (01684) 272040  Email:  democraticservices@tewkesbury.gov.uk

Link: Click here to watch live broadcast

Items
No. Item

12.

Announcements

Minutes:

12.1          The Chair advised that the meeting was being held under the emergency provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 and, specifically, the Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panel Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.  The meeting was being broadcast live via the internet, it was not being recorded by the Council but, under the usual transparency rules, it may be being recorded by others.

12.2          The Chair outlined the procedure for the meeting, including public speaking.

13.

Apologies for Absence and Substitutions

To receive apologies for absence and advise of any substitutions. 

Minutes:

13.1          Apologies for absence were received from Councillors R A Bird, L A Gerrard and R J G Smith.  Councillors D W Gray and C Softley would be acting as substitutes for the meeting. 

14.

Declarations of Interest

Pursuant to the adoption by the Council on 26 June 2012 of the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct, effective from 1 July 2012, as set out in Minute No. CL.34, Members are invited to declare any interest they may have in the business set out on the Agenda to which the approved Code applies.

Minutes:

14.1           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.

14.2           The following declarations were made:

Councillor

Application No./Agenda Item

Nature of Interest (where disclosed)

Declared Action in respect of Disclosure

P W Ocklelton

Agenda Item 5d – 19/01098/FUL – Land to the East of Horsbere Drive, Longford.

Agenda Item 5f – 16/00904/OUT – Land at Chestnut Tree Farm, Twigworth.

Had received correspondence in relation to the applications but had not expressed an opinion.

Would speak and vote.

C Softley

Agenda Item 5b - 20/00453/FUL – The Pavilion,                    Cold Pool Lane, Badgeworth.

Uses the land on a daily basis and had been in discussion with the applicant regarding the application.

Would not speak or vote and would leave the meeting for consideration of this item.

R J E Vines

Agenda Item 5b – 20/00453/FUL – The Pavilion,                    Cold Pool Lane, Badgeworth.

Is a Gloucestershire County Councillor for the area.

Would speak and vote.

14.3           There were no further declarations made on this occasion.

15.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 8 MB

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2020.

Minutes:

15.1          The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2020, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record. 

16.

Development Control - Applications to the Borough Council pdf icon PDF 6 MB

Decision:

Parish and Reference

Address

Decisions

Item No.

 

Stanton

 

 

 

20/00049/FUL

Part Parcel 3000 Stanway Road Stanton Broadway

Permit

5a

Click Here To View

 

Badgeworth

 

 

 

20/00453/FUL

The Pavilion Cold Pool Lane Badgeworth Cheltenham

Permit

5b

Click Here To View

 

Maisemore

 

 

 

20/00212/OUT

Land West Of Persh Lane Maisemore Gloucester

Delegated Permit

5c

Click Here To View

 

Innsworth

 

 

 

19/01098/FUL

Land To The East Of Horsbere Drive Longford GL2 9BY

Refuse

5d

Click Here To View

 

Ashleworth

 

 

 

19/01227/OUT

Land Off Rectory Close Ashleworth Gloucester GL19 4JJ

Deferred for Site Visit

5e

Click Here To View

 

Twigworth

 

 

 

16/00904/OUT

Land To The Rear Of Chestnut Tree Farm Tewkesbury Road Twigworth Gloucester

Refuse

5f

Click Here To View

 

Minutes:

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.

16a

20/00049/FUL - Part Parcel 3000, Stanway Road, Stanton pdf icon PDF 248 KB

PROPOSAL: Variation or removal of condition 1 of planning permission ref: 08/00827/FUL to allow the existing equestrian yard to be used in association with a horse training and stud enterprise.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.1          This application was for the variation or removal of condition 1 of planning permission ref: 08/00827/FUL to allow the existing equestrian yard to be used in association with a horse training and stud enterprise.

16.2          The Planning Officer explained that the application related to a parcel of land of approximately 2.3 hectares, located off Stanway Road on the western outskirts of Stanton village.  The site was currently in established private equestrian use and the existing complex included a building used for stabling, a riding arena and other areas of paddock.  The site was bounded by existing mature boundary hedges and trees, with the Severn Trent Water Treatment Works situated along its western boundary.  The existing gated site access was to the south of the site, fronting Stanway Road, and Liberty Farm lay to the west/north west.  Members were informed that the site was located within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but outside of the Stanton Conservation Area and Article 4 boundary.  It was noted that the site was within Flood Zone 1 and a Public Right of Way ran to the north of the site on the opposite side of Stanway Road.  The current proposal sought to vary or remove condition 1 of the previous planning permission dating from 2008, which restricted the use to private equestrian, in order to allow commercial/business equestrian use.  The applicant currently operated a horse training and stud business from Gretton Grange which was located approximately 6.5 miles away from this site; however, the lease for that site was due to come to an end shortly and the applicant was therefore in need of a new site from which to carry on the business.  It was important to note that the applicant and current site owner were not one and the same, although the requisite notice had been served upon the site owner.  It was not intended for the site to be utilised by both the current owner and applicant for both private and business equestrian purposes; should the application be permitted and the site subsequently sold, the site would be used in connection with the applicant’s established commercial enterprise only.

