Accessibility settings

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

Color preference

Text size

Agenda item

Items from Members of the Public

To receive any questions, deputations or petitions submitted under Rule of Procedure 12.

 

(The deadline for public participation submissions for this meeting is 28 March 2019)

Minutes:

91.1           The Chair invited the member of the public to ask his questions and indicated that he, as the Leader of the Council, would answer them:

1.   Could the Leader of the Council please explain, as Tewkesbury's Chief Executive was the Lead Officer on the Joint Core Strategy (JCS), why the link road from the A38 to the new A40 gateway was not reintroduced into the JCS after the decision to include the Twigworth site on appeal - DS3 made it clear as well as the Highways Authority, the link would be necessary.

     Answer: The link between A38 and A40 was included in the issued JCS transport strategy – DS7; however, in determining the appeals for the Innsworth and Twigworth proposals, the Appeal Inspector did not consider that the link between the A38 and A40 was necessary to allow the developments to proceed. Therefore, the link was not a requirement of the planning permissions subsequently granted by the Secretary of State.

2.   As the Chief Executive, under delegated authority, was Lead Officer on the JCS, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, why was it not necessary to have an overarching flood impact assessment on all the sites linked by the Ham, Normans, Horsbere, Hatherley, Wooten Brooks and Queens Dyke that flow from the Brockworth escarpment into the River Severn? As the culverts, maintenance and water retention will impact on the flow across all sites to the River Severn and the tidal impact which created the flooding problems in 2007.

     Answer: To support the JCS, flood impact assessments were completed at level 1 for the wider JCS area and level 2 for the proposed strategic allocations. This evidence was tested at examination and accepted.

3.   All traffic impact assessments made it very clear that all junctions around Churchdown, Innsworth, Longford and Twigworth would be well over capacity. Why was an access from the back of the A40 Gateway link, to the proposed extension to Innsworth Technology Park not included in the JCS to alleviate the damage to the B-roads by HGV’s and for the safety of existing and new residents?

     Answer: The proposal for the Innsworth application, which was allowed on appeal, did not include a link from the A40 to the Innsworth Technology Park. There were no objections from Highways England or Gloucestershire County Council at the Public Inquiry subject to conditions and planning obligations to secure appropriate improvements to the highway network. The Secretary of State concluded that the proposed development of the Innsworth part of the Strategic Allocation was acceptable on highway grounds. This does not preclude a link being provided in the future however this will be a matter for the developer and the owner of the Technology Park.

4.   What is the estimated cost, in light of the uncertainty over Brexit, of the European elections to the Council. Has a contingency been put in place?

     Answer: The cost of the European elections in 2014 was approximately £98,000 all of which was reclaimed from the government.  The same arrangements would apply in 2019 therefore there is no need to put in place any financial contingency.

 

 

 

5.   Is it Council policy that development densities should not exceed 33 houses per hectare.  If it is, why has the A1 phase one site got a density of 43 houses          per hectare?

     Answer: The Council does not have planning policies that prescribe exact densities for new residential development. There is, however, Policy SD4: Design Requirements in the Joint Core Strategy which sets out the expectations for new development generally. The policy states that development should be of a scale, type and density appropriate to the site and its setting. This recognises that different densities may be appropriate in different sites depending on the particular circumstances and context of the development.

91.2           The Chair thanked the member of the public for his questions and indicated that he could stay for the remainder of the meeting should he so wish.