To receive apologies for absence

Apologies were received from Cllr Val Hobman (substituted by Cllr Jackie Fraser) and Cllr Graham Morgan (substituted by Cllr Di Martin).

To confirm the minutes of the planning committee meeting held on 9 October 2012.

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 October 2012 were confirmed and signed as an accurate record.

The chairman to identify any items of urgent business

The chairman identified no items of urgent business.

To receive any declarations of interest in any matter to be discussed at the meeting. Members and officers are requested to identify the nature of the interest.

Cllr Martin declared an other interest in item 5.1 as a board member of Two Rivers Housing.

Cllr Kirkpatrick declared an other interest in item 5.4 as a member of the Tutshill memorial hall trust.

To consider the schedule of applications as prepared by the Group Manager for Planning and Housing

Cllr Glastonbury, chairman of the committee, referred to the schedule of planning applications, as prepared by the Group Manager for Planning and Housing under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and to the late material circulated before the meeting.

For reasons of clarity the applications are recorded in agenda order.

Erection of 92 dwellings including associated infrastructure and landscaping.  Demolition of existing abattoir buildings.

Erection of 92 dwellings including associated infrastructure and landscaping.  Demolition of existing abattoir buildings.

Please refer to the late material circulated before the meeting.

The Development Manager presented the item, commenting that the concerns of the Council's sustainability team had been addressed. The application had been the subject of significant design input from the community and it delivered 40 per cent affordable housing with all properties to code four standard.

Public speaking

On behalf of the applicant the architect spoke to the written representation already submitted to the Council.

Committee consideration

Cllr Sterry expressed her delight at the contribution made to enhance the busy junction at St White's Road.

Cllr Martin said that she would be happy to propose the motion for delegated permission for this exciting application, which had involved cooperation and collaboration with the local community. There had previously been ongoing problems for neighbours of   the abattoir. The application represented an appropriate use of the site with code four buildings offering lifetime, high quality homes. She was also pleased that it included 32 badly needed affordable rent properties.

Cllr Martin proposed and Cllr Sterry seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - to grant delegated permission as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (15) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, David Thomson, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

Erection of an office and production building.

Erection of an office and production building.

Tony Pope, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, explaining that the application proposed a new office building to replace a complex of portable buildings.

Public speaking

None

Committee consideration

Cllr Evans said that Forest of Dean Stone was a respected company and the application represented a smart, tasteful improvement on the portable buildings.

Cllr Bevan said that the site visit had led him to believe that the proposal would enhance the whole of the Cannop valley and partly obscure the stone works. He thought that it was an example of good planning.

Cllr Gooch pointed out a typographical error on agenda page 48, condition 8. The sentence should read The building shall only be used in connection with Bixslade Stone Works and not by any other business or company.

Cllr Evans proposed and Cllr McMahon seconded the motion.

RESOLVED – to grant permission as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (13) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

Erection of a detached bungalow and garage (Revised Scheme).

Erection of a detached bungalow and garage (Revised Scheme).

The Development Manager presented the item reminding members that it had been deferred last month to enable members to visit the site. It sought to address a previous proposal for a dwelling, which had been dismissed on appeal. The Inspector considered that having the access and drainage outside the settlement boundary was acceptable and the refusal related to the scale of the dwelling. The new application reduced the size of the dwelling and was considered acceptable.

Public speaking

None.

Committee consideration

Cllr Martin said that she understood why the application had been refused previously and that there had been changes since the appeal.

Cllr Bevan believed that the revised application's proposal had been scaled down sufficiently and was satisfactory.

Cllr Martin proposed and Cllr Horne seconded the motion.

RESOLVED – to grant permission as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (14) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0) –

Abstain (0) -

Erection of an extension to flat above the public house "Live and Let Live"

Erection of an extension to flat above the public house "Live and Let Live"

Please refer to the late material circulated before the meeting

Tony Pope, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, explaining that the original application had been amended to address concerns regarding neighbouring properties being overlooked. A condition in the late material covered the concern.