16.3          The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent explained that the site had been used for equestrian purposes since 2008 and was a use that fully integrated into the rural character of the site.  At present, the site was subject to a condition which limited its use to private equestrian only – this dated back to a time when the government’s approach was to only support development in towns and cities and most countryside developments were restricted.  Since the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012, the government and local authorities had taken a much more positive approach toward rural industries in recognition of the importance of the rural economy.  As such, the concept of sustainable development had been redefined with much greater emphasis on the economic dimension and support for rural-based industries  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16a

16b

20/00453/FUL - The Pavilion, Cold Pool Lane, Badgeworth pdf icon PDF 121 KB

PROPOSAL: Erection of ball stop fencing, car park safety fencing and a storage container.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.6          This application was for the erection of ball stop fencing, car park safety fencing and a storage container.

16.7          The Planning Officer advised that the application required determination by the Planning Committee as the site was on land owned by Tewkesbury Borough Council.  It was an existing sports ground/playing field with a pavilion building as a changing facility with access to the north onto Cold Pool Lane.  The site formed part of the Section 106 Agreement for a community sporting facility for public benefit and was used mainly for football and cricket; the applicant promoted grassroots football and had over 30 teams for children and adults of all abilities.  The local Parish Councils were supportive of the application and no other representations had been received.  It was proposed that the storage container would be sited to the rear of the pavilion building and would be used for equipment that could not be accommodated within the existing building.  The container measured six metres in length, 2.44 metres in width and 2.59 metres in height, would be green in colour and screened by planting.  The stop ball fence and netting would be sited on the southern boundary to prevent balls from activities on the site entering and damaging adjacent land and property.  The fence would be 250 metres in length and seven metres in height and would consist of three metres of weldmesh panels with four metres of netting above.

16.8          Members were informed that the proposal complied with saved local plan policy RCN2 in relation to provision of sports facilities.  The National Planning Policy Framework considered that facilities for outdoor sport/recreation were an exception to inappropriate development within the Green Belt provided they preserved its openness and did not conflict with its purposes. The storage container was considered to have limited impact on the openness due to its scale and siting whereas the supporting poles of the stop ball fence and netting on the southern boundary would be more apparent and visible in part above the existing boundary treatment and buildings; this would have an impact on openness and was therefore considered inappropriate development which required very special circumstances to be demonstrated.  The proposed fence would allow the safe use of the site by the football club with minimal impact to the neighbouring properties from balls overshooting the site.  The storage container was required for the safe storage of equipment and machinery for the sports club and the proposal would enable the club to maximise use of the existing facility which benefitted public health and wellbeing.  This justification was considered to be acceptable in terms of comprising the very special circumstances necessary to outweigh the limited visual harm to the openness of the Green Belt.  The design of the storage container was appropriate in terms of its colour, siting, height, scale and mass; the fence was similar to that used on other parts of the site; and the netting would be lightweight and fairly transparent when viewed within the context  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16b

16c

20/00212/OUT - Land West of Persh Lane, Maisemore pdf icon PDF 191 KB

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application for the development of eight dwellings (including affordable housing contribution) together with open space, access, parking, landscaping, drainage and associated works.  All matters reserved except for means of access and layout.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.10        This was an outline application for the development of eight dwellings (including affordable housing contribution) together with open space, access, parking, landscaping, drainage and associated works.  All matters were reserved except for means of access and layout.

