Contact Information

Forest of Dean District Council
Council Offices
High Street
Coleford
Glos
GL16 8HG

Tel: 01594 810000
council@fdean.gov.uk

Contact/Find us

Arthur Thomas

The Forest of Dean District Council - Agenda for Development Control Committee on Tuesday, 11th October, 2011, 2.00 pm

Agenda and minutes

Development Control Committee
Tuesday, 11th October, 2011 2.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Coleford

Contact: Joanne Moore 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies

To receive apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Jane Horne, Paul McMahon and David Thomson.

 

The Chairman announced that Councillor Brian Jones would substitute for Councillor Horne, Councillor Di Martin for Councillor McMahon and Councillor Jackie Fraser for Councillor Thomson. The Chairman welcomed Councillor Jackie Fraser to the meeting as a reserve member of the committee and Councillor Philip Burford as a permanent member for the present council.

 

The Chairman also welcomed Lisa Russell from Severn Trent Water to the meeting to answer questions on item 5.3 of the agenda, (P1033/11/FUL Cleeve Mill Business Park,Cleeve Mill Lane, Newent). He also noted that there would be no attendance at future meetings from Gloucestershire County Council Highways.

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 123 KB

To confirm the non-exempt minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 2011 (attached).

Minutes:

The non-exempt minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 2011 were confirmed as an accurate record of that meeting.

3.

Urgent Business

The chairman to identify any items of urgent business.

Minutes:

No items of urgent business were considered at this meeting.

.

4.

Declarations of Interest

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 and indicate whether it is personal or prejudicial.

Minutes:

The following declarations of interest were made at the meeting: -

 

Councillor Di Martin declared a prejudicial interest in items 5.3 and 5.8 of the agenda, P1033/11/FUL Cleeve Mill Business Park, Newent and P1332/11/FUL Tufthorn Avenue, Coleford. Councillor Martin said that, as a member of the Two Rivers Housing Association Board, she would leave the meeting for consideration of these items.

 

Councillor Gethyn Davies declared a prejudicial interest in item 5.4 of the agenda, P1075/11/FUL Land adjacent to Lords Hill/Pyart Court, Coleford, as a shareholder in the company to whom the application related. Councillor Davies agreed to leave the meeting for consideration of this item.

 

Councillor James Bevan declared a personal interest in item 5.4 of the agenda, P1075/11/FUL Land adjacent to Lords Hill/Pyart Court, Coleford, due to his association as Rotary Club Member with the owner of the site.

 

Councillor Terry Glastonbury declared a personal interest in item 5.4 of the agenda, P1075/11/FUL Land adjacent to Lords Hill/Pyart Court, Coleford, due to an earlier reporting of a personal viewpoint regarding the impact of supermarkets on rural town centres. Councillor Glastonbury clarified that the statement had been made in response to another matter and did not relate to this application.

5.

Schedule of planning applications pdf icon PDF 707 KB

To consider the schedule of applications as prepared by the Group Manager for Planning and Housing. Please refer to report PH.83.

Minutes:

Chairman, Councillor Terry Glastonbury, referred members to the schedule of 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 prior to the meeting. (Late material refers to information submitted to the council following publication of the agenda). The Chairman announced that there would be 8 public speakers speaking at the meeting, speaking on items 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12 of the schedule of applications. The applications are recorded in the order of the agenda. The Chairman reminded the committee to keep their comments relevant to the debate and, where possible, to avoid repeating previous observations.

5.1

P0041/11/DISCON Land at Angel Farm, Off Hampshire Gardens, Coleford

Discharge of conditions of planning permission P1964/10/FUL (11) foul & surface water drainage (13) waste management plan (14 & 15) site investigation report (17) fire hydrants (19) renewable energy source (20) estate roads details (22) temporary car parks and accommodation for site operative details (24) phasing programme of highway works (27) vehicle wheel cleaning washing facilities (32) acoustic details of cooling vents

Minutes:

Discharge of conditions of planning permission P1964/10/FUL (11) foul & surface water drainage (13) waste management plan (14 & 15) site investigation report (17) fire hydrants (19) renewable energy source (20) estate roads details (22) temporary car parks and accommodation for site operative details (24) phasing programme of highway works (27) vehicle wheel cleaning washing facilities (32) acoustic details of cooling vents

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Principal Planning Officer, Emma Norgate, said that planning permission for this development had been approved earlier in the year and that the application for consideration at today’s meeting was to consider the discharge of conditions relating to that planning permission. Referring to the late material and to the correspondence received directly from the Angel Farm Action Committee earlier that week, members were advised that the information had not raised any new issues and therefore the recommendation remained as set out in the schedule of applications.

