Planning and Licensing Committee - Wednesday 10 December 2025, 2:00pm

Planning and Licensing Committee
Wednesday, 10th December 2025 at 2:00pm

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Feedback

Votes

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Michael Vann
Councillor Daryl Corps
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Nick Bridges
Councillor Dilys Neill
Legal Services
Harrison Bowley, Planning
Officer
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Julia Gibson, Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill

3 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Legal Services
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Legal Services
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Dilys Neill

4 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 12/11/2025 Planning and Licensing Committee

Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Nick Bridges
04. To confirm the minutes of the meeting held 12 November 2025
Status: In progress
Councillor Dilys Neill
04. To confirm the minutes of the meeting held 12 November 2025
Status: Ended

5 Chair's Announcements

Share this agenda point

6 Public questions

Share this agenda point

7 Member questions

Share this agenda point

Schedule of Applications

Share this agenda point

Planning & Licensing Committee - 10 December 2025 - Index of Applications

8 25/02175/FUL - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Share this agenda point

Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Town/Parish Council
Town/Parish Council
Councillor Dilys Neill
Supporter
Councillor Dilys Neill
Supporter
Applicant/Agent
Councillor Dilys Neill
Public Speaker
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Daryl Corps
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Officer
Councillor Ray Brassington
Officer
Councillor Ray Brassington
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Harrison Bowley, Planning
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Nick Bridges
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Officer
Officer
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor David Fowles
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Harrison Bowley, Planning
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Thyme, Southrop Estate - SIB
Status: In progress
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Thyme, Southrop Estate - SIB
Status: Ended
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Harrison Bowley, Planning
Councillor Dilys Neill

9 25/02722/LBC - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Share this agenda point

25.02722.LBC - Case Officer Report

Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Ray Brassington
Councillor Dilys Neill
09. 25/02722/LBC - Thyme, Southrop Estate - SIB
Status: In progress
Councillor Dilys Neill
09. 25/02722/LBC - Thyme, Southrop Estate - SIB
Status: Ended

9 25/02722/LBC - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Share this agenda point

25.02722.LBC - Case Officer Report

10 25/01951/FUL - Talland School of Equitation

Share this agenda point

Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Applicant/Agent
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Harrison Bowley, Planning
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Officer
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Officer
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Julia Judd
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Dilys Neill
10. 25/01951/FUL - Talland School of Equitation - Permit subject to 106
Status: In progress
Councillor Dilys Neill
10. 25/01951/FUL - Talland School of Equitation - Permit subject to 106
Status: Ended
Councillor David Fowles
Councillor Dilys Neill
Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:01

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:06

I think we're now live in the broadcast, so welcome to everybody. I'm Delis Neil. I am

currently the chair of the planning committee, sorry, and I'm Councillor for Stow -on -the -Walt.

I'd like to welcome you all here.

Sorry, I'll just take a sip of water.

Thank you to all the members of public who have turned up

to take an interest.

You're very welcome.

And I'd also like to welcome those people who regularly

watch the planning committee from their homes.

It's very good that you take an interest in our proceedings,

and I occasionally get an email, a thoughtful email,

which I always welcome.

So thank you very much.

So can I remind anyone who's present to switch off their phone or put it on silent?

Members of the public present, you're not allowed to talk to members of the committee

and please don't interrupt the proceedings.

Advice to public speakers is that you normally have three minutes to speak on each application.

So, the first two applications relating to time,

the state office there, they are linked.

One is a full application and the other is a listed

building consent.

So, those people who are speaking, you normally just

have three minutes for each application, but because

there are two applications, you get, if you want to run

those, run your two sections together, you would get six

minutes to speak on each application.

That should be plenty of time, but we will cut you off after six minutes.

So I hope that's all clear.

Councillor Fowles, who is the board member, will get ten minutes to speak.

If you'll please, no, Chairman, I've got a sore throat and I might not go to ten minutes.

We were looking forward to a long dissertation from you, Councillor Fowles.

Just for anyone watching at home, we normally use an electronic voting system to vote and

you should see the results of the votes come up displayed on your screen so you can see

who's voted in which way. If for any reason that doesn't work, we revert to an old -fashioned

show of hands. So now I'd like to ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves.

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:02:34

I'm Councillor Julia Judd. I am from Ermin Ward.

Michael Van Fairford North.

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:02:43

Dalco Mortimer Ash West.

Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:02:45

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:02:48

Patrick Coleman from Stratton Ward in Sirencester.

Ray Brassington, Four Acres Ward of Sirencester.

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:02:57

Good afternoon. I'm David Fowles,

Councillor David Fowles - 0:03:00

Ward Member for the Colton Valley,

and I'm delighted to be the ward member for Southrop.

Thank you.

Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:03:10

I am Nick Bridges for Watermore and Syrinsester.

Thank you very much.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:03:15

Now would the officers like to introduce themselves?

Good afternoon.

Legal Services - 0:03:21

I am Mari Barnes, lawyer to this committee.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:03:27

I am Harrison Bailey, head of planning services for Cotswoldshire Council.

Hello.

Officer - 0:03:32

Amy Hill, senior planning officer and the case officer for the first two applications.

Officer - 0:03:47

Thank you all very much.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:03:49

Can I ask if there are any apologies or substitutions?

Julia Gibson, Officer - 0:03:57

We have received apologies from Councillor Ian Watson and Justin Wilkins.

There have been no substitutes.

Are we going to...

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:04

Well, only that I'm substitute...

Oh yes, Councillor Judd is kindly substituting as Vice Chair for Councillor Watson who has

got the flu.

Okay, now can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from members?

3 Declarations of Interest

Councillor Judd.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:24

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:04:26

I know the applicant for the time, but I haven't seen her for about 17 years and she was a

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:38

Legal Services - 0:04:41

I think that is acceptable for you to take part.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:44

Councillor David Fowles - 0:04:49

Is this the point at which I refer to the letter that is in the late papers?

Yes, or you can mention it after you've made your speech.

If I could.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:56

Whichever you like.

Councillor David Fowles - 0:04:59

Members will be aware of a letter that you've received from Howard Cole, written by Mark

Chadwick, on the 5th of December.

I have discussed the content of this letter with Harrison on Monday and also with our

lawyer earlier today and wish to state that whilst officers are recommending approval,

there are a large number of objectors from residents of Southrop as well as the parish

council and I was asked to summarise those views and present them as reasons for the

application to be referred to the review panel who in turn recommended it came to committee.

These are not necessarily my views as the ward member.

As the ward member, as I'm sure we all know, it's my job to represent the village of Southrop,

including the applicant and his family who have lived in the village for 23 years.

I've also met Mark Chadwick, who wrote the letter when we were in discussion about talking

to one of the residents.

And whilst I respect his views for wanting to write to the committee, I might have chosen

in a slightly different language, but I'm big enough

and ugly enough to have some of the things that we said.

But I did find the tone a little bit inappropriate.

That said, I've got a much nicer letter from Jerry Hibbert,

who's here, who is the owner of the site.

And I've known him for a very long time.

Both these letters call for me as a member of this committee,

as well as the board member, to approach this application

with an open mind and not to have a predetermined view.

I'd just like to confirm to the meeting

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:06:43

that that is my intention. Thank you very much Jim. Thank you very much for that

Legal Services - 0:06:50

explanation. Chair if I may. Councillor Fowles if I can just be absolutely clear

as the ward member and a member of this Planning Committee that you are happy

and content that you are able to approach this application open -mindedly

and listen to the debate and questions in this matter. Absolutely I mean if you

Councillor David Fowles - 0:07:10

if you look at the detail, which some members may have done,

of the letter of objections of which there are 49,

a lot of them are very supportive of time, okay,

as indeed am I.

So yes, I'm very open -minded about it, okay?

Councillor Braskinton, did you want to say something?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:25

Yeah, just because he's mentioned the name of Rob Chadwick,

just to say that I used to know him

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:07:30

because he was a planning officer here,

so I just wanted to set the record straight.

But you're not going out for a drink in the pub

with him every evening.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:39

No, I don't seem to know.

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:07:40

No.

I think that's fine.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:45

Do any of the offices have an interest in,

a disposable interest in any of the applications?

Great.

Now, we move on to the minutes of our last meeting,

which is on the 12th of November.

4 Minutes

Does anyone who was present at that meeting

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:16

have any comments on the minutes? If not, could we have somebody to propose the

minutes as a correct record? Okay, Councillor Coleman, I think your hand went up first.

Councillor Fowls, you're second, thank you. All those in favour of accepting the

minutes?

Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:08:31

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:56

Okay, that's six in favour and one abstention, so those meetings are carried.

So those minutes are carried, and I will sign those off.

Okay, so now we move on to Chair's announcements.