Public Speaking

The applicant spoke to the written representation already submitted to the Council.

Committee consideration

Cllr Kirkpatrick agreed that the revised application represented an enhancement. She recognised that the building would not block the light to neighbouring properties, but was concerned about its height, as it would still overshadow them. She also believed that a neighbouring cottage's amenity space would be compromised, and locally there were concerns that the renovation works would affect the running of the public house. She asked if there were a minimum distance from the kerbside for gates to properties, because in this application a car would need to be stopped on the bend for the driver to get out and open the gates.

The Principal Planning Officer replied that there was no minimum distance, the gate opened inwardly and Gloucestershire Highways had not objected.

Cllr Davies added that the public house was on the corner of a road with double yellow lines. Visitors to the pub currently used the welfare hall car park opposite and wondered what cars would do should that not be available.

The Group Manager for Planning and Housing emphasised that the application was only concerned with an extension to the property and that Gloucestershire Highways had not objected.

Cllr Martin was pleased to see someone willing to take on a public house that had been in administration. She agreed with the officers' reasons for recommending that permission be granted.

Cllr Thomson was impressed with the clever way to resolve the problem of overlooking other properties by recessing the window to give 'tunnel vision'. He advised other applicants with similar problems to learn from the solution.

Cllr Bevan did not believe that there was any problem with parking, as the space existed currently as a carport.

Cllr Martin proposed and Cllr Sterry seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - to grant permission as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (14) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, David Thomson, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (1) – Gabriella Kirkpatrick

Abstain (0)

Erection of a detached car port with room above.

Erection of a detached car port with room above.

Please refer to the late material circulated before the meeting

The Development Manager presented the itemreferring to the late material containing additional representations and the confirmation that the town council continued to object. While he acknowledged that the new building was larger than the adjoining garage, it was considered to be acceptable, as it was set away from the neighbouring dwellings.

Public speaking

None

Cllr Davis, the local ward councillor, agreed with the reasons for the officer recommendation.

Committee consideration

Cllr Bevan believed that the application was sympathetic and would not cause concern.

Cllr Bevan proposed and Cllr Davies seconded the motion.

RESOLVED – to grant permission as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (14) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

Change of use of land for a business proposal for the erection of yurts and change of use of first floor of ciderhouse to washroom/toilet facilities.

Change of use of land for a business proposal for the erection of yurts and change of use of first floor of ciderhouse to washroom/toilet facilities.

Please refer to the late material circulated before the meeting.

Emma Norgate, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, commenting that councillors had visited the site in October and that the Council's Core Strategy and national policies supported small developments for tourism. She referred the committee to the representation in support of the application and two revised conditions contained in the late material.

Public speaking

An objector and the applicant spoke to written representations already submitted to the Council.

Cllr East, the local ward councillor, agreed with the public speaker that there had been local concerns. He said that he was pleased to see the revised conditions proposed should the committee decide to grant permission.

Committee consideration

The Group Manager for Planning and Housing clarified for Cllr Sterry that a touring caravan site would have required permission. A Caravan Club site would have exemption from the requirement for planning permission, but with a limited number of days' permitted use per year. He added that the term 'smell pollution' referred to smoke from fires.

Cllr McMahon said that the district needed diversity to attract more tourists. He believed the application to be well thought out and pleasingly green.

Cllr Horne wondered who would enforce the planting and maintenance of hedgerows. She was also concerned about where visitors would walk and what effect the development would have on wildlife. She also asked if the applicant would need to apply for permission to change solar lights to lighting powered by the national grid, if the need arose in the future.

The Principal Planning Officer replied that landscaping was covered in the revised condition 3 in the late material. Visitors would not be able to use private land, but there was a network of public footpaths in the May Hill area. The owners of the site would manage use of their land. She clarified that condition 9 covered the issue concerning lighting.

Cllr Horne still had serious concerns about any changes that might affect the beauty of May Hill. She would have to reluctantly support the application, as she believed that if refused the applicant would win on appeal.