16.11        The Planning Officer explained that the site was located on the south western edge of Maisemore outside of, but abutting, the settlement boundary as defined in the emerging Tewkesbury Borough Plan.  The site was essentially closed on three sides with the south west boundary fronting onto open countryside.  The site was not subject to any formal or informal landscape designation.  It was currently accessed off Persh Lane via a gravel track, although access could also be gained off Blacksmiths Lane; a public bridleway ran to the north east of the site which incorporated Blacksmiths Lane.  Members were advised that the application proposed up to eight dwellings and was in outline form with access and layout to be determined at this outline stage and appearance, scale and landscaping to be reserved for future consideration.  In terms of the principle of development, the proposal did not comply with the Council’s housing policies due to its location; however, in accordance with Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, due to the Council’s current housing land supply position, these policies were deemed to be out of date and the weight that could be afforded to them was reduced.  In this situation, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole; this was known as the tilted balance.  As set out in the report, some landscape harm would arise as a result of development on a greenfield site but that was considered to be limited and would not outweigh the clear social benefits of providing much-needed housing in the borough.  The Planning Officer confirmed that no other overriding harms had been identified.  On that basis, the application was recommended for delegated permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the affordable housing.  It was noted that this had been changed from ‘permit’ as set out in the Officer report.  The Planning Officer proceeded to show a video of the application site serving as a virtual site visit for the Committee.

16.12        The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent indicated that the scheme represented an opportunity for a small housing development in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework’s presumption in favour of sustainable development, in the context of a local shortfall and national priority to significantly boost housing land supply.  Maisemore was a service village, therefore modest growth was supported in principle, albeit normally within the adopted settlement boundary.  Eight homes, including three affordable homes, was a proportionate scale of growth for the village, notwithstanding other recent developments.  The site was well-related to the village envelope and would read as a modest, well-integrated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16c

16d

19/01098/FUL - Land to the East of Horsbere Drive, Longford pdf icon PDF 220 KB

PROPOSAL: Construction of two apartment blocks comprising 33 dwellings and associated parking and landscaping.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.17        This application was for the construction of two apartment blocks comprising 33 dwellings and associated parking and landscaping.

16.18        The Planning Officer advised that the application related to a parcel of land to the north of Longford Lane and to the east of Horsbere Drive in Longford.  The site covered approximately 0.31 hectares and was situated within the new residential development at Longford.  Existing residential properties bordered the site to the south east; the new primary school, Longford Park Primary Academy, was to the north east; and to the north west were four recently constructed retail units.  The site was bounded to the south by Longford Lane.  The proposed apartment blocks would be three storeys in height and would front onto Longford Lane, Horsbere Drive and Clock Tower Road with the mix consisting of six one-bedroom units and 27 two-bedroom units.  The application had been submitted on the basis that it would deliver a 100% affordable housing scheme.  Vehicular access to the development would be via Whitefield Crescent and a proposed pedestrian link would run through the site and connect to Horsbere Drive.  A total number of 33 car parking spaces were proposed, set within a courtyard arrangement.  An assessment of the material considerations was included at Pages No. 94-114 of the Officer report which set out that the identified harms would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposed development, therefore, the application was recommended for refusal.  It was noted that, since the publication of the Additional Representations Sheet, attached at Appendix 1, comments had been received from the Council’s landscape consultant raising concern about the built form and the fact the site would be overdeveloped and dominated by a housing block.  The landscape consultant also found the lack of space to be disappointing, particularly along the streetscene and in terms of meaningful outdoor amenity space.  The Planning Officer proceeded to show a video of the application site serving as a virtual site visit for the Committee.

16.19        The Technical Planning Manager indicated that he wished to make a few comments in terms of clarifying and responding to the issues that had been raised in the letter from the applicant’s agent.  Officers wanted to support any scheme for affordable housing where possible and they had been proactive throughout to try to achieve this. It had always been made clear, including at the pre-application stage, that there were concerns with regard to the scale and massing and he reiterated that this was an amended scheme that was before Members today.  Ultimately, it was considered that the design solution was unsuitable for this location and the terms of reference for entering into Planning Performance Agreements were very clear this was not a passport to planning permission.  He pointed out that the applicant had been insistent that the application be brought to this Committee, therefore it was incumbent upon Officers to express a view on all matters referenced in the applicant’s letter at the point of writing the report. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16d

16e

19/01227/OUT - Land off Rectory Close, Ashleworth pdf icon PDF 219 KB

PROPOSAL: Outline application for up to 42 dwellings including access and associated works (all matters reserved for future consideration).

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Delegated Permit 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.29        This was an outline application for up to 42 dwellings, including access and associated works (all matters reserved for future consideration).

