Skip to main content

Agenda item

Schedule of Applications

To consider and determine the applications contained within the enclosed schedule:

 

Application No.

Description

Ward Member

Case Officer

21/04342/FUL

Extension to yard used for the storage of horticultural products at Melcourt

Industries Limited Boldridge Brake Crudwell Lane Long Newnton Tetbury

Gloucestershire GL8 8RT

Councillor Nikki Ind

Andrew Moody

21/00549/FUL

45 residential dwellings with associated garages/parking, including demolition of existing petrol filling station and other existing buildings at Northfield Garage London Road Tetbury Gloucestershire GL8 8HW

Councillor Nikki Ind

Mike Napper

22/02519/FUL

Erection of incidental outbuilding (retrospective) at Grain Store 5 Old Dowmans

Farm Coberley Cheltenham Gloucestershire GL53 9FF

Councillor Julia Judd

Harrison Bowley

 

Minutes:

21/04342/FUL Extension to yard used for the storage of horticultural products at Melcourt Industries Limited, Boldridge Brake, Crudwell Lane, Long Newton, Tetbury Gloucestershire GL8 8RT

 

The Senior Planning Case Officer introduced the application that had been deferred at the November Planning & Licensing Committee meeting to allow for a Site Inspection to take place, to assist Members in their consideration of the application with regard to viewing the local road network, and also to request attendance at the meeting by the Highway Authority.

 

The Senior Planning Case Officer summarised the application and re-presented locality and site maps and photographs of the proposed development along with details of both the current road access to the site, proposed improvements, and additional illustrations showing the location of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), nearby conservation areas and photographs of roads taken during the Site Inspection.

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

Diane Thomas – Town/Parish Council

Jamie Lewis – Objector

Paul Greatwood – Agent

Nikki Ind – Ward Member

 

The Chair invited comments from Committee Members following the Site Inspection.

 

The Committee noted that the roads viewed during the visit were very narrow and any vehicular passing (HGV/HGV, HGV/car, HGV/tractor, car/tractor) appeared to cause issues and lead to vehicles being driven onto verges.

 

The Committee noted the width of the road near to the church was particularly narrow and difficult to pass for any motor vehicle.

 

The Committee noted that Melcourt Industries had suspended HGV deliveries to and from its site on the day of the site visit for Health and Safety reasons.

 

The Committee noted that the location and length of some of the proposed passing places would appear to be ‘wholly inappropriate’ adjacent or cutting into an AONB.  It was however recognised that the Highways Authority had the authority to build passing places without consideration of AONBs.

 

The Committee noted that Gloucestershire County Council Highways Authority had moved on from a previous position where it had not opposed the application, to recommending a refusal, for the following reasons:

·         When the original application had been submitted it was understood that there would be an off-setting of HGV movements that would give nil detriment, and one Passing Place had been proposed to improve congestion

·         It then transpired that the off-setting could not take place and the 10 HGV movements that had been considered, applied to an adjacent ancillary commercial site, and not the proposed application site, and an additional 12 HGV movements per day would be created from the application

·         An improved form of mitigation had been offered in the form of 5 Passing Places within the application, and this had initially been considered reasonable.

·         Following referral to the Planning and Licensing Committee, the Site Inspection, and communication with both the Applicant and the Planning Authority, it had become clear that the application site was intrinsically linked to the adjacent ancillary commercial site and, should the application be approved, it would fall under B2 commercial use and potentially increase (double) the number of HGV movements.

·         This led to the Highways Authority concluding that “…after undertaking a robust assessment of the planning application and based upon the analysis of the information submitted, the highway authority concludes that there would be an unacceptable impact on the safety and operation of the public highway. The proposed development would fail to provide and maintain safe and suitable access for all users contrary to INF1 and INF 4 of the Local Plan and NPPF paragraphs 110 and 112.  It is therefore recommended that this application is refused.” 

 

The Committee noted that The Freight Route Map appeared to indicate that the area round the application site was not recommended for HGV movements.

 

The Committee noted that the formal written notification from the Highways Authority recommending a refusal was received after the Site Inspection had taken place.

 

The Committee noted that the Planning and Licensing Committee did not have the authority to specifically restrict the use of HGV movements to or from the application site as part of this (or any future) planning application.