My first announcement was that following discussions with

5 Chair's Announcements

various people, we thought it would be nice to have a festive

lunch in January in which the planning committee would ask

our offices to join us.

We were thinking of having a buffet lunch here rather than

to a restaurant and the date that seems to be appropriate

would be Thursday the 15th of January.

It seems that a lot of offices are in on the day

after the next planning committee.

So could members of the committee here show me

by a show of hands if you'd be available

on the 15th of January?

Great, fabulous.

In that case, I'll send out an invitation

on behalf of the planning committee to our lovely officers

and see how many of them are interested in coming,

and then I will confirm whether that's going ahead or not.

So, the other thing that I wanted to say was that

a huge absence from our committee is Councillor Maclean,

who, as you know, has stepped down and resigned

as a district councillor for the Rissingtons

because of ill health.

So, he's now formally resigned,

which is why he's not here today,

and we don't have a substitute

because he's no longer a councillor. All of us who are on the planning committee

will recognise what an enormous input he gave to us in the committee, always keeping us

on the straight and narrow about matters of energy conservation and issues relating to

ecology and to climate change. And we would just like to thank him so much for his contribution

and saying he is enormously missed and we will continue to miss him in the future. So

perhaps we could document that. Thank you very much.

6 Public questions

7 Member questions

Schedule of Applications

Now, are there any public questions? No. Are there any members' questions? I haven't been

So, our first application is for the erection of three new structures and associated landscaping

to provide additional spa facilities and hotel accommodation at Time, Southrop Estate Office,

in Southrop near Lechlade. The applicant is Southrop Estate Agents Limited. The case officer

is Amy Hill and the ward member is Councillor David Fowles. So the second application on

the schedule which we'll come to later relates also to time. So as discussed before the public

speakers can address both issues when they come up to speak. But first of all I'll ask

8 25/02175/FUL - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Amy if she'd like to present the case. Thank you chair. First just to remind you

that there were quite a few updates you received so there was a letter

received from Pegasus group on behalf of the neighbours raising concerns over that

information submitted in terms of heritage. There was also additional comment of

Officer - 0:12:37

support received and officers and a letter referred to by

Councillor Fowle's regard from the agents that's attached in the late pages.

It was also with conditions four and five have been reviewed regarding

enforceability concerns and updated and they're there. They would just be

substituted in subject to no objections from committee. So if I proceed with the

action. Okay. So this one's come through. The application site is in Southrop which

which is about three kilometres to the northwest of Letchlade.

Sotherup is, sorry, Time, I'll say it as the Time Time Hotel.

So it's a hotel restaurant.

It's also got a bit of cookery school and spa facilities.

It's sort of a more luxury version of a hotel.

They also own quite an area of land around the site to the north,

primarily to the northeast and south of it.

One of the appendices is a site plan with a blue outline that shows that area.

The site itself is in the Southrop Conservation Area.

It's near several listed buildings that are highlighted in orange on the map,

and it's in the Cotswold National Landscape.

The part of the site is also to be curtly listed to the lodge,

Southrop Lodge, just the north of the site.

Also notable on the plan in front of you is the areas,

or the lines in red, which are public rights -of -way,

that go just to the south of the site,

sort of cut through various bits of time.

So now there's an aerial photograph.

Hopefully the red and yellow lines

means it's visible for everybody.

And you can sort of see there

what that looks like a bit more.

So the public rights away would run to the south of it.

It doesn't include that area,

sort of just the immediate sort of the curved area

or the curved field, just the south of the site.

But beyond that wall is where the public rights away run

and then also up through next to the main part of Time, the Time Hotel facilities, which

is to the right as you're viewing the screen.

It runs a footpath there.

And also just the south of those sort of cluster buildings, which are the converted barns,

you can see the overflow car park, which has been referred to in various parts of communications.

Also note within this in terms of context, the left of it, you're sort of on the south,

the south left, no, southwest is Dovecote, so that's a grade two listed building and just north

of that but sort of to the west side is Newman's House. What you can also see there and slightly

better here is the swimming pool associated with the time and the tennis court beyond.

The building that's just running along the right hand side of the site is the stable cottage which

is the Kirtle is listed building associated with Southrop Lodge.

Some photographs taken and hopefully the arrows, obviously the arrows are not

precise but they're more just given an idea of where the photographs were taken

from. So on the left of yours, on the left part is the Dovcott and then

the site sort of they've got, so that's the main, I'm doing one three, the main

bit in the forefront is Dovcote barn and what you can see is sort of going out

slightly is the associated ancillary accommodation and then beyond that is

where the site is and just a little bit further along by you see more of sort of

the site and then buildings associated with time further in the distance and

then looking from one of the public rights of way down into the site so in

terms of the site context you can see around with it being walls all around

the wall on three sides of the site

And that's the stable cottage,

that's the curtsey -listed building which was referred to.

And then the end where the extension is proposed.

And the front just to give you a context

of what that building looks like currently.

Then we've gone back to the public right away

just in terms of the site further off

towards other parts of time.

And just giving that overall impression of it.

Then further back into the field

just to give you a context of what it's looking out onto.

So it's quite a wide open area here.

And then looking back more towards the village and other structures around the site of that field.

And then looking back along the public right away and towards Dovecote Farm again.

In terms of the plans of what we're looking to build, you can see there's three main parts.

You've got the L -shape and then dual pitched roof which are the wellness facility parts of it,

so at the yoga studio and the like.

There's a relaxation room attached to stable cottage,

just the north.

And then on the right hand side is the holiday,

so the hotel accommodation as in bedroom accommodation

in that separate structure.

And the one to the northern part of that

is the only part of the proposal which is two storey,

one and a half storey depending on what you preferred.

So you can see, so if we're doing a first floor plan,

that's the only one which actually has a bedroom,

which is accessed via external steps.

I feel like I've just, sorry.

Then the ground floor plan of it,

where you can see the yoga studios

and then sauna and spa facilities

and the bedrooms and garden room link.

Hopefully the arrows will help you direct

in terms of which parts of the scene

you're looking at of the elevation.

So you've got the yoga studio there in the centre

with sauna rooms to the right and the section through the bedroom accommodation to the left.

And then we're looking sort of if we are halfway in the site looking down further into Sotherip

with the spa accommodation in front of us and then you can also see the relaxation room to the side.

And then the bedroom accommodation taken from the field, all sort of from just outside of

the site boundaries. And then from within the site. And then just some other elevations

of that talking part of it. And then the yoga studio. So you can see it's got quite a lot

And then similarly with the other parts of the facilities that you have open glazing

mostly to the inside facing in towards the site and then the outer parts.

So the bottom one is the one that is along the western boundary and there's much less

glazing but with the south elevation facing in the site so that's also got quite a bit

of glazing and sort of flat roof structures and timber clad.

and then of the relaxation room taken from inside the main part of the site and

then of the other valuations of the structure. Thank you Chair. Thank you very

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:19:51

much. Can I now ask the public speakers to come forward for the town

council or parish council. I've got Cathy Brickley, the objector Jonathan

Ternock, supporter Flavio Mann and the applicant Camilla Hibbert.

Okay, so just a reminder, you can address both this application and the following one,

which are obviously closely related. And so you would have six minutes, each of you will

have six minutes, and we'll tell you if you exceed your limit. So can I ask Mrs. Brickley

to speak first of all?

Town/Parish Council - 0:20:57

Good afternoon, I'm Cathy Brickley. I've been on the Southrop Parish Council for about eight

years and I'm speaking today on behalf of the SPC as the chairman isn't

available. So as a parish council we we don't often object to planning

applications but in this case we felt it necessary to make a qualified objection

on several grounds in the hope that time and the LPA might take stock of these

and try to mitigate them. Some minor tweaks have been made we acknowledge

that but we don't think they have addressed our concerns sufficiently. So

given that time is short I'll highlight the three most fundamental in our view.

So they are new development, increase in traffic impact and over development. So

I'll take new development first. I'd like to preface this by saying that we

acknowledge and appreciate times -sensitive renovations of

existing historic buildings.

They've done it really nicely.

However, our concern with this application in particular is

that it represents a new development right next to open

countryside in a conservation area.

And we have two worries about this.

The first one is environmental.

There's potential for noise and light pollution.

You've seen how much glazing there is involved in the plans.

And if permitted, any proposed conditions attached, lighting schemes and noise abatement

or whatever, may not be enough to limit the harm sufficiently.

The new glazed extension additionally proposed in application 2502722LBC would surely cause

an especially large area of visible artificial light

within the development.

Southrop values its dark skies at night all too rare

these days.

And they've been preserved thus far by the lack of street

lights and also the minimal use of exterior lighting

on people's properties.

The other concern about the new development

is creep, in inverted commas.