16.30        The Planning Officer advised that the application site was located immediately adjacent to the recent housing development completed off Nup End/Lawn Road to the north west of Ashleworth.  The site was currently accessed off an existing farm track located on the north western boundary where there was also a Public Right of Way.  It was noted that the site was located within a Landscape Protection Zone.  As originally submitted, the outline application proposed up to 42 dwellings, including 40% affordable housing, with access to be determined at the outline stage – access was now proposed to be dealt with at the reserved matter stage; however the County Highways Officer had confirmed the principle of the access shown on the submitted plans was acceptable.  Whilst all matters were now reserved for future consideration, the application was supported with a Design and Access Statement and illustrative site layout which showed how the site could be developed.  As set out in the report, Officers were satisfied this demonstrated that the proposed development could be accommodated on the site in an acceptable manner.  In terms of the principle of this development, the proposal did not comply with the Council’s housing policies due to its location; however, in accordance with Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, due to the Council’s current land supply position, these were currently deemed to be out of date and the weight that could be afforded to them was reduced.  In this situation, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole; this was known as the tilted balance.  As set out in the report, the development would be highly reliant on the use of the private motor vehicle to access services and facilities and this was also a reason for refusal on the adjacent development; however, whilst it was noted that Ashleworth was not categorised as a service village, the appeal Inspector had found it was a settlement of reasonable size with some primary and secondary service provision including a post office, village shop, village hall, primary school, public house, sports pitches, children’s play area and a place of worship all generally within walking distance of the site.  The Inspector had also noted the proximity of Tewkesbury Town and Gloucester City which had higher order facilities and employment opportunities.  Given the findings of the Inspector, it was considered that it would be difficult to sustain a refusal reason on this basis.  Members should also note that mitigation was proposed in the form of a financial contribution towards public transport provision, as per the adjacent development.  It was acknowledged there would be a degree of harm to the landscape but this level was considered to be localised and limited.  In this case, Officers were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16e

16f

16/00904/OUT - Land at Chestnut Tree Farm, Twigworth pdf icon PDF 288 KB

PROPOSAL: Outline planning proposal for up to 100 dwellings together with associated public open space and equipped children’s play space, landscaping, access and associated infrastructure.  All matters reserved except access.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

Additional documents:

Minutes:

16.37        This was an outline planning application for up to 100 dwellings together with associated public open space and equipped children’s play space, landscaping, access and associated infrastructure with all matters reserved except for access.

16.38        The Technical Planning Manager explained that the site lay behind the existing linear development facing onto the A38 at Twigworth.  The site was bound by Sandhurst Lane to the east and the land to the Grade II* listed Wallsworth Hall/Nature in Art to the west, with agricultural fields to the north.  The site was outside of the settlement boundary as defined in the now made Down Hatherley, Norton and Twigworth Neighbourhood Development Plan, although it was adjacent to that settlement boundary at the site’s southern and eastern extent.  The Orchard Park caravan site lay to the south of the A38 and to the east and south of the caravan park was the Twigworth element of the Joint Core Strategy strategic allocation A1 where development had already been permitted.  This application was in outline, although access was to be considered at this stage, and an illustrative masterplan had been submitted to show how the development could look.  A single point of vehicular access was proposed from Sandhurst Lane leading to the development with a play area to the east and swales proposed as part of the drainage solution.  Landscaping was proposed around the site boundaries with the landscape buffer along the boundary with the lane to Wallsworth being of particular note so as to address the concerns of Historic England regarding the setting of the Hall.  Members were advised that Twigworth, Norton, Down Hatherley and Sandhurst Parish Councils all objected to the application, mainly in respect of conflict with the Neighbourhood Development Plan and concerns regarding highways and drainage.  The County Highways Officer had originally raised concerns; however, following the submission of further information, those concerns had been addressed.  Similarly, following further work, Highways England was satisfied that once the upgrade to Longford roundabout - required by the Innsworth and Twigworth planning permissions – had been completed, there would be an acceptable impact on the A40.  As Members would appreciate, flood risk and drainage had been carefully considered given the location of the site and both the Lead Local Flood Authority and the Council’s Flood Risk Management Engineer required further information to be satisfied that the drainage strategy could be achieved.  On the basis of that further information, both consultees had indicated that they had no objection to the application and Severn Trent Water was similarly satisfied that it had no concerns regarding foul drainage, subject to conditions.  Given that the Council could not currently demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, the presumption was that planning permission should be granted in line with the National Planning Policy Framework unless there were areas or assets of particular importance which provided a clear reason for refusal, or there were any adverse impacts of granting planning permission which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16f

17.

Current Appeals and Appeal Decisions Update pdf icon PDF 41 KB

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

Minutes:

17.1          Attention was drawn to the current appeals and appeal decisions update, circulated at Pages No. 187-190.  Members were asked to consider the current planning and enforcement appeals received and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government appeal decisions issued.

17.2          It was

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