 

Vote

Councillor Terry Glastonbury moved and Councillor Di Martin seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the schedule of applications and to the information included in the late material.

 

For (15)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (0)

 

Abstentions (0)

5.2

P0177/11/FUL Wilderness Farm, The Stenders, Mitcheldean

Erection of a detached dwelling to replace farmhouse destroyed by fire

Minutes:

Erection of a detached dwelling to replace farmhouse destroyed by fire

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Development Control Manager, Clive Reynolds, referred to the late material and an update on the dimensions of the proposed dwelling. The Development Control Manager reminded members that the Site Inspection Panel had visited this site and that the proposal was an application for a replacement of a fire damaged dwelling. He said that the key issues for the committee to consider were whether or not the proposed replacement dwelling was in keeping with its surroundings, whether it adversely impacted upon the adjoining bungalow and whether the scale and design of the dwelling was acceptable. He said that the dwelling was substantially larger than the existing house and had the appearance of a pair of semi-detached properties. The recommendation was therefore one of refusal as per the schedule of applications.

 

Public speaking

Speaking as one of the sons of the owner of the site, the speaker said that the applicants had traded as farmers at the site for the past 30 years. He said that both he and his brother had lived at the farm since they were born and were responsible for the majority of the work at the farm, including looking after a beef suckler herd and a flock of breeding ewes. The speaker said that the constant attention required when calving and lambing warranted a farmhouse at the site to provide basic, modern, living standards for the family and to provide an on-site working environment that would allow the family to store and remove work clothes before and after use. A large farm office would also be required to manage the increased amount of paper work involved in running the business. As working adults at the farm, the speaker said that both he and his brother hoped to have an element of privacy from their parents, who were both of retirement age, hence the need for space and the proposed number of bedrooms at the property. Furthermore, there was a need for security at the site, particularly with the number of recent thefts at the property. The speaker said that the adjacent bungalow at the site did not form part of Wilderness Farm, was totally separate and had different ownership and deeds. He said that the bungalow was a completely unsuitable dwelling for everyday farming needs and that all the applicant wanted to do was to re-build the original farmhouse at Wilderness Farm, tragically burnt down in August last year.

 

Ward member, Councillor Ian Whitmore, said that Wilderness Farm was a large farm to manage and that he understood the need to replace the farmhouse at the site. He said that it made perfect sense to rebuild the original farmhouse, particularly in view of the need to accommodate and sustain a large working family.

 

Committee consideration

Councillor Norman Stephens referred to comparisons with this application and a similar application that had been considered by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.2

5.3

P1033/11/FUL Cleeve Mill Business Park,Cleeve Mill Lane, Newent

Erection of office headquarters with landscaped areas, parking and associated infrastructure

Minutes:

Erection of office headquarters with landscaped areas, parking and associated infrastructure

 

Councillor Di Martin left the meeting for consideration of this item

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, said that this application had been deferred at the planning committee meeting in September 2011, to seek clarification of several issues from Severn Trent Water regarding the Newent Sewage Treatment Plant. The planning officer referred members to the late material and to the response from Severn Trent Water. 

 

Public speaking

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, the speaker outlined the principle for the development. She said that, based on the consultations that had been undertaken with Severn Trent Water, there had been no valid reasons for deferring the application at the planning committee in September 2011. Furthermore, following additional consultations since that meeting, Severn Trent Water had reinforced their previous stance of no objection, as detailed in the late material. The speaker said that the application met with council policy and with the district local plan and would make good use of the site, (which had previously stood vacant for some time). She said that the parish council had raised no objections to the application and that it was hoped the proposed development would support the local economy by creating additional employment in the area.