Unless there are rethink, unless there

are restrictions on further spread imposed at this point.

There's a high chance that future permission

may be sought to add to the new accommodation

currently proposed in this location.

So this proposal impinges on both conservation area

and listed building status,

particularly the two listed buildings

immediately adjacent to the site.

If it's permitted in its current form,

these protections would appear to have little value.

Secondly, then, our second fundamental concern is the increase in traffic impact.

I'll say straight away, the traffic through the village is, of course, not all caused

by the presence of time, but much of it is.

There's inevitably much traffic associated with running a large hotel complex, service

vehicles, delivery vans, and the arriving visiting clients.

and traffic approaching from the east and the north typically routes through

the village to avoid lech laid which is a known pinch point. This expansion will

of course add to that volume of traffic it's bound to, further impacting road

safety and road degradation and contributing to congestion as vehicles

try to pass one another on the very narrow roads. We find it extraordinary

that Highways approved the proposal without doing a traffic survey. And

lastly over development. Times seem to be surprised that 49 villages have objected.

There were 35 letters of support for the application but we note that the

majority of these don't live in the village. Several of the supporters

asserted that the proposed new facilities would provide quote an

enhanced experience for local residents but this isn't meaningful. Times offering

isn't aimed at locals, it's positioned at high -end exclusive clients. Despite this

over the years local people have accommodated the changes to the village

that time has brought. The sheer volume of village objections to this particular

application reflects deep concern that this proposed expansion begins to

represent over development which would be too dominant in such a small

community of only 127 houses. Thank you chair.

Town/Parish Council - 0:25:51

Good afternoon I am Dr Jonathan Turnock an associate heritage consultant at

Pegasus Group and a full member of the Institute of Historic Building

Conservation. I've been instructed to act on behalf of Sue Dale and Julian Gleek

the owners and residents of the dove coat.

The dove coat, as you know, is a grade two listed converted barn directly adjacent to the application site.

As set out of my formal

representations to officers, I have serious concerns about the final development scheme before the committee and the

deficiencies in the heritage assessments provided by the applicant and officers.

The application is not accompanied by a heritage statement prepared by suitably qualified heritage professional.

Critical evidence has either been omitted or dismissed, and it is my professional view

that the magnitude of heritage harm identified in the Case Officer's report is not a true

reflection of the actual impact that the development would have.

I consider that the development proposals would harm the significance of the Southerup

Conservation Area and two Grade 2 listed buildings, the Dovecote and Newman's House.

Based on recent submissions made by the conservation officer, there is also a question mark over potential impacts on grade two listed Sotherup Lodge,

and I've recommended further research be undertaken to adequately understand this.

The Dovecote and Newman's house are located immediately adjacent to the application site, and they are known to have shared a historic functional association.

That is, the buildings were part of a historic farmstead that was used to work with the surrounding

land which included the application site.

Developing the application site in the manner in density proposed would harm the significance

of the list of buildings because it would remove an open parcel of land from their immediate

vicinity and close the historic gap between the former farmstead and the buildings to

the east.

Any legibility of the site is agricultural land that was once worked by the adjacent farm buildings would be lost.

My conclusions in this regard follow appeal decisions, court judgments, and Historic England's professional guidance.

Insufficient information

to demonstrate this functional connexion,

sorry apologies, insufficient information has been presented by the applicant and officers to demonstrate that this functional connexion has been properly understood.

And I do not agree that the development could be delivered with no harm to these assets.

With regard to the Southrop Conservation Area, there are four public footpaths running through

the field to the south of the site.

These are historic rights of way, and people walking them are afforded high quality views

of the southern edge of the Conservation Area.

The application site is perceived as an open green gap in these significant views, and

It helps illustrate the historic settlement pattern and the interface between the village

and its immediate agricultural hinterland.

I note that no proper visual assessment has been submitted by the applicant or officers

in this regard.

Officers have accepted there would be harm to the significance of the conservation area.

However, my professional view is that the magnitude of harm would be greater than the

extremely limited harm alleged.

This is because of the density of new built form on the site and issues of design and

materiality which I have previously raised with officers.

The important green gap would be lost and the significant views would be permanently

and harmfully altered.

In summary, I consider that the proposed development would cause less than substantial harm to

the significance of at least three designated heritage assets, which are all protected under

the 1990 Planning Act.

Less than substantial harm does not equate to a less than substantial planning objection,

and harm at this level attracts great weight in the final planning balance.

Whether developed to be permitted, I have serious concerns that the duties of the Local Planning Authority

with regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and the 1990 Planning Act will not have been discharged.

This is because the significance of the heritage assets and the impacts of development have not been adequately understood.

I would also seriously question whether sufficient evidence has been submitted

by the applicant to demonstrate the public benefits of the development.

Any benefits would need to attract considerable weight in order

to overcome the heritage harm identified.

I therefore respectfully request the committee refuse planning permission

and listed building consent for the development based on harm to the significance

of the Southern conservation area and listed buildings within.

The home will be contrary to the 1990 Act, the MPPF and policies EN1, EN10 and EN11 of the Local Plan. Thank you.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:30:47

Thank you very much Mr Ternick. Now, Mrs Mann.

Supporter - 0:30:57

Hello, my name is Flavia Mann and I come to this with quite a unique perspective.

My husband's family have lived in Southrop for a very, very long time and I've lived

there for the past eight years.

And I now live right on the doorstep of Time and I've also worked at Time, part -time.

So I've seen both sides to this, what it's like to be part of the team inside and what it's like to be a neighbour.

What I don't feel has been represented in this process is the amount of support that actually exists in the village.

And there are many of us who value what time brings and want to see it evolve in a sustainable and exciting way.

I've heard much of the narrative around this application and it's really sad to hear so

much negativity in our community.

We all know how many villagers have lost their pubs, their shops, their local employers.

Southrop is unusual, we still have amenities, we have life and so many of us are proud of

that.

Lots of people in the village use the pub, the restaurant, the spa and the events that

offer and it surprises me that that has been slightly missed off when so many

people objecting and for me this proposal isn't about a big development

it's about allowing a family business that employs a lot of local people to

keep enhancing what is already there. Time isn't a remote owner or an outside

investor they're part of the community and they employ people at all different

stages of their life. From school students doing summer work and young people starting their career

to experience long -standing hospitality people and professional parents re -entering their careers

like I was trying to. And from a neighbour's point of view I honestly cannot see how this

particular building will have a negative impact. Everything they've done over the years has been

done with care and sympathy for the old buildings and the village around them

and this proposal is no different. The spa is especially quiet. It's the place

of calm and people go there not to make any noise. It already, Type already

operates a bar by their pool next door to the spa and have done for five years

and no one has ever made a complaint about that. The idea that this would

create 24 -7 light and noise just doesn't match up with the reality of how it operates.

And on traffic, I simply don't see how this small addition will cause any kind of influx.

The village traffic comes from many places and the vast majority is not to do with time,

and this development won't change that.

And just to add a bit of context, when the barns came up for sale years ago, time stepped

in and they saved it at the will of the community.

The whole place could easily have fallen into the hands of developers that don't operate with such integrity.

Southrop has always had industry. It used to be a quarrying village and of course agricultural.

And Time is simply the modern version of that. Sensitive, local, well run and rooted in the village.

Time is part of our community. It supports local jobs, suppliers, events and drives customs to business and offers the best local amenities.

And actually a lot of us really do appreciate that. Anyway, thank you for listening.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:34:36

Thank you very much for your contribution. And now Mrs. Hibberts.

Supporter - 0:34:43

Thank you.

Applicant/Agent - 0:34:46

Thank you committee members for allowing me the opportunity to speak.

I'd also like to thank both the objectors and supporters for their views.

It shows just how deeply people care about our village and its future.

My name is Millie Hibbert.

I'm the general manager of Time and I oversee the day -to -day operations and our 130 member

local team.

I'm pleased that the application has received a positive recommendation, following a long

and constructive dialogue with heritage, conservation, environmental and planning experts.

I have lived in the village since I was eight years old.

My family and I have put down our roots here, and over the years we have worked hard to

restore and care for the old farmstead that has now become Time.

Time is a family business run on family values. We're not weekenders, we're not remote owners,

and we are not absentee employers. It has been claimed that Time has little engagement with

the village and local community, and this is simply not true. This project represents a

continued investment in this former farmstead, much of which was derelict for the best part of

century. Our team of local trades and crafts people keep these listed

buildings alive and useful, something we are extremely proud of, especially in the

current economic climate for rural hospitality. The winter months from

November through to April are the hardest for hospitality businesses. Our

average hotel occupancy drops from 85 % to 30%. We need to increase our

occupancy during these periods to continue a healthy operation and indeed

to support the local team that we employ. Indoor hot spa facilities are essential

to this purpose. Councillor Fowles states that the applicant has stated that the

key reason for wanting to develop the spa is so time can compete at the very

top of the leisure and hotel sector. Thank you for recognising this. As it

leans into your own green economic growth strategy.