Cllr Kirkpatrick asked if the foundations would be easy to remove, as specified in condition 6. She also suggested that the committee add a condition that if the business activity ceased, all yurts, foundations and the toilet block be removed.

The Principal Planning Officer referred to the proposal, which stated that the bases would be timber framed and presumably easily removed.

Cllr Stephens asked if the conservation adviser had been the same one that had been against a similar application involving a listed building. The Group Manager for Planning and Housing confirmed that the Council had used the Herefordshire Council conservation adviser.

Cllr Stephens was concerned that the parking area seen on the plan was not in the farmyard, as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.6

Listed Building Consent for alterations to the first floor of the cider house to washroom/toilet facilities.

Listed Building Consent for alterations to the first floor of the cider house to washroom/toilet facilities.

Emma Norgate, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, commenting that it followed on from the previous application for yurts. She added that the alterations were minor and would have no impact on the building.

Public speaking

None.

Committee consideration

Cllr Sterry Proposed and Cllr Kirkpatrick seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - to grant consent as detailed in the schedule of applications.

Voting was as follows.

For (15) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, David Thomson, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

Change of Use of barn to leisure use, provision of an amenity block and the erection of 5 Yurts.

Change of Use of barn to leisure use, provision of an amenity block and the erection of 5 Yurts.

Please refer to the late material circulated before the meeting

Tony Pope, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, explaining that the applicant had reduced the number of proposed yurts to two, but that the application retained a proposed toilet block and use of an existing barn for communal use.

Public speaking

A representative of English Bicknor Parish Council and the applicant spoke to written representations already submitted to the Council.

Cllr Smart, the local ward councillor, said that she had brought the application to the committee because of the number of concerns and because it was not supported by the parish council. She acknowledged that the report contained conditions to ensure appropriate screening. There remained, however, serious concerns over poor access and a dangerous junction with the B road. For the reasons detailed in the report she hoped that the committee would support the officer recommendation for refusal.

Committee consideration

Cllr Martin said that the application had also received letters of support and that the applicant had responded to concerns by reducing the number of proposed yurts to two. She thought that the application was small and sensitive. It represented sustainable tourism and was exactly what the area needed. She wondered if the committee would delegate to officers to negotiate further to be able to grant permission.

The Group Manager for Planning and Housing said that officers were confident that concerns raised by the Council's sustainability team could be overcome. However, if the committee granted permission, it would be against the view of Gloucestershire Highways.

Cllr Stephens commented that after site visits he believed this site to be more suitable for yurts than the application under item 5.6. He thought that the site would be well shielded, although he had been concerned about overdevelopment with the proposal to erect five yurts, so was pleased with the revised application for two. He thought the site suitable and would support delegated permission, having considered the parish council comments.

Cllr Horne was not comfortable with the yurt bases being flagstones, which gave the impression of permanence.

Cllr Kirkpatrick was also concerned about the slightly more permanent nature of the yurts compared with the application under item 5.6. She hoped that similar conditions would apply about removing all structures, should the business activity cease.

Cllr Martin proposed and Cllr McMahon seconded the motion. The reason for approval was that the proposal was considered to be a sustainable form of development supporting the rural economy, providing  for small scale tourism. The development would only generate a marginal increase in traffic using the access and as such was not considered to be detrimental to highway safety.

RESOLVED – to give delegated authority to the Group Manager Planning and Housing to grant permission subject to the satisfactory resolution of the ecology issues raised by the sustainability team and the imposition of conditions  including ones to control the use  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.8

Retention of building known as Amber House as a single dwelling unit with a revised garden boundary, parking and manoeuvring area, retention and conversion of building known as Roseville House as a double garage at ground floor and storage at first floor to be used as ancillary to Amber House.

Retention of building known as Amber House as a single dwelling unit with a revised garden boundary, parking and manoeuvring area, retention and conversion of building known as Roseville House as a double garage at ground floor and storage at first floor to be used as ancillary to Amber House.

Emma Norgate, Principal Planning Officer, presented the item, highlighting the recent site visit and that the application sought to rectify a previous scheme, where an applicant had not built according to the permission granted.

