Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Tuesday, 5th December 2023 6.00 pm

Venue: North Warehouse, The Docks, Gloucester, GL1 2EP

Contact: Democratic and Electoral Services 

Items
No. Item

45.

Declarations of Interest

To receive from Members, declarations of the existence of any disclosable pecuniary, or non-pecuniary, interests and the nature of those interests in relation to any agenda item. Please see Agenda Notes.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

46.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 173 KB

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 7th November, 2023.

Minutes:

The minutes of the previous meeting held on Tuesday 7th November 2023 were confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

47.

Late Material pdf icon PDF 78 KB

Please note that any late material in respect of the applications detailed below will be published as a supplement on the Council’s website in the late afternoon of the day before the meeting. Additional late material will be uploaded as a supplement on the Council’s website on the day of the meeting, should further relevant representations be received thereafter.

Minutes:

Late Material had been circulated in respect of Agenda Item 5 – (RAOB Club - 23/00696/OUT) and 6 (Great Western Road - 22/00770/FUL).

48.

RAOB Club, 87 - 91 Southgate Street, Gloucester - 23/00696/OUT pdf icon PDF 406 KB

Application for Determination:

 

Outline planning application for the demolition of former RAOB Social Club and redevelopment of the site to provide 17 residential flats and associated landscaping and external works. (landscaping reserved)  Revision to extant consented scheme comprising 14 units (17/00658/OUT).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report detailing an outline application for the demolition of former RAOB Social Club and redevelopment of the site to provide 17 residential flats and associated landscaping and external works. (landscaping reserved) Revision to extant consented scheme comprising 14 units (17/00658/OUT).

 

 

Members’ Questions

 

The Principal Planning Officer responded to Members’ questions concerning the length of time before the previous application was consented, the difference between the application before the Committee and the one that had previously received planning consent, concerns about three of the flats and whether they would be used for their purported affordable housing purpose, why the dwellings did not meet national design space standards (NDSS), whether the applicant would still have the 2019 permission to build properties in the event of a refusal, whether local history was taken into account by officers and whether the street numbering team could be contacted to reflect that, whether the applicant proposed to include glazing, if the Whitesmiths Arms required repairs and concerns about bin storage as follows:

 

-      The legal agreement in respect of the provision application required a considerable duration to finalise.

-    Landscaping was the sole reserved matter not encompassed within the application.

-    The application under the Committee's consideration proposed only three alterations: the addition of three units on the second floor, the inclusion of affordable housing units on site and M4(2) units on the site.

-       The applicant was in talks with a Registered Social Landlord (RSL). If, after a year they could not sell the 3 affordable dwellings, then an offsite contribution would be required.

-       Most of the dwellings did not meet NDSS standards. None of the dwellings in the previous application met NDSS standards and had received consent as this policy had not been implemented by the Council until 2020 and was not in the adopted plan until January 2023. The additional three flats met NDSS standards.

-       The original permission to build 14 dwellings would still be in effect, in the event of a refusal.

-       Local history was taken into accounts by relevant officers.

-       The officer could email the street numbering team. However, it would not form part of the planning resolution.

-       The applicant had not offered to provide solar panels. However, there was a condition that stipulated that details of the proposed glazing and ventilation products must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before construction commences and these windows would have to be well-glazed, owing to the noise in the area. This would ensure that the properties were well insulated.  

-       The Whitesmiths Arms did require repairs. The Conservation Officer had worked closely with the relevant staff from Whitesmiths on this.

-       The Waste Management Team were content with the bin storage provision. 

 

 

Members’ Debate

 

The Chair noted that he was happy to see the affordable housing put on site.

 

Councillor J. Brown observed that concerning the size of the units, a comparable development at the Post House  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

49.

Great Western Road yard/sidings - 22/00770/FUL pdf icon PDF 456 KB

Application for determination:

 

Residential development of 315 dwellings (comprised of apartment blocks and houses) and formation of new accesses, with associated landscaping, parking, open space and ancillary works including demolition of existing buildings.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Principal Planning Officer presented the update report detailing an application for residential development of 315 dwellings (comprised of apartment blocks and houses) and formation of new accesses, with associated landscaping, parking, open space and ancillary works including demolition of existing buildings.

 

A local resident spoke in opposition to the application.

 

He said that he had concerns in respect of the application on the following grounds:

 

-       About thermal design and whether the site could reach net zero.

-       Heat pumps could interfere with each other.

-       The current design meant that there would be additional cost and complexity for air source heat pumps.

-       The design had not been completely thought through.

 

A director of Eutopia Homes spoke in favour of the application.

 

She stated that the application should granted on the following grounds:

 

-       Officers had recommended approval.

-       The proposal only sought to make minor amendments.

-       The application would provide 315 new homes on an allocated, centrally located brownfield site.

-       The applicant had had advanced discussions with a housing association which has got grant funding.

-       An energy strategy had been submitted with the application.

-       The site would provide 35% affordable housing, this was above the policy requirement of 20%.

 

 

 

Members’ Questions

 

The Principal Planning Officer responded to Members’ questions concerning whether there would be traffic lights installed on Great Western Road, whether there would be a pedestrian crossing on Great Western Road, whether there would be batteries attached to the solar panels, further details about the updated energy strategy, questions about relocating modular housing in future to areas of need, and questions about traffic congestion on Great Western Road and London Road, construction traffic and parking provision as follows:

 

-       Traffic lights were not proposed on Great Western Road.

-       The energy strategy provided by the applicant suggested that they would provide houses with batteries with solar panels .

-       Questions about whether to provide a pedestrian crossing on Great Western Road had been discussed in depth when the application had previously gone before committee, it had been resolved then to approve the application without it.

-       The energy report provided by the applicant evidenced that they were aspirational in relation to their energy efficiency targets.

-       There was some complexity regarding the affordable housing situation. The developer contribution was secured (26 units in block D) in the heads of terms for the legal agreement. However, as this was lower than the City Council’s policy (20%), the legal agreement would oblige the applicant to look for public subsidies. This was why a housing association had been sourced by the applicant. Therefore, with the combined developer contribution and housing association, the total percentage of affordable units would be 35%.

-       In theory, modular units could potentially be relocated, however, this would require a separate planning application, and may not be straightforward due to ownership issues, etc.

-       The applicant had submitted a travel plan. The heads of terms for the legal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

50.

Delegated Decisions pdf icon PDF 278 KB

To consider a schedule of applications determined under delegated powers during the month of October 2023.

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the delegated decisions for October 2023 were noted.

51.

Date of next meeting

Tuesady, 9th January 2024.

Minutes:

Tuesday 9th January 2024.