The strategy seeks, and I quote,

to improve the quality of tourism

and increase visitor spend.

It emphasises the council's aspiration to, again, I quote,

promote the area as an all year round destination

rather than having a heavy concentration

of visitors in the summer.

Both objectives align with our planning application.

Another important part of our business is the green approach. We were delighted this year to have been selected by the Cotswold Tourism Board as one of 20 local businesses to be their first sustainability champions.

The proposal before you, the spa buildings, is the next step in a 20 -year effort to bring this historic site back into sustainable and productive use.

The design has been carefully developed with your officers to ensure it complies with heritage guidelines and remains in character with the village and the conservation area.

Your list of building experts have helped produce in planning speak an appropriate and sympathetic design solution.

It will sit alongside our current facilities which operate quietly and without nuisance.

In all the years we've been open, we have never had any environmental health complaints.

For many months, we have worked closely with officers to make sure this proposal meets planning policy in every respect,

from design and materials to landscape and local impact.

The professional approach shown by your officers has shaped a stronger and better scheme.

Notwithstanding those positive views, we have also reached out to our neighbours and the Parish Council to understand their worries and work to mitigate them, which we have done in our revised application and amendments.

Many of the issues raised are not about planning issues but appear to be in principle objections to development, some of which lay outside the planning regime.

For instance, to suggest that time is responsible for the village traffic

problems is not only incorrect but it risks detracting us from finding real

shared solutions to a problem that affects our whole community. I ask

members to consider that distinction today. Whether the concerns raised are

based on planning policy or simply on a resistance to change. It was difficult

personally to read some of the objections especially from people I see

and serve every day and many based on incorrect information and mistruths. In

response we have now formalised our communications with the SPC with regular

liaison meetings which has now met twice and has been very positive. So to

To summarise, this proposal is supportive to the sensitive growth of our important local business,

is consistent with policy and officer advice, and is a continuation of the sensitive restoration of a once derelict site,

and an investment in the long -term sustainability of our local economy.

I hope you will agree that it strikes the right balance between protecting the special character of Southrop

and allowing a long -standing local business to evolve responsibly.

So thank you for your time and consideration.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:40:38

Well done. Perfect timing.

Thank you very much to all our speakers.

Can I invite you to return to your seats now?

And Councillor Fowles, do you want to come up to the front to speak?

So as previously discussed, you've got up to 10 minutes to speak.

Public Speaker - 0:41:22

Thank you, Chairman.

Excuse my voice.

which for some of you is probably good news.

Members, good afternoon.

I'd like to thank the planning review panel for agreeing to review and refer this application

to the Committee for Determination, recognising that the Office's recommendation is to permit.

I'd also like to thank the residents of Saldrop who are filling the back of the room,

many of whom, not only have they come today, but I've received for the first time

a number of apologies from residents who couldn't be here.

That's the first time in 20 years I've ever had that happen.

And also there are obviously people here who are supporting

the application.

I also would like to acknowledge the efforts referred to by the

applicant and their agents to engage with the parish council

and the principal objectors, particularly recently.

And yes, there is the establishment now of regular

liaison meeting, but it's interesting that this

application has brought that about, even though the site's

been in use for, getting on for 18 years.

Firstly, the objectors in parish council have made it clear that

they acknowledge the achievements of time, as indeed

do I, and that after today's decision, everyone will still

be living in this close -knit community.

And I congratulate the speakers on the way in which

they acknowledge that.

Indeed, prior to this meeting, I attended a Southrop Village

Hall Macmillan Coffee Morning, although I didn't win the raffle,

which were many of the objectors and indeed members of the Hibbert

family, and everyone was getting on.

So we do need to try and find a resolution to this.

Just a bit of history for your information.

The applicant and the family moved to Southrop in 2002 and

then started to restore these buildings in 2007 and have built

nationally if not internationally acknowledged successful business with

restaurant, cookery school and hotel. Converting an old Manor Heart Farm

building and associated other buildings. Over the last 18 years you'll see the

planning history on pages 15 and 16 and I'd like to acknowledge the contribution

of Councillor Ray Theodolou who was involved in that process because I'm

obviously a recent ward member whereas Ray worked very closely with residents

and the parish council and the applicant.

This is acknowledged by the parish council who up until this application have basically

never really objected to anything.

And their objections today are very carefully worded and very structural in how they've

approached it.

Because this application is for new buildings in open countryside and it's a very different

application to the historic applications.

Time now employs over 130 people and is committed to using

locally sourced ingredients and using local suppliers.

And as has been stated by the agent and by Millie,

many of the residents are customers of Time,

which despite the agent's comments in the letter to me,

does not preclude them from objecting.

So you can be a user of Time, I'm sure,

but also have some concerns.

The applicant states that over 30 employees live locally

in GL 7 -3.

Well, GL 7 -3 not only extends to Southrop, but also extends

to places like Letchlade and Fairford.

And over 44 percent of the employees live in GL 7.

Well, we're in GL 7 here.

The issue isn't that there are lots of local employees.

We all acknowledge that.

Time have stated in their application, in order for them

to compete at the top of the market, this application is

vital for the development of a 20 -year programme.

Time have also stated that they have regular customers who live locally but

but this is not their core business. On the Time website the applicant states

Time is a restored Cotswold Manor and farm. It is a family storey where passion

for the land, for food and entertaining merged with a love of local heritage,

beauty and conservation and this is really at the nub of what residents are

concerned about.

Southrop is a small Cotswold village.

We're familiar with them as a panel.

We see them throughout the Cotswolds.

And this business is a large, successful business right

smack bang in the middle of the village.

There are just over 200 dwellings, and 49 residents

have objected.

That is 25 % of the community.

You will see on pages 21 and 22 that the objections centre

around overdevelopment, harm to the Cotswold national landscape, noise, light pollution,

concern over future expansion, impact on creating a village within a village, etc., etc.

It is also acknowledged that there are over 35 letters of support, although the parish

council expressed some concern that many of those letters appear to be from outside the

village, probably from employees, but that's all fine.

That's the way this application is going.

And they are naturally very different to focusing on things such as focusing on jobs, which is what the speaker said.

Some of it is to do with supporting rural economy, some of it is to do with continued investment and growth.

We acknowledge all of that.

The parish council's comments are detailed in two parts on pages 17, 18 and 19.

And those two parts relate to before the engagement with the objectors and after.

The Parish Council and I fully recognise the efforts made by the applicant very recently to mitigate the impact of the development on the immediate neighbours,

which have resulted in some small adjustments to the location of the plant room and the removal of windows. That's all acknowledged.

The Parish Council detail their concerns on highway safety and have introduced speed cameras and are working with Brice Norton Airfield,

because it's used as a cut -through if you know where Southrop is.

It's not all down to time. We fully recognise that.

But at the end of the day, it's a small village and vehicles go through it and they do go to time.

And yes, there is a new south car park and you can get into time without going through the village.

But equally, you can go through the village to get to time.

There is going to be an increase in traffic. That's accepted. It has to be.

The Parish Council is also concerned about the impact of this development

development on the listed buildings and wider conservation area in the open countryside.

The principal objector, Sue Dale and Julian Gleek, employed an expert who you've heard

from and he spoke very knowledgeably on the whole issue of what the harm of this scheme

will bring to two Grade 2 listed buildings, the Dovecutt and Newman's House and potentially

Southrop Lodge.

The proposed development will remove a vital and historic open field between the farmstead

and adjacent buildings and compromise the historic settlement pattern.

Members, this is a very finely balanced application which has raised real concerns in a community

which is close -knit and wants to live and work together.

It is one thing to hear speakers, who all spoke very well, it's another to read the

reports and to look at photographs and maps.

It's quite a different thing to experience Southrop firsthand and to see where the application will sit in the village

and how close it will be to neighbouring properties.

And at the appropriate time in this discussion, I would like to propose that we have a site meeting

so that you can determine this application because this is a forever development.

I would just like to end, because I've been asked to do this quickly, Chairman, with WhatsApp that I received from a local resident.

I would like to point out that I for one, and I suspect many of the people present today,

do not object to time or anyone who is involved in it.

Indeed, I like their product and yes, I'm a paying customer.

The objections are, however, about wishing to preserve the village heritage and conserve

the fragile ecosystems in our beautiful and much loved village.

My objection is not personal nor meant with any malice against time as a business.

Thank you very much.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:49:51

Thank you very much for your considered report, Councillor Fowles. Now, can I ask members

of the committee if they have any questions? Councillor Caul.

Thank you to the David Fowles, the ward member. That was incredibly useful and insightful.

And if you are going to propose a site visit, I would very happily second that proposal.

It's a very difficult one.

We've heard very different points of views from the parish council, from supporters and

from rejectors.

And obviously reading Amy's very, very detailed report on this.

I think I would personally struggle to make a decision on what we have in front of us

today without making a site visit. Have you got a question? We're on questions at

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:50:51

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:50:54

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:50:57

the moment. Yes you're right. Can I ask that any vote on a site visit is done after

we've heard questions and comments and then we take that in precedence to any

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:51:06

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:51:07

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:51:11

other proposal to... Yeah we'll move on to the question of the site visit

when we get to comments which we've got questions at the moment. Have you got a question?

Sorry, back to my question. Yeah.

Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:51:22

Sorry, Amy, exactly, I've seen a few times in here about the the sighting of a plant

room that there's obviously concern about the noise being generated by that and that's

exact location. Apparently it's adjacent to a party hall and I couldn't quite see on the

drawings where that was going to be.

Officer - 0:51:40

I'll get to the right page on the plans in a second. It's also going to be in your appendices.

Now the scheme has been amended so at one point, a few ago if we could share the screen, the plant room was proposed essentially along that within, I might get this one slightly wrong, but essentially within the building which was where the yoga studio and some of those changing rooms

and the Svar aspect just the south of it so it was going to be a relatively long

block of plant rooms there. The agent following discussions with the Mayor, the

agents amended them so there's bits of scattered more inside of the

residential accommodation and also a little bit at the end of the building

towards the north. If you go to your late pages the plan submitted by the agent or

the correspondence submitted by the agent.

There is a plan on page,

I'm sorry, I actually think it's numbered.

You are looking for the pages that have schemas

currently proposed overview and proposed amendments.

I'm sorry, page 15, 14 and 15.

So yeah, on page 14, you can see the plant rooms

behind the saunas.

So there's annotators or circles, whereas now you can see them positioned so there's

a little bit in there but also more to the north adjacent to the spa pools on page 15.

Does that...

Is that the end of your questions?

Thank you.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:53:24

I think Councillor Bresnent, you were next.

Thank you chair.

References have been made a lot to the doof coat, but can you point out exactly on that

plan there where the doof coat is?

Because it's not...

It's the house...

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:53:46

The doof coat has been a grade two listed converted barn, so it's currently residential

use.

If I go to this plan, and I think on our current thing,

I can do that that's the main,

well, that is the main building that Dovecote,

obviously with a significant margin of error

for my ability to draw on this.

So, but that's the building we're talking about.

So that one's Dovecote, and then I don't know

if this will work.

That one's Newman's house.

Which is the building where you got the red line?

This bit here.

To the right?

That bit.

So that's ancillary accommodation to the dove cut.

Right, okay.

Going to my question then.

I'm pleased to see that the noise conditions have been amended.

What is the noise?

I don't know who suggested that.

But we've got no control over noise from the construction of the site, and I was wondering

whether we should have a construction management plan to control noise and dust, given the

close proximity of residential accommodation?

Officer - 0:55:01

It's not something that's been advised by the environmental health officers beyond having

good working hours to sort of restrict operation or noisy operation outside of those sort of

outside the core normal working hours.

Obviously it's up for committee members to consider whether they feel that it is necessary

And if that is what they wish you wishful, then we can potentially add on a construction margin plan without so

Probably make it reasonable. You know that I like to suggest we do have one

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:55:26

My other question is this spa pool roof. It's looking obviously says it's a bio diverse green roof

What what does that consist of?

Officer - 0:55:44

Details have been submitted of the spa roof there.

I do not have in front of me right now what that mix comprised of.

I know they submitted details and we've asked for additional information as part of the conditions.

I'm afraid that it is there within the document.

They've got some reports that include the roofing, but unfortunately I can't tell you off the top of my head.

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:56:08

It's important to element when it comes to noise control.

Officer - 0:56:18

The short answer being that it's not something that whilst one of the noise conditioners has sort of asked what strategies they're trying to do to reduce noise in terms of the plant and machinery,

and that could include the actual fabric of it, it's not part of what's been detailed as noise mitigation at this point.

Councillor Coleman?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:56:33

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:56:36

Probably only two questions. First of all the phrase

Curtilage listed appears and it's an abbreviation and I am not absolutely

certain what it means. I think is it Dovecurt that's Curtilage listed or is it

one of the other buildings? I came across it and I thought it's a bit of

Officer - 0:56:59

jargon we need to be clearer about. So the building, Sabre Cottage is the

building and the building is what we consider to be

Curtish listed, but Curtish listed to,

it's known as Southrop Lodge or The Lodge,

but it's that building up here.

If that's being shared,

I'm going to draw over my slides at this point.

So it's that one there.

Historic maps would have made it clearer,

but it's not something I've sort of put in here.

There should be something in some of the heritage documents,

essentially, but that is the building to which we consider

the same cottage to be courteous listed to.

So it makes it grade two listed in terms of considering it as an asset.

Is it grade two listed?

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:57:38

Yes, but not directly.

It's listed by virtue of being within the being historic and within the

curtledge of the listed building.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:57:52

A bit more about the plants growing on the roof bit of the design.

Do you know whether there's any suggestion by having the plants growing on the roof

that this somehow aids in biodiversity?

I'm just concerned that actually it makes a visual distraction from what might otherwise be

just an ordinary part of a building that didn't draw your eye towards it.

Officer - 0:58:21

I'd have to go in to try and find all the comments going in depth.

Biodiversity don't usually count green roofs particularly highly

on biodiversity grounds because it's quite hard to manage to

make sure they're actually getting the biodiversity value

that you'd look for from them.

So I think we'd consider them in terms of biodiversity more

of a bonus than an integral part of any mitigation.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:58:43

I will add a third, which my colleague suggested a condition

to control the amount of construction and the timing

vehicles and the time of vehicles we've been told the lanes are narrow and so

the question is is there any way we can ensure that the any damage done if

during construction it by the bigger vehicles needed it's quite a substantial

construction job is is as far as possible prevented and when where it

happens is paid for, the repairs are paid for by the applicant to reclaim from the people

driving on the verges with their lorries.

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:59:31

The way we would have to do it is basically a construction management plan that requires

a survey of the condition of the existing grass verges and then a requirement to restore

them. It's effectively a gramping condition. It is quite an onerous condition so I would

Obviously, we've got to bear in mind the applicant has the right to appeal against conditions

they don't agree with, and my recommendation would be that is quite an onerous condition.

I've only ever used it once, which was quite substantially greater development than this.

If there was particular concern based on the site context and the potential impact of development,

it is certainly an option, but I would just sort of take caution because it is quite an

onerous condition in a sense, because we effectively need to establish what the existing condition

is first and then what they are restoring it to because you need to have that element

of control. So it would be effectively a ground -keeping condition securing those two aspects. It's

an option if there was particular concern for members but as I say it is quite an over

risk requirement.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:00:25

Thank you for that. Although the only experience I have had of ground -keeping conditions is

they are not worth the paper that Britain on but that was for a drainage scheme required

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:00:36

by Thames Water which was ignored and Thames Water said, I will write what you have done

which of course smells is perfectly all right.

This isn't drainage, but surely photographing before

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:00:44

and after is a pretty straightforward thing.

And then you just send the bill.

We'll take that as a comment, Councillor Coleman.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:00:51

Councillor Bridges.

Councillor Nick Bridges - 1:00:57

I'd just like to, I picked up on a few things,

very articulate everybody, by the way.

The highways traffic survey hasn't come through.

I've picked up on that.

Is it possible that that could be chased up before we do our site visit that we haven't voted on yet?

That's number one and question number two

the

Talk of light pollution going on here

Is it possible we can do?

some sort of condition

What?

Is it okay? Sorry about that retract that one?

Officer - 1:01:35

In terms of highways we haven't requested a traffic survey from them

this point highways came back and said they were satisfied that the proposal

wouldn't result in an unacceptable level of additional traffic so it's not

something that we've requested from the agents to submit so we're not it's not

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:01:55

pending. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Fowles. Thank

Councillor David Fowles - 1:01:59

Thank you Chairman. Nick asked part of one of the questions I was going to ask about

about highways. The parish council and the objectors were concerned about

highways and the increase of traffic which I think is acknowledged there will

be some increase in traffic whereas the applicant and the supporters said that

that would not be an issue. Now I know that the parish council have been

operating a very effective community speed watch programme. Have we got access

Officer - 1:02:34

to any of that data or can we request it? It hasn't been provided to me. Obviously given

Officer - 1:02:37

my recommendation and highways comments it's not saying that I would have

requested that said if that's the direction of the committee wants to take

and sort of this instruction then I will see if that's something that can be

submitted to me. I imagine the parish council probably best suited to providing

it and then it'll be going back to highways with that. We're subject to what

Councillor David Fowles - 1:02:55

happens today, that data I think will prove invaluable because what you can't

see on those maps that you've shown is the entrance to the village is

literally a right -hand angle. I think it's 20 miles an hour

speed limit. It is an issue about access. I just think we need to get more

data, that's what I'm saying, on highways. My main question was related to this

whole issue of conservation. The principal objectors have gone to the trouble of employing

consultants who spoke at length and I would just be interested in Justin's view as our

senior conservation officer. Could you show the photographs with this open field? Because

I for one with the maps, and I know the site, I know the village and I've been to the properties

concerned but it's very difficult on the maps to see how this site impacts on the

neighbouring properties. Is it possible to have a look? The open field, not that

one, because it's so far away you can't really see it. Just that's kind of, that's kind of

a good one but there's another one where you were actually at ground level.

Yeah that one, I think that's one, isn't it? I know the other, that, I think that's it, is it

The dove cut over on the left there.

Yeah?

I just want your view, Justin.

I mean, a lot has been said about the historical

development of the Manor Farm and the adjacent buildings.

And no one's disputing that it's been done absolutely

brilliantly, and so on and so forth.

But there's this sense that this particular site is new

development in, effectively, an open field.

And that that significantly alters the relationship

between the surrounding properties and the farm buildings and I'd be really

interested in your view on that. Thank you.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:04:56

Officer - 1:04:58

The paddock, it is when you're actually in it, yes it is interactive open paddock.

When we actually look at its contribution to the conservation area as a whole, the

main views of it from without the paddock itself are from South, where in

In my view, it doesn't read as an important open green space

but part of the general sort of soft permeable

edge of settlement to get along there

with buildings visible to either side of it

to the back of it.

So my feeling was that some level of development

on there wasn't necessarily in principle a problem

so long as it respected that very soft,

broken edge of settlement character.

As for the impact on the adjacent list of buildings,

the paddock was in the same sort of land ownership

as the adjacent thrashing barn and the house just to the north of that in the tithe map.

But it's just shown as one of a number of agricultural paddocks around here

and was part of a much larger land holding.

So whilst there was a relationship,

how much there was a direct functional relationship between a paddock and a

thresher barn as opposed to any other field that was in the same ownership. So I

think, yes, there is relevance there but there is no evidence of a direct

functional relationship. It's part of its wider setting and context. Similarly

the house to the north, which had its own clearly defined domestic

curtilage. So it was in the same sort of land ownership or

or leasehold, but there's no evidence that we have

of any direct functional relationship.

It's part of its wider character and context and setting,

which is very much edge of settlement,

rural edge of settlement.

So again, my view is it came down to,

if we are respecting that character,

that some development may be possible.

And it doesn't sever the old threshen barn,

which I think the dove quote,

it doesn't separate that from the wider countryside

because it still faces wider countryside to the south.

So it's not severing the historic barn

from the wider countryside anyway.

It's simply plus the fact the listed barn already has its

annex building between it and the site anyway,

so it doesn't have an unimpeded open view.

So for all these reasons, my feeling was

that the main contribution this site makes to all of those was

just as part of the general character of this sort

of soft permeable, fairly low scale edge of settlement context.

and if we could work with that.

And all three discussions, that was the nature,

that it must feel like that sort of small sprawl

of loosely based outbuildings.

And coming back to the, actually, green roof was mentioned.

That was, the view was that

there would be two distinct design philosophies here.

One taken from the existing swing pool just to the north,

which already has a green sedum roof,

was that it would go for a very lightweight,

low contemporary buildings,

And keeping them low, again, lessens their impact.

And the idea is that they would have a meadow grass roof.

And it was more meadow grass than sedum.

And that was actually my request,

because I always find sedum jars in the context of the Cotswolds.

It looks a bit fake, whereas just meadow grass

would soften in.

And then at the end, we have buildings

that are modern interpretations of just a simple little out

building and a simple little stable block.

So again, all sort of small scale buildings,

keeping the mass down and broken up,

that reflect this sort of soft decrease in scale and density

as you move from settlement to the wider country, so beyond.

Does that answer the question?

Thanks, that's a very comprehensive answer.

Yes, Councillor Pasternak.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:08:35

It may be comprehensive, but I don't quite understand.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:08:38

To me, soft and permeable works when it's a field.

Soft and permeable doesn't work when there are buildings there.

And if you look at pages 61 onwards,

there are a significant number of buildings

that are going to occupy what has been regarded by the objectors and the parish council as

significant open space.

So perhaps I ought to ask the question a different way.

At the moment, time is contained within a group of existing converted old buildings.

Would this represent a significant departure from that by effectively building new buildings

in an open field and connecting them to neighbouring residential properties, particularly the Dovco.

Isn't there a distinct difference from where we are now and to where we could go?

I would have thought that's a yes or no.

Officer - 1:09:35

Well, here's the question, but how does that come down to the significance and the impact

on the significance of the conservation area in the Listeria building?

Yes, it is a change.

Not all change is intrinsically wrong or harmful, especially in a vibrant living community.

So yes, it is a change, but it's a change that...

It is a change.

Absolutely, it's a change.

It's development.

It's a change.

We're not pickling this settlement in aspect and just allowing it to become a dormitory,

which unfortunately is what's happened with many of our villages.

It's still a vibrant living village with communities and businesses and so forth.

Not all change is intrinsically harmful.

To be harmful, it has to actually harm an aspect of the setting that contributes positively

to the significance of adjacent mystery buildings or conservation area.

In my view, it was looking at the significance of this site.

Its primary significance, in my opinion, was the fact it formed part of this soft permeable

edge of settlement context, rather than the fact it was intrinsically an important open

space, which might be a subtle distinction.

That's how I read it.

You've used from the south and you look towards it.

It's not like a green corridor you see straight through the settlement.

You see buildings around it, low -scale buildings.

So you don't read it as this important open space, you read it as part of this sort of

general soft edge of settlement.

And in terms of the, talking about keeping the edge soft, it's about the scale and disposition

of the buildings.

You get small little outbuildings commonly in this sort of area.

The idea was that the buildings were built, were meant to be this echo, these sorts of

small broken up forms of massings that you get, sort of little out sheds, outbuildings,

small quasi -agricultural buildings.

and the more contemporary ones with the green roofs are low and are just not really meant to be seen until you're in the site

when they're suddenly nice little exciting contemporary buildings that are very discreet and nestled down.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:11:24

Councillor David Fowles - 1:11:26

One more. Do you think it would be useful for members to actually see what you're describing as soft and permeable

to actually see that field and get some indications to the height of the buildings and so on

and their relationship to the existing time buildings and indeed the neighbouring residents

who are quite concerned about it. Do you think that would be useful?

I think that's for members to decide.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:11:46

I withdraw that.

It's not for the Conservation Office to decide, it's for us to decide whether we want to visit.

Thank you very much Councillor Jad.

Councillor Julia Judd - 1:12:01

Thank you chair. I am also slightly confused as to where the

Dovecock is. Is the Dovecock also on the plans bedroom one and bedroom two or in the ancillary

The Dovecote, if we share the screen again, is the neighbouring property and it's the ones that are just over there.

So it's that main building. It's on some of the plans it shows up as Price's Barn, which might have caused confusion on the...

Price's Barn.

So on your site location plan, let me just double cheque this before I continue.

Yeah, that's why I'm so confused.

Okay, yeah, so on the site location plan it's down as Price's Barn. It is now the

Dovecot and it's that building just to the south west of it.

So, thank you. That really does make me feel as though I'm not going completely insane.

So those from Price's Barn, the Dovecot, whichever you want to confuse me,

where that white van is, is that the main side of the building or are the main

windows and and and the living income I mean is that part of the Tyne complex or

is that private house what is that that's the neighbouring property so it's

the resident of the people who I guess this group spoke on behalf of earlier on

sorry it's the neighbour price so price is the neighbour no they're separate

completely independent and so they they've obviously got their driveway on

that side and what I want to know next is so the buildings where the going back

to the plan with the bedroom one bedroom two above and then what's what downstairs

is the digital girl I get confused with paper nowadays so that that that for

So looking at this, is that the field end there?

That is the open culture side coming from there.

It's not clear, is it?

So on that, if I go back to the last group,

this essentially means you can rotate it

so that this bit is the norm, so this side of the open fields.

Yeah, so the roof.

It does pop just to the south.

Well, sorry, pops up.

Just the bottom of the tree there, but actually the west.

Brilliant.

So the roof height of the bit to the right, Amy, you know, with that pretty little sort

of garden in the middle to the right on the field site, that, those roofs.

