Agenda and minutes

No declarations were made on this occasion.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2014.

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2014 were confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

The Development Control Manager presented the report which detailed an application for the demolition of an existing building and the erection of a Class A1 food store (1,680 m² gross; 1,125 m² net) with associated access, parking and landscaping on land at the junction of Clifton Road and Bristol Road.

He referred to the representations and petitions received detailed at paragraph 5.2 of the report. He drew Members’ attention to the recommended amendment to Condition 16 and additional representations contained in the late material.

He believed that the choice of materials especially the choice of brick would be of great importance to the development and he noted that the application was acceptable to the highways authority.

He noted that there would be some adverse impact on the Seymour Road local centre but this was not considered significant enough to warrant refusal and he referred Members to paragraphs 6.8 – 6.14 of the report together with the recommended conditions 22 and 23.

Mr Dan Templeton, of Turley Associates on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee speaking in support of the application.

Mr Templeton advised Members that the site had the benefit of planning permission for commercial development which had not been taken up. Extensive discussions had taken place with Council Officers both before and after submission of the application and both the design and the retail implications had been rigorously tested.

He believed that the site currently made no real contribution to the area and the design proposed recessed panels with detail in blue engineering brick to reflect the former wagon works and Morelands factory buildings.

Mr Templeton referred to the retail impact assessment and advised Members that Aldi tended to compete with other large food stores not small local shops. He believed any impact on the Griffin’s Cornershop would be limited and was not a material consideration.  He noted that the sequential test had indicated that no suitable sites were available and other recent refusals had involved different retail offers.

He asked Members to approve the recommendations of their officers as the development of this site, which had been unused for 20 years, would bring improvements to the townscape and employment opportunities.

Mr Richard Holmes of Mid Counties Co-op addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.

Mr Holmes referred to the policy section of the report and the Joint Core Strategy health check analysis which indicated that floor space capacity was more than sufficient until 2013.

He believed that the proposal would take trade away. loss of trade would lead top loss of profit and ultimately closure with loss of a service to the community and particularly the vulnerable.

He noted that the Tredworth and Seymour Road retail areas were afforded protection by policy. The Lidl store had had a harsh impact on the Co-op store. He was not satisfied that the proposal had satisfied the sequential test and asked Members to refuse the application.

Mrs Lisa Bayes addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 249.

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report which detailed an application for the erection of a detached three bedroom dwelling house on land south of Rectory Lane.

She drew Members’ attention to the late material which contained further representations, the comments of the Contaminated Land Officer, the Agent’s response to late representations and an additional condition.

Ms Sandra Potente on behalf of Chartwell Close Residents Association, addressed the committee in opposition to the application.

Ms Potente advised Members that the proposed tree planting was too close to boundary walls. She noted that Rectory Lane formed part of the Severn Way and became congested at times especially at the start and end of the school day and during events causing road safety concerns. She believed that the proposals contravened Building Regulations in respect of fire appliance access.

She noted that the site was in a Landscape Conservation Area, that the owners had closed a permissive footpath and had allowed the site to become overgrown. The proposal was overbearing and intrusive and would have a clear view into the bedrooms of three houses, contravening Article 8 of the European Human Rights.

She noted that there was an overflowing manhole in Rectory Lane and newt access would be compromised should further tarmacadam be laid.

The Chair advised that he had visited the site and found the access to be poor and he expressed concerns on access during the construction phase. He also had concerns on overlooking.

The Principal Planning Officer advised that there would be no windows in either side of the dwelling to overlook neighbours. She noted that the proposed dwelling was contained between the built form of Chartwell Close and Foxleigh and was therefore considered to be an infill site. She confirmed that the highway authority had raised no objection. A construction method statement would be secured through a planning condition.

Councillor McLellan believed the access to be poor and the egress to be dangerous.

Councillor Hobbs saw no planning reason to refuse the application and expressed surprise that only one dwelling had been proposed.

Councillor Smith agreed that the proposal was infilling but she noted that the 20 metre gap between buildings would prevent overshadowing or the building being overbearing. The lack of windows in the side elevations would prevent overlooking and she believed that a refusal could not be justified in planning terms.

In answer to a question, the Development Control Manager advised that no contribution to highway improvements had been requested by the highways authority.

It was moved and seconded that consent be granted in accordance with the officer’s recommendation. When the vote was put there was an equality of votes and the Chairman exercised his prerogative of a casting vote, so the motion fell.

A further motion to defer the application to visit the site with a highways officer invited was carried.

RESOLVED to defer the application for a site visit to be organised with an invitation to attend being sent to a Gloucestershire County Council highways  ...  view the full minutes text for item 250.

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report which detailed an application for the demolition of existing farm buildings and construction of eight dwelling houses and associated garages and parking and formation of new vehicular access from Ladywell Close.

He drew Members’ attention to the late material which confirmed that a number of issues had been resolved including building recording and bat issues and additional highway conditions. He confirmed that the Section 106 Agreement had been completed.

Mr Tom Sheppard, Design Manager for Newland Homes, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Mr Sheppard advised that the proposal was the result of extensive pre-application discussions. Newland Homes understands and enhances the sites it develops and the application responds to the character of the existing site.

He advised that most of the existing buildings had become unsafe and were beyond repair but he believed that the application represented an exciting proposal for their replacement.

The application had been revised to improve the relationship with 11, Ladywell Close. An existing barn would be rebuilt and some windows had been repositioned to prevent overlooking.

In conclusion, Mr Sheppard noted the contribution for education and the environmental benefits of the proposals which would deliver new homes in Hempsted on a brownfield site.

Mr Robert Fleming of 11, Ladywell Close addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

Mr Fleming considered the proposals to be excessive and not sympathetic with a loss of privacy. He noted that the garage of plot 1 encroached over its site and other plots had small rooms which suggested there was not enough room on the site and could lead to conversion of garages in future. He questioned the access through Ladywell Close and believed that bungalows would be more appropriate than terraced dwellings on the site.

He had enjoyed the privilege of viewing wildlife from his home for 14 years and questioned the loss of habitat for a gain of only eight dwellings. He had lived in Hempsted for 43 years and was sure that there would be residents interested in downsizing to bungalows.

In answer to a question, the Principal Planning Officer advised that although Conservation Area Consent was no longer required for the demolition of the buildings the process had become part of the assessment of a full planning application. The applicant had advocated the reuse of materials where possible and this was supported by Officers. He noted that if it were to be retained and converted, Barn 2 would require the whole roof and much of an exterior wall replacing. The barn building had limited architectural value in itself but made a contribution as part of the collection of building – it was the group of buildings that has significance.

Several Members spoke in favour of the design and considered it sympathetic to the area.

Councillor Taylor was pleased that access was not via the lane which was not acceptable.

Councillor Hobbs understood the concerns of the neighbour but considered the scheme was not overbearing or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 251.

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

The Development Control Manager presented the report which detailed an application for the stationing of a hot food catering van at Edison Close, Quedgeley.

Councillor Dee suggested that the Planning Policy Sub-Committee should consider a policy for hot food catering vehicles. Councillor Noakes noted there would also be implications for the Licensing and Enforcement Committee.

RESOLVED that permission be granted subject to the conditions in the report.

Appeals update to mid-March 2014.

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

The Development Control Officer presented the report which detailed the six appeals lodged since the previous report to Committee in October. In addition the report included details of the six appeals dismissed and the one appeal allowed in that period.

Members congratulated Officers on the report.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To consider a schedule of applications determined under delegated powers during the month of January 2014.

(schedule herewith)

Person to contact:             Development Control Manager

                                                Tel: 01452 396783

Consideration was given to a schedule of applications determined under delegated powers during the month of January 2014.

RESOLVED that the schedule be noted.

Tuesday, 6 May 2014 at 18.00 hours

Tuesday 6 May 2014 at 18.00hrs.