 

Councillor Neill proposed and Councillor Jepson seconded that the application was  REFUSED for the reasons provided by the Highways Authority

 

RESOLVED The Committee agreed to REFUSE the application for the reason provided by the Highways Authority

 

Voting Record – For 9, Against 0, Abstentions 1, Absent 1,

 

21/00549/FUL 45 residential dwellings with associated garages/parking, including demolition of existing petrol filling station and other existing buildings at Northfield Garage, London Road, Tetbury, Gloucestershire, GL8 8HW

 

The Major Developments and Appeals Manager introduced the application that was deferred by Committee at the meeting of 9th November 2022 to allow further negotiations to take place in relation to the potential provision of additional on-site Public Open Space(s). Negotiations had been completed and updates had been provided in the relevant sections of the report, including in respect of items that had been reported to the November Committee in the Additional Pages to the latter.

 

The Major Developments and Appeals Manager then re-presented the planning application for the erection of 45 residential dwellings with associated garages/parking  The proposed development was summarised, and the application site and location maps, photographs and illustrations were presented to provide context for what was initially proposed along with new illustrations showing the new proposed green spaces.

 

The Committee noted that the inclusion of the green spaces had resulted in the loss of three of the 100 parking original spaces, although this would not reduce the 91 parking spaces that would be allocated to properties.

 

The Committee noted that management of the Public Open Space by a private management company had been proposed by the Applicant and this would require residents to make small contributions for the upkeep and management of green spaces.

 

The Committee recommended that the management of the green spaces should first be offered to Tetbury Town Council for a nominal sum as a preferred solution.

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

Catherine Sheppard – Applicant

Nikki Ind – Ward Member

 

The Committee noted that the Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) assessment, the applicant has provided a plan to deal with this flooding, which is to incorporate

two underground attenuation tanks to store surface water. This strategy was acceptable, subject to a detailed design condition.

 

Councillor Webster proposed and Councillor Harris seconded that the application was APPROVED for the reasons provided by the Major Developments and Appeals Manager.

 

RESOLVED The Committee APPROVED delegated permission subject to completion of S106 in respect of Affordable Housing, completion of S106 in respect of library contribution, and confirmation of Lead Local Flood Authority satisfaction.

 

Voting Record – For 8, Against 1, Abstentions 1, Absent 1,

 

Erection of incidental outbuilding (retrospective) at Grain Store, 5 Old Dowmans Farm, Coberley, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL53 9FF

 

The Senior Planning Case Officer introduced the application for the (retrospective) erection of an incidental outbuilding on built up land at a site at the western edge of the village of Coberley located within the Cotswolds AONB..  The site comprised historic vernacular farm buildings with more modern farm buildings to the north, which had been the subject of permission for conversion to residential use. No. 5 Old Dowmans Farm, was set centrally within the latter development, along the eastern boundary of the site and the building constituted a historic barn, now converted to a dwelling, with a modest garden and off street parking to the front. The application was summarised, and site and location maps, photographs and illustrations were presented to provide context for what had been constructed. 

 

The following people addressed the Committee:

Duncan McGaw – Town/Parish Council

Rebecca Murphy – Objector

Richard Greenwood – Agent

Julia Judd – Ward Member

 

The Committee noted that the host building had been identified as a non-designated heritage asset.

 

The Committee noted that the original planning permission (2017) included a condition to remove permitted development rights and bring the construction of further structures under the Planning Services control.

 

The Committee noted that the removal of permitted development rights condition would usually be carried forward on subsequent applications but this had not happened at this site.

 

The Committee noted that enforcement officers had determined the change in height of the built up area on which the new structure stands, as 0.3m, using historic topographic surveys and more recent physical measurements.

 

The Committee noted that absence of the condition removing permitted development rights and existing permission would enable further development of the site with construction of a car barn, and this would not be considered ‘over-development’.

 

Councillor Jepson proposed and Councillor Judd seconded that the application should be DEFERRED to enable a full Committee member Site Inspection to take place.

 

RESOLVED The Committee agreed to DEFER the application to enable a full Committee Site Inspection to take place. 

 

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

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages