Skip to main content

Agenda item

25/01194/OUT - Land Parcel North of Olimpick Drive

Proposal

Outline application for residential development of up to 30 dwellings.

 

Case Officer

Martin Perks

 

Ward Members

Cllrs Gina Blomefield and Tom Stowe

 

Recommendation

REFUSE

 

                                                 

Minutes:

The proposal was for outline application for residential development of up to 30 dwellings.

 

Case Officer: Martin Perks

Ward Members: Cllrs Gina Blomefield and Tom Stowe

Original recommendation: REFUSE

 

The Chair invited the Case Officer to introduce the application who made the following points:

  • Additional pages included confirmation that the concerns in Refusal Reason 3, relating to Great Crested Newts, had been addressed through the applicant’s licensing report reviewed by Nature Space, and that this refusal reason was no longer pursued.
  • It was confirmed that County Council Highways raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions.
  • One additional objection had been received, relating to the loss of greenfield land and drainage.
  • Site location maps, photographs of the site and the indicative layout were shared.

 

Public Speakers

Speaker 1 - Chipping Campden Town Council

John Dooley (Town Council Clerk) explained that Chipping Campden Town Council opposed the application due to ongoing flooding concerns, noting that previous development at the site had inadequate flood mitigation measures that were not resolved, and they sought guarantees that the existing flooding issues would be properly addressed.

 

Speaker 2 – Objector

David Jennings-Riley raised concerns that the Sequential Test omitted guidance on cumulative flood risk, noting that previous development at Leasows One had increased flood risk to nearby areas, and that the proposed cut-off ditches for Leasows Two could worsen downstream flooding due to omissions in the plans. These concerns were supported by the 2023 Cotswold District Council Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and local flooding evidence.

 

Speaker 3 - Agent

Wendy Hopkins noted that the Council’s five-year housing land supply shortfall was the key consideration. She stated that landscape impact concerns were likely exaggerated, and that previous refusals were outdated or untested. She argued that applying the tilted balance meant the landscape harm was insufficient to justify refusal.

 

Speaker 4 – Ward Member

Councillor Tom Stowe, the Ward Member, supported refusal of the application, citing inadequate flood mitigation, significant landscape harm within the Cotswold National Landscape, and conflict with Local Plan policies and statutory duties. They concluded that adverse impacts outweighed any benefits.

 

Member questions

Members asked questions of the officers, who responded in the following way:

  • The detailed drainage scheme would be secured by condition if approved in order to manage hillside flooding. Indicative proposals included a capture trench to control flows and protect existing properties. Previous drainage issues at Olimpick Drive had been addressed, and technical consultees were satisfied that, the measures would prevent flooding to the development and surrounding areas, including Park Road.
  • The Officer explained that the assessment drew on experience, site history, and an independent landscape consultant’s review, resulting in a refusal recommendation. The decision also reflected changes in legislation, which placed weight on conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of national landscapes.
  • The Officer explained that the site itself did not flood, as it was sloping and water flowed over it to lower areas, where flooding has occurred in the past. A potential issue was whether development would exacerbate these problems by diverting water or increasing surface runoff. With the proposed drainage measures, including capture drains and attenuation features requested by the Lead Local Flood Authority, such impacts could be managed.
  • The Officer explained that, under paragraph 11(d)(i) of the NPPF, a lack of a five-year housing land supply required weight to be given to housing supply, but harm to a nationally designated landscape could provide a reason to refuse a planning application.
  • The Officer explained that previous flooding to properties backing onto the River Cam was caused by surface water, not the river itself. The proposed development would include on-site attenuation to store and release water at controlled rates.
  • The Officer explained that the public right-of-way crossed the site and formed part of a route linking Chipping Campden to the surrounding area. Whilst it was not part of the Cotswold Way, the footpath is used by pedestrians, and the proposed development would affect users.
  • It was clarified that the proposed development would not extend onto the Olimpick Drive site, except for use of the access road. However, the development would impact the intended function of the green corridor north of Stickler Place.

 

Member Comments

In discussing the application, Members made the following comments:

  • Concerns were expressed regarding the agent’s comments on housing targets, emphasising that government targets do not allow unrestricted development and that the Committee had a duty to ensure housing is directed to suitable locations whilst protecting the National Landscape.
  • The site was highly sensitive, elevated, and visually prominent. They considered that the development would cause unacceptable harm to the landscape, local character, and tourism value, and noted a potential flooding risk.
  • The refusal reasons were supported by the National Landscape Trust policies and stated that the application provided no public benefit under the tilted balance.

 

Councillor David Fowles proposed REFUSING the application and Councillor Julia Judd seconded the proposal. This proposal was put to the vote and agreed by the Committee.

 

RESOLVED: to REFUSE the application.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages