Skip to main content

Agenda item

Schedule of Applications

Application No.

Description

Ward Member

Case Officer

22/00688/FUL

Two residential units within the curtilage of the main house approved under

application 18/00051/FUL, removal of approved garage outbuilding and associated

amended driveway and landscape enhancements at Land At New Covert Ewen

Gloucestershire

Tony Berry

Mike Napper

22/02119/REM

Erection of 15 dwellings with associated access arrangements and ancillary works

(Reserved Matters application) at Land West Of Davies Road/Mosedale Moretonin-

Marsh Gloucestershire

Rachel Coxcoon

Martin Perks

20/02798/FUL

Demolition of single storey lean to, fenestration alterations and landscaping (part

retrospective) at Middle Hill Farm Saintbury Broadway Gloucestershire WR12

7PX

Gina Blomefield and Tom Stowe

Ed Leeson

20/02799/LBC

Demolition of single storey lean to, fenestration alterations, internal alterations to include new mechanical and electrical works, and landscaping (part retrospective) at Middle Hill Farm Saintbury Broadway Gloucestershire WR12 7PX

Gina Blomefield and Tom Stowe

Ed Leeson

 

Minutes:

Application 22/00688 - Two residential units within the curtilage of the main house approved under application 18/00051/FUL, removal of approved garage outbuilding and associated amended driveway and landscape enhancements at Land At New Covert, Ewen, Gloucestershire.

 

Major Developments and Appeals Manager introduced the application that had been deferred from the Planning and Licencing Committee Meeting 14 September 2022, and reminded the Committee that the deferral had been made to enable the applicant to continue in negotiation with the Council with pre-commencement conditions. These negotiations had concluded successfully (for conditions 4 and 19) and no further information was required from the applicant prior to the commencement of the development to satisfy these.

 

The Committee noted the original application (18/00051/FUL) was for a single dwelling, and the current application was for three dwellings, with the two additional  residential units being within the vicinity of the main house, and that the development was now being considered under policy DS3 as it was now considered to be part of the (non-principal settlement) village of Ewen.

 

The Major Developments and Appeals manager summarised the development’s location, site and dwelling designs and presented site and location maps, photographs and illustrations to provide context for what was being proposed.

 

The Committee noted that 60-75% of the site was existing woodland and new native-tree, shrub and meadow planting would increase biodiversity by 31%.

 

The Committee noted that each of the three dwellings were highly energy efficient with Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) ratings in excess of the 100 maximum.

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

Councillor Tony Berry – Ward Member

 

The Committee noted the proximity of high tension wires did not represent a risk to health of occupants of the proposed development.

 

The Committee noted that the original single dwelling’s ‘outstanding design in an exceptional location’ consideration was less significant, now that the development had been considered to be part of the village of Ewan, and was being assessed under policy DS3.

 

The Committee noted that although the applicant had described the two additional dwellings as annexes to the main, house, they had been considered as new dwellings for the purposes of addressing relevant policies and therefore further development or extensions to the properties without the need for further planning permission had been prevented by the removal of permitted development rights in the recommended conditions.

 

The Committee noted that all of the land at the development was privately owned and no public access had been had been applied for.

 

The Committee noted that should either of the two additional dwellings be sold, the requirements and conditions in the application would remain in force and remain the responsibility of the relevant land owner.

 

Councillor Jepson proposed and Councillor Trotter seconded that the application should be REFUSED due to the two additional dwellings taking away and lessening the ‘exceptional site and outstanding design’ of the main building.

 

Voting History – For 3, Against 7, Abstentions 0, Absent 1,

This vote was lost

 

Councillor Webster proposed and Councillor Neill seconded that the application should be PERMITTED for the reasons provided by the Major Developments and Appeals Manager.

 

RESOLVED: The Committee agreed to PERMIT the application for the reasons provided by the Major Developments and Appeals Manager

 

Voting Record – For 7, Against 3, Abstentions 0, Absent 1

 

The Committee PERMITTED the application in agreement with the recommendation of the Major Developments and Appeals Manager

 

 

22/02119/REM - Erection of 15 dwellings with associated access arrangements and ancillary works (Reserved Matters application) at Land West Of Davies Road/Mosedale Moreton-in-Marsh Gloucestershire.

 

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application and drew the Committee’s attention to additional written representations from local residents and a written statement from the Ward Member that had arrived on the day of the Committee.

 

The Chair provided a period of time for the Committee to read and note the additional written representations.

 

The Principal Planning Officer summarised the history and location of the proposed development on a grassed area of land within the town’s development boundary on the eastern side of Moreton-In-Marsh. The site location, proposed access and build design were presented, along with maps, photographs and illustrations to provide context for the 15 social rental dwellings that were being proposed.