 

Committee consideration

Ward member, Councillor Roger Yeates, informed the committee that since the last meeting, he and fellow ward members for Newent, Councillors Julia Gooch and Len Lawton, had met with Severn Trent Water, who confirmed that the treatment works was working correctly. On this basis, and welcoming the opportunity to create new employment in the area and to tidy up the site, Councillor Roger Yeates moved the recommendation to grant planning permission. Councillor Gabriella Kirkpatrick seconded this proposal.

 

The majority of members hoped that the proposal might benefit the area by making the site more presentable and by creating new employment. Councillor Norman Stephens enquired how bad the problem of odour from the treatment plant would have to be before considered an issue. Lisa Russell, representative of Severn Trent Water, advised Councillor Stephens that such issues were considered, but only if Severn Trent Water was made aware of the problem. She said that, unless complaints were received, it would be difficult to take action. She also said that, at the meeting with Councillors Yeates, Gooch and Lawton at the Newent Sewage Treatment Plant, the smell on that particular occasion had not been offensive. The site manger had suggested, however, that unpleasant odours sometimes occurred when cleaning the tanks at the site, or if there was a malfunction. Lisa Russell said that if the problem became a reoccurring one, the matter could be addressed by installing odour monitors.

Vote

Earlier in the meeting, Councillor Roger Yeates moved and Councillor Gabriella Kirkpatrick seconded the motion to grant planning permission. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, as detailed in the schedule of applications  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.3

5.4

P1075/11/FUL Land Adjacent To Lords Hill/Pyart Court, Coleford

Erection of a Class A1 convenience retail store and 5 retail units, and associated works (demolition of existing retail units 1, 25, 26 and 27)

Minutes:

Erection of a Class A1 convenience retail store and 5 retail units, and associated works (demolition of existing retail units 1, 25, 26 and 27)

 

Having declared a prejudicial interest, Councillor Gethyn Davies left the meeting for consideration of this item.

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, outlined the detail and the background to the application and advised members that the key issue to consider when evaluating the proposals was that the site was already allocated for retail development in the Local District Plan. The Planning Officer referred members to the late material for details of the responses to additional consultations and to the amended and additional conditions.

 

Public speaking

Speaking as an objector to the application, the speaker referred to the immense impact the proposed development would have on Coleford Town Centre, particularly when located in such a prominent location. Describing the proposals as an unconvincing case for yet another leading supermarket in Coleford, the speaker said that the development would draw shoppers away from the old town centre, threaten existing retailers and seriously damage the character of this rural market town.

 

Questioning the suggestion that the proposed development might create new employment for the area, the speaker said she was more concerned about the number of job losses affecting other retail businesses in the town centre. She said she was also concerned about the inability of the infrastructure of the town centre in coping with increased traffic movements and demands on utility services. Noting the objections from Coleford Town Council, the speaker criticised the lack of public debate that had been involved in commenting on the proposals, which she described as somewhat misleading due to the well-drawn but slightly deceptive plans. The speaker said she believed the proposals constituted a poor advertisement and lost opportunity for the Forest of Dean District Council in providing something a little more creditable for the residents of Coleford.

 

Speaking as the applicant and owner of the site, the speaker said that he had lived in the area for over 70 years and worked locally as a builder for over 45 years. He said that he had a wide knowledge of the area and believed the proposed development would benefit both Coleford and the Forest of Dean in creating more employment, providing more choice for the town centre and responding to local demand. The speaker said that he hoped the development would boost local trade and enhance the number of visitors to Coleford. Making comparisons with similar premises in Lydney, the speaker said that the intention was to both retain and increase the number of people shopping in Coleford and to also invest in the town centre. Highlighting the attributes of working for a large corporate organisation, the speaker reflected on the benefits to employment and to the increase in the number of local people working in the area. Responding to criticisms about the design of the proposed development, the speaker said  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.4

5.5

P1155/11/FUL The Bungalow, The Slad, Popes Hill, Newnham

Erection of a replacement dwelling. (Demolition of existing dwelling). Alterations to vehicular access and layout of parking. (Part Retrospective)

Minutes:

Erection of a replacement dwelling. (Demolition of existing dwelling). Alterations to vehicular access and layout of parking. (Part Retrospective)

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Principal Planning Officer, Emma Norgate, said that this proposal was for the erection of a replacement dwelling that had been demolished without the benefit of planning permission. Following concerns about the elevation drawings for the property, the applicant had subsequently submitted revised plans, which, although addressing some of the concerns, did not reflect the size of one of the openings on the front elevation. With this in mind, the recommendation had been amended to one of approval with delegated authority given to the Group Manager for Planning And Housing to issue the decision subject to the receipt of satisfactory revised plans.

 

Vote

Councillor Di Martin moved the recommendation and Councillor Brian Jones seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the schedule of applications and with delegated authority to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing to issue the decision, subject to the receipt of satisfactory revised elevations.

 

For (15)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (0)

 

Abstentions (0)

5.6

P1263/11/LBC Ty Anon Farm, Newent Lane, Huntley

Listed Building Consent for the conversion of barn to dwelling and loose boxes to ancillary accommodation. (Demolition of existing outbuildings)

Minutes:

Listed Building Consent for the conversion of barn dwelling and loose boxes to ancillary accommodation. (Demolition of existing outbuildings)

 

Development Control Manager, Clive Reynolds informed members that this application corresponded with the next item on the agenda. He said that the Sites Inspection Panel had visited the site and that the delay in presenting the item to the committee had been a consequence of the negotiations that had taken place, (as recommended by the Highways Officer on the site visit), to facilitate a new independent access to the site. The Development Control Manager said that the principle of converting the buildings into residential use had been established by virtue of the previous planning permissions for the site. He said that the application would also safeguard the ‘at risk’ listed building. The recommendation was therefore one of planning permission and listed building consent as per the schedule of applications.

 

Public speaking

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, the speaker said that she and her partner had fallen in love with the property two and a half years ago and had immediately wanted to make it as good as when first built. She said that they intended to use sympathetic materials and that, even without listed building consent, they aimed to restore the building with merit.

 

Vote

Councillor Di Martin described the proposals as both sensitive and modest, and on that basis, moved the recommendation. Councillor James Bevan seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,  

 

RESOLVED to grant listed building consent, subject to the conditions detailed in the schedule of applications.

 

For (15)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (0)

 

Abstentions (0)

5.7

P1264/11/COU Ty Anon Farm, Newent Lane, Huntley

Conversion of barn to dwelling and loose boxes to ancillary accommodation. Demolition of existing outbuildings. Retention of caravan for dependents on site to allow conversion of barns. (Temporary period of 18 months)

Minutes:

Conversion of barn to dwelling and loose boxes to ancillary accommodation. Demolition of existing outbuildings. Retention of caravan for dependents on site to allow conversion of barns. (Temporary period of 18 months)

 

This application was considered in conjunction with the previous item

 

Committee consideration

Councillor Lynn Sterry said that she hoped the property would not mysteriously fall down and have to be replaced with a larger property, as had been the case on previous occasions. Councillor Sterry was assured that this would not be the case and that condition 10 of the planning permission required a detailed schedule of repairs for the stabilisation of the building during the construction phase of the development.

 

Vote

Councillor Brian Jones moved the recommendation and Councillor Di Martin seconded the proposal. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions detailed in the schedule of applications.

 

For (15)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (0)

 

Abstentions (0)

5.8

P1332/11/FUL Tufthorn Avenue, Coleford

Demolition of 28 existing dwellings and the erection of 37 dwellings with associated accesses, parking and landscaping

Minutes:

Demolition of 28 existing dwellings and the erection of 37 dwellings with associated accesses, parking and landscaping

 

Councillor Di Martin left the meeting for consideration of this item

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Principal Planning Officer, Emma Norgate, outlined the response to the additional consultation with Welsh Water and to the additional information, (including additional condition 17), as detailed in the late material. In response to concerns about drainage, members were advised not to consider the drainage details at this stage, as the matter could be satisfactorily covered by condition and would thereafter need to be addressed by the applicant in a further discharge of condition application. The recommendation remained, therefore, one of delegated permission.