Public Speaking

A representative of Woolaston Parish Council and an agent for the applicant spoke to written representations already submitted to the Council.

Committee consideration

Cllr Stephens was of the opinion that a car could just about be squeezed in to the space allocated. He had read the email regarding a compromise to remove the upper floor on one part, leaving a double garage, but he could not support the application in its current form. He added that the parish council was clearly unhappy and to grant permission would only store up problems for the future. He suggested deferral for officers to discuss with the applicant the removal of the upper floor mentioned previously.

Cllrs Davies thought that the application needed further careful consideration and agreed with the suggestion.

Cllr Kirkpatrick said that she would still have concerns even if the upper floor were removed. She asked about landscaping plans and levels, considering the steepness of parts of the site.

The Group Manager for Planning and Housing replied that the scheme contained re-levelling proposals and a condition regarding drainage.

Cllrs Bevan and Martin agreed that the application should be deferred for further negotiation.

Cllr Stephens proposed and Cllr Davies seconded the motion that the application be deferred with negotiations sought to remove the first floor from the building proposed to be used as a garage.

RESOLVED - to defer the application to enable officers to discuss suitable changes with the applicant.

Voting was as follows.

For (15) – Terry Glastonbury, Arthur Thomas, Norman Stephens, Julia Gooch, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Gethyn Davies, Roger Yeates, Jane Horne, Jackie Fraser, Lynn Sterry, David Thomson, Di Martin, Paul McMahon, Frankie Evans, James Bevan

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

a)     To confirm that the next sites inspection panel of visits will take place on 18 December 2012.

b)     To consider any new applications put forward by elected members, or by the Group Manager for Planning and Housing. These sites are in addition to any that may be identified during the meeting.

The Development Manager presented a list of suggested sites and explained the reasons for visiting them.

Cllr Stephens said that it would be important to view the wind turbine at St.Briavels from different vantage points and to take time when viewing the proposed Hartpury College site.

In response to a question regarding the electricity output of the windturblne at Alvington, the Development Manager clarified that site visits were undertaken to assess physical impact only. He would gather as much relevant data regarding the wind turbine output as possible for the committee report.

Referring to the St Briavels wind turbine Cllr Bevan thought that it would be important to see the wind turbine in reality, to gauge the accuracy of the montage that the committee had seen when considering the application.

RESOLVED - to hold the next sites inspection visit on 18 December 2012 to include the following sites:

P1396/12/FUL             Alvington Court Farm                                      

Additional Visit to view completed development Wind Turbine at St Briavels                                                                                                      

P 1257/12/FUL             The Cottage Cockshoot Hill St Briavels

P0650/12/FUL          Public Convenience, Bream Road, Lydney                                                                                                           

P1378/12/FUL          Bream Court Farm, Coleford Road, Bream                                                                                                                        

P1431/12/FUL          Bream Court Farm, Coleford Road, Bream                                                                                                           

P1580/12/FUL             Hartpury College                                          

P1550/12/FUL          The Rock Redmarley                                        

The committee to consider report PH.144, detailing the performance of the planning enforcement team 1 July to 30 September 2012.

The Senior Planning Enforcement Officer presented report PH.144, highlighting the 35 per cent reduction in complaints, an increase in the number of cases investigated within 25 days to 91 per cent and an increase in the number of cases closed. Enforcement was continuing its lean systems review to increase efficiency and achieve more focused results.

Cllr Horne thanked the officer for his recent help.

Cllr Martin congratulated the officer for his clear, comprehensive report.

Cllr Stephens said that it was refreshing to see how the officer dealt with the general public handled enforcement through dialogue, which was good for the council and the public.

To consider, and if so agree, to resolve, that under section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in schedule 12A of the said act, and that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information

RESOLVED that under section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in schedule 12A of the said act

To consider the following planning enforcement report: -

The committee to consider report PH.142.

The Senior Planning Enforcement Officer presented the report.

11 December 2012

Tuesday 11 December 2012 at 2.00pm