Agenda item

Application for determination:-

Outline application (with all matters reserved other than means of access) for redevelopment of part of the former Bishop’s College site for residential use creating up to 90 new homes and provision of open space.

Councillor David Brown had declared a non-prejudicial interest in this application as a Member of Gloucestershire County Council.

The Principal Planning Officer presented his report which detailed an outline application, with all matters reserved other than means of access, for redevelopment of part of the former Bishop’s College site for residential use creating up to 90 new homes and provision of open space.

He drew Members’ attention to the additional representation and amended recommendation contained within the second tranche of late material.

Councillor Williams, as a Member for Longlevens ward, addressed the Committee.

Councillor Williams expressed concerns regarding the access to the development and traffic impact. She agreed with the late representation and expressed particular concerns regarding construction access to the site and where contractors would park. She noted that it would be impossible for two large vehicles to pass and queried where the construction workers would park. She suggested that the application be deferred for further consideration of highways issues.

John Bond, on behalf of Estcourt Close residents, addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

Mr Bond believed that the site should be retained for educational purposes as there was a high demand for high school places which would be increased by developments at Longford and Innsworth.

He believed that the development would have a significant impact upon the residents of Estcourt Close.

He stated that at the exhibition for the University development the County Council had given the assurance that the use of the close would be no greater than when the school was open.

He believed that the assurance had been based on flawed data as all able bodied students had used the pedestrian access rather than the Close. In addition the residential access would be year round rather than just school hours within term time.

He noted that Estcourt Close had been designed to serve 24 homes and it was not sustainable to add another 90 homes with potentially another 180 vehicles.

Alan Divall, on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Mr Divall stated that the site was no longer required for educational purposes and Schedule 1 consent had been obtained for disposal as addressed in paragraphs 6.80 to 6.84 of the Officer’s report.

He stated that the application would contribute to the City’s housing requirement and five year housing supply. He stated that an appropriate housing mix would be delivered by the development. It was a highly sustainable proposal with a density of 28 dwellings per hectare on a previously developed site and was closely linked to the University's growth plans. It would also contribute to the local economy with construction jobs and subsequent Council Tax.

He noted that the Highway Authority and Sport England had no objections and he confirmed that the sports facilities would be well maintained with increased usage. The retention of the playing field would be addressed by the Section 106 agreement. It would improve connectivity with the wider area.

He also noted that Severn Trent Water, the Lead Local Flood Authority, the Council’s Tree Officer and the Planning Policy Officer had no objections to the application. A Sustainable Urban Drainage System could be secured by condition.

In conclusion, he confirmed that Gloucestershire County Council had followed all the appropriate procedures in bringing the site forward and the benefits of the development clearly outweighed any concerns.

In answer to a Member’s question about access for construction traffic, the Highways Officer advised that a construction method statement would be required by condition and the construction traffic would not be materially different to the vehicles already servicing Estcourt Close. The construction staff vehicles would be expected to be accommodated within the site.

A Member suggested that the educational needs be established before granting planning permission. The Principal Planning Officer advised that the

Ministerial approval to the disposal of the school site was dealt with by a separate process outside the planning system. He referred to the summary of the position in the Committee report and that the Education Authority had declared the site to be surplus to requirements.

Another Member suggested that an alternative access should be provided for construction traffic. He was advised that it was not for the Highway Authority to propose alternative access, in this case they had assessed the application and considered it to be acceptable.

The Solicitor advised that disruption during any construction phase was not a material planning consideration as this is normally conditioned and Members should not consider the matter in their deliberations.

RESOLVED that subject to confirmation that the Council’s Drainage Engineer is satisfied as to the future provision of an acceptable sustainable urban drainage strategy, and securing of a legal agreement or agreements to provide the following;

1.            A proportion of affordable housing (as set out in the report factoring in vacant buildings credit as required).

2.            A package of mitigation for open space requirements that the Committee delegates to the Development Control Manager to finalise.

3.            A financial contribution towards education on the basis set out in the report.

4.            A financial contribution towards libraries on the basis set out in the         report

and delegation from the Committee to the Solicitor for the incorporation of such additional provisions in the proposed planning obligation that may be deemed necessary by the Solicitor, planning permission is granted subject to the conditions in the report with delegated powers granted to the Development Control Manager to amend or add conditions as necessary to deal with the outstanding matters;