 

The Committee noted that the development was not in a Conservation Area or in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

 

The Committee noted that, following discussions, the proposed properties’ gable depths had been reduced in width, rear extensions had been added and roof pitches had been increased in height in order to tie in more closely with properties in Davies Road and Mosedale.

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

A representative from Moreton-In-Marsh Town Council

Simon Jones & Mrs E Miller (written statement to be read out) – Objectors

Charlie Scherer – Applicant

Councillor Rachel Coxcoon (written statement submitted)

 

The Committee noted that the Ward Member had not referred the original application to the Committee in 2020.

 

The Committee noted that the application had now been referred to the Committee, as Cotswold District Council had now become involved with the development and scrutiny was now required.

 

The Committee noted that the following matters had been decided prior to CDC’s involvement and therefore did not need to be considered by the Committee:

·         The Outline Application

·         Drainage Plans

·         Ecology Report

·         Access Plans

 

The Committee noted that the Committee would be able to focus its consideration of the application’s four reserved-matters application area i.e. Appearance, Layout, Landscape and Scale

 

The Committee noted that, although the current application was for 15 social rented dwellings, the original S106 agreement required only six social rented dwellings to be part of the development, and this had not changed.

 

The Committee noted that the development was for 11 three-bed, 2 two-bed and 2 one-bed dwellings.

 

The Committee asked that ‘Control of Noise and ‘Hours of (Building) Working’ conditions should be added to the Construction Plan.

 

Councillor Maclean proposed and Councillor Neil seconded that the application should be PERMITTED for the reasons provided by the Principal Planning Officer

 

RESOLVED: The Committee agreed to PERMIT the application for the reasons provided by the Principal Planning Officer

 

Voting Record – For 6, Against 4, Abstentions 0, Absent - 1

 

The Committee agreed to PERMIT the application in agreement with the Principal Planning Officer.

 

 

20/02798/FUL - Demolition of single storey lean to, fenestration alterations and landscaping (part retrospective) at Middle Hill Farm, Saintbury, Broadway, Gloucestershire WR12 7PX

And

20/02799/LBC - Demolition of single storey lean to, fenestration alterations, internal alterations to include new mechanical and electrical works, and landscaping (part retrospective) at Middle Hill Farm Saintbury Broadway Gloucestershire WR12 7PX

 

The Chair announced that the two applications would be considered and discussed together, but separate votes would then be taken for each application.

 

The Senior Planning Enforcement Officer introduced the applications and drew the Committee’s attention to six additional updates that had been received, and a period of time was provided for the Committee to read and note the additional updates.

 

The Senior Planning Enforcement Officer re-introduced the applications seeking planning permission for the demolition of a single storey lean-to, fenestration alterations, internal alterations including new mechanical and electrical works both of which were part-retrospective. The site location, maps, photographs and illustrations were presented to provide context for the proposed works.

 

The Committee noted that there was an ongoing enforcement investigation at the property relating to a number of unauthorised works that had been undertaken at the property which were considered unacceptable, and some of which formed part of the two applications. A listed building enforcement notice had also been served.

 

The Committee noted that the property was a Grade II listed 18th century farmhouse located within the Saintbury Conservation Area, which was located within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

Anne Thomas – Saintbury Parish Meeting

Mr John Evetts – Applicant

Councillors Gina Blomefield and Tom Stowe (written statement) – Ward Members

 

The Committee noted that Planning Officers had engaged with the applicant throughout the planning process starting with the advice on the original proposals in October 2020.  The Applicant had been advised that certain elements of the proposed work would not be considered acceptable, but should these be removed the remainder of the application could continue.

 

The Committee noted that the term ‘Great Hall’ had been used by the Applicant in the original application and had continued to be used in subsequent documentation.

 

The Committee noted that it was not uncommon in multi-phased buildings to have differing, but equally significant, historic phases and it was considered that this layering added richness and texture to the history and character of a listed building and should be retained.

 

Councillor Jepson proposed and Councillor Judd seconded that an all Member  SITE INSPECTION should be arranged, to assess the works undertaken in situ to assess any harm to the listed building, and enable a more informed decision of application 20/02798/FUL.

 

Voting Record – For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 1, Absent 1,

 

Councillor Jepson proposed and Councillor Judd seconded that an all Member SITE INSPECTION should be arranged, to assess the works undertaken in situ to assess any harm to the listed building and enable a more informed decision of application 20/02799/LBC.

 

Voting Record – For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 1, Absent 1,

 

RESOLVED: The Committee AGREED to an all Member SITE INSPECTION to the property to assess the works undertaken in situ to assess any harm to the listed building, and enable more informed decisions to be determined.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages