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

Venue: Tewkesbury Borough Council Offices, Severn Room

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

Items
No. Item

27.

Announcements

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.   

Minutes:

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

27.2          The Chair gave a brief outline of the procedure for Planning Committee meetings, including public speaking.

 

28.

Apologies for Absence and Substitutions

To receive apologies for absence and advise of any substitutions. 

Minutes:

28.1          Apologies for absence were received from Councillors K Berliner and P W Ockelton.  Councillor R J Stanley would be a substitute for the meeting. 

29.

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:

29.1          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.

29.2          The following declarations were made:

Councillor

Application No./Agenda Item

Nature of Interest (where disclosed)

Declared Action in respect of Disclosure

G F Blackwell

Agenda Item 5c – 19/01201/FUL – Fortitude, Birdlip Hill, Witcombe.

Had communications with the applicant in relation to the application but had not expressed an opinion.

Would speak and vote.

R J Stanley

Agenda Item 5d – 21/00686/FUL – Crown Close, Bishop’s Cleeve.

Had spoken to residents in relation to the application but had not expressed an opinion.

Would speak and vote.

R J E Vines

Agenda Item 5c - 19/01201/FUL – Fortitude, Birdlip Hill, Witcombe.

Is a Gloucestershire County Councillor for the area.

Would speak and vote.

29.3          There were no further declarations made on this occasion.

30.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 301 KB

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2022.

Minutes:

30.1          The Minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2022, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. 

31.

Development Control - Applications to the Borough Council pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Decision:

Agenda Item number

Planning Reference

Site Address

Officer Recommendation

Committee Outcome

5a

22/00232/FUL

Land To The South Of

Geston Place

Twyning

Delegated Permit

Delegated Permit

5b

21/00655/FUL

Windyridge

Tewkesbury Road

Coombe Hill

Permit

Permit

5c

19/01201/FUL

Fortitude

Birdlip Hill

Witcombe

Refuse

Delegated Permit

5d

21/00686/FUL

Crown Close

Bishops Cleeve

Delegated Permit

Delegated Permit

 

 

 

Minutes:

31.1          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.

31a

22/00232/FUL - Land to the South of Geston Place, Twyning pdf icon PDF 268 KB

PROPOSAL: Residential development comprising 21 dwellings, creation of new vehicular access and ancillary works.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Delegated permit.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

31.2          This application was for residential development comprising 21 dwellings, creation of new vehicular access and ancillary works.

31.3          The Development Management Team Leader advised that the proposal sought full planning permission for residential development of 21 dwellings, including eight affordable homes, the creation of a new vehicular access off Shuthonger Lane and ancillary works.  The application site was located to the south of a recent housing development to Brockeridge Paddocks, directly to the south of Geston Place and to the west of an area of public open space which served that development.  An application for residential development of up to 36 dwellings had recently been allowed on appeal located to the south of the site.  Although not allocated for housing, the application site lay within the settlement boundary as defined in the Tewkesbury Borough Plan and within the Residential Development Boundary as defined by the Twyning Neighbourhood Development Plan.  The proposal would accord with the principles of Joint Core Strategy Policy SD10, Policy RES2 of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan and Policy GD2 of the Neighbourhood Development Plan.  Whilst the proposal would lead to some landscape harm by introducing development on an undeveloped parcel of land, this would be limited due to the presence of built development to the north and the recently approved development to the south with this proposal essentially infilling a gap.  The proposal would provide a variety of house types and designs which would be harmonious with the area and would include eight affordable dwellings, of which five would be social rented.  The applicant had advised that a number of ecological assessments had now been completed following initial advice from the Council’s Ecological Adviser.  The findings were being written up and would be subject to review by the Ecological Adviser.  The proposal would have no other adverse impacts in terms of highway safety or flood risk.  The Officer recommendation remained delegated permit, as set out in the Additional Representations Sheet, attached at Appendix 1.

31.4          The Chair invited the representative from Twyning Parish Council to address the Committee.  The Parish Council representative indicated that he intended to focus on why the Parish Council felt the five year land supply was relevant in the current circumstances. He explained that the Parish Council’s original argument was based on the fact that Officers had not addressed the five year housing land supply position within the Committee report; however, the Additional Representation Sheet clarified that the Council was now able to demonstrate a five year housing land supply therefore the tilted balance was not engaged.   As such, the Parish Council representative noted that Paragraphs 11 and 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework did not apply and the question was therefore whether there continued to be a requirement to allow additional houses to be built in rural villages such as this, particularly given that the Tewkesbury Borough Plan Inspector had stated that Service Villages had sufficient housing and did not require any more.

31.5          The Chair invited a local resident  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31a

31b

21/00655/FUL - Windyridge, Tewkesbury Road, Coombe Hill pdf icon PDF 241 KB

PROPOSAL: Erection of one dwelling following demolition of the existing agricultural building and associated works.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

Additional documents:

Minutes:

31.15        This application was for erection of one dwelling following demolition of the existing agricultural building and associated works.

31.16        The Development Management Team Leader advised that the application sought full planning permission for the demolition of an existing agricultural building and replacement with a two storey house with associated facilities.  The site presently comprised a concrete block-built agricultural building set to the northern side of the access drive which served Windyridge which was a detached dwelling.  The site lay within the Green Belt and outside of any defined settlement boundary; however, Coombe Hill was defined as a Service Village in the Joint Core Strategy and Tewkesbury Borough Plan.  Whilst the proposal would conflict with policies in respect of the location of new residential development, the site benefited from an extant prior approval for conversion of the existing agricultural building to residential use which was considered a fallback position in this instance.  Although the proposal would represent inappropriate development within the Green Belt which, by definition, would be harmful, it was considered that the extant prior approval for a dwelling at the site constituted very special circumstances.  Furthermore, the current proposal would be a significant improvement in design terms and would not impact the openness of the Green Belt when compared to the previously permitted scheme.  The proposal was therefore considered to be acceptable and was recommended for permission, subject to conditions as set out in the Committee report.

31.17        The Chair invited the applicant to address the Committee.  The applicant explained that his father had started building the existing barn for his livestock haulage and farming business which he had now taken over.  He had an agricultural holding number which he felt demonstrated that he was at one with the land, nature and the environment.  His architect had been in regular discussion with the Planning Officer who had guided and advised them, resulting in concerns being addressed and compromises and amendments made to produce the plans presented to the Committee today.  He felt that the length of time and care taken represented their desire to get this right.  The applicant confirmed that he owned all of the surrounding land and more evidence of his historical care and foresight was shown by his planting of 17 trees in 1993 which were now maturing nicely down the driveway and beyond.  In addition to the extra planting in the proposals, he intended to plant a small orchard in front of the house shielding further from the A38.  The applicant explained that he had designed this house for himself to live in and to be versatile enough should his mobility become restricted.  In summary, the proposal would protect the environment, provide a much smaller footprint, with less impact, and a better end result than converting the barn and the extended time taken ensured a high quality design which was sensitive to its rural setting.  The applicant hoped that Members could support the Officer recommendation to permit the application.

31.18        The Chair indicated that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31b

31c

19/01201/FUL - Fortitude, Birdlip Hill, Witcombe pdf icon PDF 235 KB

PROPOSAL: Demolition of an existing log cabin and the cessation of the extant log cabin development and erection of a new single dwelling and associated landscaping.  Change of use of part of the site from lawful residential/holiday curtilage back to agriculture/paddock land. 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

Additional documents:

Minutes:

31.19        This application was for the demolition of an existing log cabin and the cessation of the extant log cabin development and the erection of a new single dwelling and associated landscaping; change of use of part of the site from lawful residential/holiday curtilage back to agriculture/paddock land.

31.20        The Development Management Team Leader advised that the site was located on a parcel of land situated on Birdlip Hill, Witcombe set within an area of open countryside forming the lower slopes of the Cotswold Escarpment within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  Currently, a single detached log cabin which was used as holiday accommodation and an internal access track and gates were located on the land.  The site was outside of any defined settlement boundary and within Flood Zone 1 as shown on the Environment Agency’s plans.  There was extensive planning history associated with the application site which currently benefited from an extant permission granted on appeal in 1998 allowing the erection of 10 holiday log cabins with associated sports facilities, proprietors accommodation and new access.  It was noted that the access and the single holiday log cabin had been constructed.  This permission formed the basis of the applicant’s fallback position.  Members may recall the most recent planning application which was brought before the Planning Committee in November 2019 seeking outline consent for the demolition of an existing log cabin and the cessation of the extant log cabin development and the erection of a new single dwelling.  Members had refused that application as the proposal would be located in an isolated countryside location that was not well-served by public transport, pedestrian or cycling facilities and did not meet the strategy for the distribution of new development, subsequently the application site was not an appropriate location for a new market dwelling; and, on the basis of the information provided at the time, the proposed development would result in an unwarranted and visually intrusive impact on the open character and visual attractiveness of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  The scheme presented to Members today had been submitted as a full application and had sought to address the previous reasons for refusal.  The application was supported by information that was not previously available as part of the outline scheme including a detailed design of the proposed new dwelling, a visual landscape assessment, comparison sketches, ecological appraisal, energy assessments and a landscaping scheme.  Officers had initial concerns regarding the proposed design of the new building and how it would enhance or conserve the scenic beauty of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Officers recommended that the design be presented to the Gloucestershire Design Review Panel.  The applicant had agreed to this and, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it had not been heard until July 2021 when the Panel had resolved that the site was in a very sensitive part of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and successful redevelopment could only be achieved with a thoroughly thought out proposal which brought  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31c

31d

21/00686/FUL - Crown Close, Bishop's Cleeve pdf icon PDF 244 KB

PROPOSAL: Redevelopment of site to include demolition of existing garages/maisonettes and erection of 30 affordable dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping. 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Delegated permit

Additional documents:

Minutes:

31.25        This application was for redevelopment of the site to include demolition of existing garages/maisonettes and erection of 28 affordable dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping.  It was noted that the description of the development had been amended since the Committee report had been published to reduce the number of affordable dwellings from 30 to 28.

31.26        The Senior Planning Officer advised that the proposal sought demolition of five units, each with four/flats maisonettes in mixed tenure, together with the demolition of the single storey garages.  The brownfield site was served from an existing access leading onto Crown Drive and was in a predominantly residential area.  The proposed 28 dwellings would comprise 18 houses and 10 apartments, which would all be affordable, and 48 off-street parking spaces would be provided.  The scheme was supported by Bishop’s Cleeve Parish Council and any outstanding drainage issues had been resolved.  The principle of development was acceptable and the proposal would provide much-needed affordable housing through the comprehensive redevelopment of an underused and unappealing site.  The proposal was considered to have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding areas and on residential amenity and it was therefore recommended that authority be delegated to the Development Manager to permit the application, subject to the omission of Condition 7, as set out in the Additional Representations Sheet, attached at Appendix 1; the receipt of no additional adverse representations during the consultation period for the revised plans, which was due to end today; the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the affordable housing in perpetuity; and any amended/additional conditions.

31.27        The Chair invited the applicant’s representative to address the Committee.  The applicant’s representative advised that the proposal was to replace the unsatisfactory maisonettes which required modernisation with 18 social rent and 10 shared ownership properties.  The scheme offered well-designed homes which would benefit from high thermal efficiency and would improve the visual and social aspects of the existing residential development.  The position and orientation of the units minimised overlooking to and from the adjacent properties and the position of the new dwellings was set in order to avoid new overlooking from within the site itself.  The method for creating suitable dwellings for modern living was to make larger than usual living areas and all dwellings would be above the minimum requirement of the Nationally Designed Space Standards   The addition of modern design would create an uplifting area to live in.  As would be expected, a number of surveys had been carried out to deal with matters of flooding, drainage, transport and traffic which had all met with the satisfaction of Officers.  The building design had been shaped through meetings with the local community who favoured a contemporary feel; several public consultations had been held with Rooftop, Hemmingway Design and The Space Studio which had helped shape the initial concepts.  The designs replicated those of the recently completed Bishop’s Drive (Pember Close) redevelopment.  These homes would be built to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31d

32.

Current Appeals and Appeal Decisions Update pdf icon PDF 92 KB

To consider current planning and enforcement appeals and Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities appeal decisions.

Minutes:

32.1          Attention was drawn to the current appeals and appeal decisions update, circulated at Pages No. 116-119.  Members were asked to consider the current planning and enforcement appeals received and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities appeal decisions issued.

32.2          A Member drew attention to Page No. 117, Paragraph 2.1 of the report in relation to 21/01312/PIP - Land Adjacent Blenheim Way, Shurdington which stated that a partial award of costs was made against the Council for the erroneous inclusion of an additional refusal reason and she asked for further clarification on this.  The Legal Adviser explained that, although the Inspector had taken a different view on infilling to that of the Committee, there was not unreasonable behaviour found in respect of that; however, partial costs had been awarded because a further reason of sustainability not put forward by the Committee had, in error, found its way into the appeal documentation which had been unreasonable and the appellant had incurred unnecessary costs in respect of that.  In response to a query, the Legal Adviser indicated that she did not know how much the Council was required to pay.

32.3          It was

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