 

Public speaking

Representing the applicant, the speaker said that the housing association believed there was no immediate threat to the site in relation to foul and surface water drainage. Furthermore, the homes were insurable and, whatever the circumstances, drainage would always be a concern. Outlining the extensive consultation that had been undertaken, including an open public meeting, the speaker said that the scheme formed part of a 4-year programme and that the applicant had worked closely with the council’s housing allocations team in ensuring every possible measure was taken to make the transition to the new homes as easy as possible.

 

Ward member, Councillor Maria Edey, said that, noting the strength of community that existed amongst householders, she hoped the proposed scheme would not be too stressful for local residents. She also hoped concerns regarding drainage issues would be addressed quickly and enquired how long it would be before current householders could move back into their homes? Group Manager for Planning and Housing, Peter Williams, said that, although it was not within the council’s control to determine how long the scheme would take, the housing team continued to work closely with the applicant in meeting its obligations. Additionally, the housing association was eager to progress the scheme as quickly as possible.

 

Committee consideration

Councillor James Bevan believed the proposal offered a win/win situation and hoped that the new parking arrangements would help ease traffic congestion along Tufthorn Avenue. Councillor Frankie Evans enquired whether any bungalows had been included in the scheme. She was informed that that this was not the case, to which Councillor Evans stressed the importance of considering the needs of the elderly. Councillor Lynn Sterry said that local residents had waited along time for this scheme and stressed the importance of returning current householders to their homes as quickly as possible. As an observation, Councillor Gethyn Davies questioned the feasibility of replacing 28 existing buildings with 37 new dwellings.

 

Vote

Councillor James Bevan moved and Councillor Graham Morgan seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to give delegated authority to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing and the Group Manager for Legal, Democratic and Human Resources to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the schedule  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.8

5.9

P1382/11/FUL Land Adjoining Caircant, Newnham Road, Blakeney

Alterations and conversion of existing workshop building to provide two holiday units with layout of 12 touring caravan pitches and ancillary works

Minutes:

Alterations and conversion of existing workshop building to provide two holiday units with layout of 12 touring caravan pitches and ancillary works

 

Please refer to the late material circulated prior to the meeting

 

Development Control Manager, Clive Reynolds referred members to the late material and to the updated information following the recent submission of revised plans. The Development Control Manager said that the site had an extensive planning history and that the current proposed use for tourism purposes provided an opportunity to resolve a long running problem both in terms of removing the current unauthorised storage of portable buildings but also the authorised transport depot, both of which had proved to be visually intrusive. The recommendation was one of permission as per the schedule.

 

Committee consideration

The majority of members welcomed the proposals as a means of addressing issues relating to the site. Several members also welcomed the benefits to tourism. Responding to a question from Councillor Gabriella Kirkpatrick, who enquired whether it would be possible for the applicant to live in one of the properties and sell off the rest of the site, Group Manager for Planning and Housing, Peter Williams confirmed that this was possible but that a condition regulating this possibility was not a realistic option due to the limitations on how much control the council could impose on a building when used as a commercial property.

 

Vote

Councillor James Bevan moved and Councillor Norman Stephens seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the schedule of applications.

 

For (15)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (0)

 

Abstentions (0)

5.10

P1484/11/COU Lealands, Joyford Hill, Coleford

Change of use of land to provide additional residential curtilage

Minutes:

Change of use of land to provide additional residential curtilage

 

Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, said that this and the following application were linked and related to a full application for change of use of land.

 

Public speaking

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, (who was unable to speak at the meeting due to having a major operation on her neck the week previously because of a slipped disc), the Democratic Services Officer read out the following statement: -

 

The applicants would like to raise the following points: -

 

(1) Dealing initially with the change of use of land to additional residential curtilage, the planning department refer to impact on the countryside and, quite frankly, the scale of the area would have no significant impact upon the "open countryside".  You will be aware that under Permitted Development Rights, we could enclose/fence this land whether or not it is utilised for residential curtilage. As regards to the loss of the hedgerow you will be aware that we could remove it at any time without any prior authority. 
 
(2) Regarding the proposal for the “New Dwelling" the site lies within the Defined Settlement Boundary on the District Local Plan Review and you will be aware of many other similar infill plots authorised in the general locality. We are not here dealing with any special designation in terms of planning policies and both national policy advice, as well as Development Plan Policies still re-affirm the desirability of ensuring use of land so as to reduce pressures upon Greenfield Sites. We have carefully considered the concerns raised in terms of the relationship of the proposed dwelling with Lealands and the street scene, as per our revised plans that we submitted to the planning department, although we were advised this would make no difference.  
 
The planning department have indicated that their own residential design guide is of significance and we would draw your attention to the information contained in that document regarding plot shape and size on page 41. In terms of a street or smaller suburban plot the document confirms a plot size of approximately 230 square metres and you will note that in this instance, plot size is 228 square metres.  This document also confirms that an urban infill plot should have a plot size of 175 square metres, which our proposal clearly exceeds. Therefore, in terms of plot size and shape, scale of amenity space and relationship to the existing development, these proposals are well conceived and are comparable with other authorised schemes in the locality.

 

We would just like to say that we feel that we have had a very negative response from the planning department from the outset and we feel this is extremely unfair considering that the planning department have granted permission within our locality for similar proposals.

 

Committee consideration

Councillor Norman Stephens noted the lack of objection from the local parish council. He said that he felt that the reason for refusal was weak and was surprised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.10

5.11

P1492/11/FUL Lealands, Joyford Hill, Coleford

Erection of a detached dwelling. Alterations to existing vehicular access and construction of a new vehicular access to serve 'Lealands'

Minutes:

Erection of a detached dwelling. Alterations to existing vehicular access and construction of a new vehicular access to serve 'Lealands'

 

This application was considered in conjunction with the previous item

 

Committee consideration

Councillor Philip Burford pointed out that planning permission had already been granted for one additional property in the garden and that it was probably best to refuse this application rather than allow a second property at the site. Councillor Norman Stephens referred to an email from the applicant listing a significant number of similar applications where planning permission had been granted. Noting the level of objection from the parish council, Councillor Di Martin believed it was important to consider each application on it’s own merit and said she could not support this proposal.

 

Vote

Councillor Philip Burford moved and Councillor Lynn Sterry seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to refuse the application for the reasons as detailed in the schedule of applications.

 

For (12)

Councillors James Bevan, Philip Burford, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Terry Glastonbury, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin, Graham Morgan, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (1)

Councillor Norman Stephens

 

Abstentions (0)

5.12

P1695/11/FUL Riverside Nurseries, Ryton Road, Dymock

Alterations and erection of a first floor extension to dwelling. (Resubmission)

Minutes:

Alterations and erection of a first floor extension to dwelling. (Resubmission)

 

Principal Planning Officer, Emma Norgate, referred members to the recent site visit and said that in the officer’s opinion the need for a four-bedroom dwelling at the site was not essential. Furthermore a property of this size was not considered affordable as an agricultural worker’s dwelling.

 

Public speaking

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, the speaker said that she and her partner had purchased Riverside Nurseries in late 2008 and that planning permission had already been granted for the current dwelling. She said that, since that time, the applicant had put a lot of work and financial commitment into the site and had built the house within seven months, whilst living in a mobile home with a young family and running the nursery. The speaker said that the nursery had required a much-needed overhaul and had been extremely run down and overgrown. It now provided full-time employment for both herself, (currently working 7 days a week, between 14 and 16 hours per day), and for two part time jobs for local residents. The speaker said that she and her partner had met the agricultural tie policy from the income they had received from the nursery. Referring to her growing and extended family, the speaker outlined the need for an additional bedroom, (to provide accommodation for her partner’s stepson during regular visits and for their own son and daughter), and said that she and her partner had no intention of moving from the property but would have to consider such an option if not granted permission to extend the property and create the additional bedroom.

 

Committee consideration

Councillor Norman Stephens criticised the intimation that the size of an agricultural worker’s family should be limited, as had been implied in the recommendation. Councillor Stephens believed the application was not an unreasonable one and proposed that it be granted planning permission to accommodate the applicant’s growing family. He said that the proposal was for a modest extension and did not constitute a risk to the council’s agricultural workers policy.

 

Vote

Councillor Norman Stephens proposed that the application be granted planning permission and Councillor Arthur Thomas seconded the proposal. A recorded vote was taken and members,

 

RESOLVED to grant planning permission, with delegated authority to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing to suggest appropriate conditions.

 

For (7)

Councillors James Bevan, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Brian Jones, Norman Stephens, Arthur Thomas and Roger Yeates

 

Against (6)

Councillors Philip Burford, Terry Glastonbury, Val Holman, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Di Martin and Lynn Sterry.

Abstentions (2)

Councillors Jackie Fraser and Graham Morgan

6.

Sites Inspection Panel

a)     To confirm that the next sites’ inspection panel will be held on Tuesday 18 October 2011

 

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

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the next sites inspection panel be held on Tuesday 18 October 2011, and that the following sites be added to the itinerary for that day: -  

P11670/11/OUT

Land rear of 27 to 41 Coalway Road, Coalway GL17 7HL

P1596/11/FUL

Old Goods Station Yard, High Street, Blakeney

P1089/11/FUL

Land at Highfield Road, Lydney

P1755/08/FUL

66 Klondyke Avenue, Lydney GL15 5PN

P0807/11/FUL

Land off St Annes Way, St Briavels GL 15 6TY

7.

Performance Management pdf icon PDF 125 KB

A report from the Principal Planning Officer regarding the performance of the planning team in relation to the determination of planning applications. Please refer to report PH.84.

Minutes:

Principal Planning Officer, Emma Norgate, presented report PH.84, outlining the performance of the planning applications team in determining the number of planning applications considered between 1 April 2011 and 31 August 2011, (426), including comparisons with local and government set targets.

 

Referring to Table A of the report, the planning officer said that the cumulative figure for decisions made on major applications during this period had been 78 per cent, well above both local and national targets. The cumulative figure for determining minor planning applications had also achieved a 78 per cent performance, again, well above the national target but just below the local target. In relation to decisions on other applications, the cumulative figure was 86 per cent, above the national target, but 1 per cent below the local target. Overall, the council had achieved a level of performance between April 2011 and August 2011 that had cumulatively exceeded local and government targets in relation to major planning applications and had exceeded the government targets for minor and other applications.

 

Outlining some of the implications affecting the performance of the team due to the reduction in the team’s resources, (a consequence of the ongoing cuts the council is required to make), the planning officer informed members that the backlog of major applications had now increased to five and that it was extremely important for any existing major applications and any submitted until the end of March 2012 to be determined within the correct time period. (Members were informed that the senior planning officer that had been on maternity leave would no longer be returning to work and that the post had been frozen. Additionally, the planning assistant who had been appointed on a one-year temporary contract had left the council in July). It was therefore inevitable that the reduction in staff would continue to impact on the performance of the team.

 

Councillor Norman Stephens enquired whether there had been a reduction in the total number of total applications during the past few years?  He was advised that in comparison to when the number had peaked in 2007, there had been a 40 per cent reduction. With this in mind, it was suggested that all future reports include a comparison with the number of applications received for each category, (including a comparison with the number of applications received over the past two years). This was agreed and the report noted.

8.

Exempt Business

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 outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Minutes:

Resolved that under section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved 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.

9.

Exempt minutes

To confirm the exempt minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 2011

Minutes:

The exempt minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 2011 were agreed and confirmed as an accurate record of that meeting.

10.

Schedule of Enforcement

To consider the schedule of enforcement action as prepared by the Group Manager for Planning and Housing. Please refer to report PH.85.

Minutes:

Copies of a schedule of enforcement had been circulated with the agenda.

11.

Next meeting

8 November 2011

 

Please be aware that should the business not be completed at this meeting, the outstanding items will be considered at a reconvened meeting on Tuesday 25 October 2011