How tall are those roofs?

No, they're not single storey.

So the top part of it, so one further away is two storey or one and a half storey.

That one is single storey.

I will just try and find my report because I'm relatively sure I went through the initial

bit saying what height everything could be.

So I've gone there, the single storey element, the ease would be approximately 2 .2 metres

in height and 4 .7 metres.

So that would be for the dimensions for this section of the building here.

So they're not huge, are they?

And those, so I'm now looking at the footpaths.

So the end of that, the top building, that one, thank you, thank you.

Has that got a window in the gable end?

Or is it a Cotswold stone?

There, yeah.

So that's looking at the footpath.

That's what you see from the footpath, is it?

Other than there is the separation

of the part of the field.

So the paddock that the site's in, or most of the site is in,

has sort of a continuous with a curved wall below.

And so there is a field separating it

from where the poet writes away are,

because there's not any poet writes away in that bit.

So there's a wall between the footpath

and those glazed windows?

Yes, so if I go back to an aerial.

So there is, so the site is this bit in here and it's part of that wider paddock.

There is a wall along here, so a dry Cotswolds Slope will actually continue to

most of that. There's a couple of gaps with gates but essentially there is a wall

along there.

I don't know if I can. I've got a much smaller screen so my movements are

really slow to me, but possibly not to you, but it's that one along there.

That's it. And then the footpaths.

Footpaths, you can see come and sort of skirt the wall, as well as being further afield

in the main field. But so they're outside it, so they would be not blocked by that,

because there are views through. I took a picture of one of those views through, so

you're seeing that wall there.

Yeah. So that's not being locked down, that wall?

No, no, not this but and then that's the Gateway so when you you'd be walking this part along the public right away

And so you would have use of it but from the sort of wider field

Sort of the south then your views are going to be limited not obscure but limited by that wall

What I'm really getting at is that this development is you can hardly see it from anywhere. It's not on a road

You that the dove cut or whatever you want to call that house prices house that that

has concerns for me, but I mean it's

includes

No, no

It's not enclosed in the sense of some sites where you go no one can see it

There are public there is going to be public visibility at very least of that those southern

buildings along the field edge, there will be sort of views of that.

They're not going to be particularly prominent because of that setback and because of the

separating wall, but I would expect people to be able to see them.

I just wanted to see, I just wanted it to be clear in my mind where the level of harm

is on that.

I have one other question, please.

But I've lost it again.

I've written on the back of my piece of paper.

Yeah, I found it. No, I've asked them. It's the height of buildings. Thank you very much.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:18:56

Any other questions? Councillor Fowles.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:19:00

Councillor Judd's just made reference and the case officer to the public footpaths and

public rights of way. Absolutely, the road that runs through the villages to the north

of that photograph and this site is obviously tucked in, so no, you can't see it. Well,

Some people argue you will be able to see it

because of the elevations.

But I'd just like to get a better fix

on where the footpaths and public rights away

are in that field.

Because surely if people are walking their dogs

and are just going for a walk,

they will see this development, won't they?

I mean, it will impact or won't it?

I would expect there to be some visibility,

probably especially as you came through this one

and just looking to the north end.

So that would be where I'd imagine that the most views were,

where I envisioned the most views coming from.

But it's, so it's yes, I expect it to be visible, but not...

Will be visible?

Yes, I wouldn't.

The point in the design wasn't that it wasn't visible,

it's that it was a sympathetic design for that site.

Seeing it is not...

I'm not commenting on the quality of the design.

I know a lot of you have gone into that.

I'm talking about will it be visible?

Yes.

So for instance, from this one where we're standing next to the Dovcote,

and the proposal would be there.

So from this one I imagine those end buildings would be pretty visible and then as you go further afield

you'll sort of see the tops of them so probably more of the the pitch of the roof above the wall

About that boundary wall there. Okay. Thank you, Amy.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:20:31

Can I just ask something about the car parks there seem to be some concern in some from some of the objectives

about the position of the car parks

but I don't know there's going to be any change in the plan, but there seemed to be a concern that

the overflow car park would be used more often and this would lead to more traffic through the village.

That was my understanding. I wonder if you could just say something about the car parks.

Officer - 1:20:53

So that overflow car park or what is essentially now their main car park is the one that's just

down here and yes it is where we would expect people who are visiting the site

for the additional bedrooms to park. Most of the spa facility obviously is more about providing

additional accommodation to people who would be there or could already be there because the rooms

exist and so whilst I guess there'd be more if the scheme works as intended

there'd be more visitors in the winter so that would increase provision traffic

at that point the main sort of additional beyond their current vision

is really associated with the three bedrooms and so wouldn't necessarily

be expected to provide result in an awful lot more parking need. So to use

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:21:33

that ancillary car park do you have to drive through the village to get to that car park?

Officer - 1:21:38

No, because it's accessible from the south.

But, so if you're coming from that stage you wouldn't need to.

That said, from what comments have come in is that people do also unfortunately,

either by accident or because it's the route they're going to end up going through the village

before then detouring to the south to access the car park.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:21:59

If there are no further questions we'll move on to the debate or comments as you like to call it.

This is the moment to which I think you could suggest a site inspection briefing if you'd like to.

Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:22:10

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:22:13

Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:22:13

Yes, in view of all the comments made, I think there's a general consensus that we should have a site inspection,

so I'd like to propose an all -member site inspection.

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:22:23

Could I have reasons, sorry, based on the Constitution, sorry, because there's set reasons that we would have to give for the SIB.

So could you say that again?

So within the Constitution there are set reasons we would have to satisfy in order to have an SIB.

So are we able to just get...

Have to give reason.

I'll give some.

Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:22:39

I'm going to go with that.

Go on then.

Councillor Braslington, do you want to put the reason forward?

Oh, sorry.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:22:45

Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:22:50

If Councillor Braslington is proposing it, I don't think it's appropriate that I say anything, but which of the two colleagues is seconding it?

Do you want to put board a reason before we pass it on to the public?

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:23:05

Yes, the complexity of the site both existing and as proposed, the evolution of the proposal

in the late notice and papers and the changes to the design, the topography, the special

nature of the landscape with its triple protection of national landscape

conservation area and whatever the third thing is listed buildings probably and

the widespread public concern I'm not saying the number of objections because

that isn't a reason to do anything necessarily but and the fact that from

finally, that this would count as a major application to a lot of us, even if it doesn't

strictly meet the criteria. And it hasn't, and I think also the evidence from the debate

that it's been difficult for us to follow all the different elements and all the different

things without being on site. And I do remember going on a site visit to Time, but it was

back in Abigail's day as a counsellor, I think. Was that her name?

So quite a few years ago and I don't remember it at all it's probably changed a lot. Thank you.

Thank you. Does that give you enough reasons?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:24:23

I think that ticks off all three points.

Good. So shall we move to the vote? Is there anybody else?

I think the seconder.

Yeah, I think Councillor Fowls was seconded.

No, I...

You deferred.

All right so Councillor Brasington has proposed and the formal seconder will be

Councillor Caul. So shall we move to the vote on that? Thank you.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:25:09

Mr Thorpe, could we do an extra specific email to our colleagues who are absent today?

and recognising that we won't have a replacement for Councillor McLean unless

one is found from his colleague in the Green Group.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:25:57

Councillor David Fowles - 1:25:59

I'm just going to ask Amy, if I may, Chairman. I did tell Amy and indeed the Chairman of

the Parish Council, both of us went independently to see the application in a three -dimensional

model and if that model is still available I think members and if the

applicant was supportive of the idea I think that model would be very useful

for members to see when they visited the site. I certainly found it useful I know

that Tim Guest who was going to be here found it useful because it kind of puts

everything in context you see the elevations but it's up to Amy liaising

with the applicant or the agent I would like to recommend that we at least try

and see if we can get hold of that model. I'm sure if the model was available we

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:26:40

could incorporate that into the site inspection.

Is that appropriate?

You haven't seen it?

Councillor David Fowles - 1:26:47

We can request that it's there, but I can't, you know,

obviously if that's something that's not our decision.

Officer - 1:26:52

So clearly if we are having a site inspection briefing,

the decision on this is going to be deferred,

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:26:56

and we don't have to take a further vote on that, do we?

So apologies to all the members of public.

We will be having a site inspection briefing.

I'm going to guess that's going to be on the 7th of January.

Please put that in your diary, everyone.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:27:16

Could you please explain to the guests that are here exactly what we've just decided in terms of this application and what then happens after the site meeting? I think it might be useful, Jen.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:27:27

I'll ask Harrison to do that. Could you explain why we're doing the site inspection?

Councillor David Fowles - 1:27:34

For members of the public, what we've just decided.

Yes, we will effectively defer the item until the January Planning Committee so that all

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:27:40

members can visit the site and sort of bring it taking their views of the put that point

and then bring that back to the Planning Committee in January and so effectively this item is

now deferred until that for consideration in January.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:27:57

Is that clear to members of the public? Could you just nod? Great, thank you very much.

So that application is deferred for a site inspection briefing.

So now we move on to the second one, which presumably,

do you want to do the presentation on that?

We'll have, this is a slightly difficult situation

because clearly this application is intimately bound

up with the previous one.

But I think the right, the correct thing to do would be

to let Amy do the presentation about that.

9 25/02722/LBC - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

then we'll if there's any questions on this particular the list of building

consent we can do that otherwise we can move on to about the comments.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:28:40

Councillor Fels. I'm a bit confused. Having having gone deferred to sites on the first

does this mean we automatically defer the second or we're going to have a

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:28:51

presentation? Surely the Constitution is you can't we can't determine the second

Councillor David Fowles - 1:28:53

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:28:57

one. Yes, I think I think it would be correct for Amy to do her presentation

and then presumably we would. We'll have we'll have all the facts when we have a

Councillor David Fowles - 1:29:11

better understanding if we for item two surely. No. Thank you.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:29:22

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:29:23

I'm going to start a society called the Slower Speaking Society.

They're so quick, so brainy.

The point I want to make is that usually the listed building application that's required

is inextricably bound up with the main application.

This is unusual in that whilst we would just look at a whole landscape, there's a very

specific LBC application here which is purely about the glazed extension to

occur to each listed building. So in my view that is distinct enough that it is

worth hearing but perhaps then deferring presentation on this item because

apart from anything else it would be reassuring to have something that isn't

so complicated. I think I would agree with you there as long as our legal team

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:30:09

agree with you this is a somewhat separate application to the previous

one so we will get we will have the presentation asked we've had speakers

already so we don't need to go through that again we've heard Councillor Fowles

so if Amy would like to give her presentation then we can see if any

members have any further questions on the list of building and discussion

separately is that all right great thank you very much

Officer - 1:30:38

you sure I will make this relatively brief as it's mostly the same site so

So I've actually, I've copied the red line over

and I shouldn't have because actually the site area

just relates to where the proposed extension would be

next to the lot, sorry, stable cottage.

So we're just talking about the area in here.

I'll go to the next one.

So we're just talking about the structure there.

So not the open paddock.

So the site's photographs remain as are,

so I'll just flick through these quickly.

And other than the building,

which is the one we're talking about,

So the extension would be going off the side here.

As you can see, and then also having an opening up

in that wall to provide access between the site areas.

So in case anyone's a crew, so that's our stable cottage,

and this is the part of the application

that we're actually looking at at this point,

so just that extension.

As you can see, it's a relatively,

so it's another flat roof structure,

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:31:49

relatively lightweight. The end there. Thank you Chair. Thank you very much. So we

heard all our speakers already so are there any questions that relate

particularly to this part of the application? The list of building consent.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:32:05

Councillor Conlon. Again asking if we can we give a slightly more measured response

given that we've saved a bit of time I think. Could I ask a conservation officer to detail

why he believes this isn't an extension or development that will significantly adversely

affect the listed building because it seemed to me to be quite a substantial

extension and very contrasting in style. I wonder if you could pick up reasons why I

Officer - 1:32:44

need to read that better. This this curtlish listed building is an outbuilding

or bothy within the wider grounds of Southrop Lodge which was the

Historically vicarage, according to some of the old maps.

So it was just a garden building, probably sort of a gardeners' boffy or something of that ilk.

But it was in the edge of, but within the defined garden.

The old OS maps clearly showed this area was landscaped garden.

It was part of the garden.

So the view I had was that if it was a garden -esque type structure,

whether it was perhaps a glasshouse or an orangery type structure,

it would not be inappropriate as it is within an historic garden context.

I didn't see any reason why it couldn't be a contemporary interpretation thereof.

Specifically at my request, they did create a link, a narrow link between the two,

so that they read, it almost reads as an orangery that sits next to the Bothy

with just a delicate link through, rather than visually reading as a continuation of the Bothy.

But it was a modern interpretation of the sort of garden type building

that would you quite commonly get within high status residential garden.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:33:58

Yes satisfied with that Councillor Coleman. Thank you. Any other questions? Let's move on to

comments I guess we would need a proposal for a site to thank you

Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:34:09

Councillor Breslington. Yeah I propose a site inspection for a reason given before.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:34:12

Okay so proposed by Councillor Breslington seconded against by

Councillor Cacol, can we roll over the reasons

from the previous one?

Yes, absolutely.

Okay, let's move to the vote

on the site inspection briefing.

Sorry, this seems a bit academic,

but I'm sure it's the correct way to proceed.

Thank you very much.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:34:37

So we've unanimously agreed on a full panel

site inspection briefing to cover both these applications.

We've only got one further short item.

If anyone urgently needs a break, five minutes.

We'll start again at 22.

You've just got five minutes.

9 25/02722/LBC - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

For anyone who's watching at home, apologies for the pause for the comfort break.

We're now moving on to the next application, which is for the construction of an outdoor

riding arena and associated landscaping works to include on -site BNG at

Talend School of Equitation, Ampney Knoll. The applicant is the Talend

10 25/01951/FUL - Talland School of Equitation

School of Equitation. Sounds very grand. Case offer is Kerry Porter. The

Officer - 1:35:45

So, be kind, it's my first outing with you.

Yes, this is an application for the School of Equitation.

It's a long -established and well -respected equestrian centre,

and it's probably one of the largest in the UK.

It's purely before committee because of the size of the development area.

It's over a hectare where it includes the BNG,

therefore our scheme of delegation requires you to determine it. So the site

itself is located to the northwest of Sirencester. It's just within the

national landscape. It's to the west of the complex of buildings that form

Talend School. We have an indoor arena, an existing external arena and other

and the stables in this little group here.

The arena itself is proposed in the field

to the west of the site.

The site area is the whole yellow area

and then the school is the yellow block.

Because it would measure 80 metres by 80 metres

and it would provide extra facilities for the school.

Because the fields slopes from, I'm trying to get my directions there, down to the northeast in this direction,

to have the flat area, they're going to have to move some soil to keep it up, to raise it up nearest the school.

So it's proposed to build up the land on this side here.

This does mean it would be raised by seven metres at its highest point.

But this is graduated across approximately 115 metres through the field so that it actually rejoins the natural land levels.

And yeah, across the top where it goes from A to A there, that is approximately about a two metre change in levels.

But again, that just extends across about 30 metres so it evens out.

What else can I say about this?

So although the change is quite extreme at one end,

at this point here, it will be graduated over quite a long area,

as you can see, to rejoin the land.

It's a standard surfaced horse arena, so it's purely there for drainage.

Otherwise, they wouldn't want it.

So it's sand on top of a sub -base that will drain.

So in terms of hard surfaces, there are none.

It would be enclosed with a 1 .4 -metre -high fence,

timber, post and rails, so very simple.

And here are some views of the site

so that you can kind of get an idea of how these bits are

relatively limited from the public domain. This is from the B442425

that runs to Barnsley which is to the north this view is. You can't even see

the buildings up there on the distance and this field here is where the levels

would be raised. The next view is slightly to the south from the B

Road again. The site is where this tree is so whilst the level would change there

it would just graduate back. Well let's have a look at some more. So this is

actually within the site that's showing it is from the south it's flat you can

just see the slope disappearing down here. From the main entrance into the

site at the south, you can barely see the buildings, let alone the site of this application.

And then this view is from the lane to the east, to get my compass bearings. Again, you

can just make out the buildings, the existing buildings, and the proposed horse arena would

be behind that. So again, very limited in that sense. Let's have a look. That's that

from the views. So in terms of biodiversity net gain, they're going over the 10%. I think

it's 10 .5%. Currently it's grazed by horses, so it's not a particularly biodiverse field.

The regraded slopes would be grass to match existing, so whilst you'd have the initial soil moving,

and it would be obvious once it's grassed, I feel it would not be particularly onerous in the landscape.

BNG, they're going to plant around the edges with improved grassland, meadow sort of seed.

That's to be agreed.

And plant trees around the edges as well.

Basically, because of the size of the amount of BNG that has to be done, it requires a

Section 106 to secure the mitigation for ongoing monitoring for 30 years.

That would be 2 ,666 for the whole time.

So subject to that and the conditions recommended

regarding biodiversity and no lighting,

it's not going to be lit.

That's another good aspect of it.

It's recommended for permission subject to the agreement

of the 106.

Thank you very much.

We've got one public speaker.

Mrs. Polly, is that you?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:42:02

You have three minutes to speak.

You're the applicant, are you? You're the agent, great, thank you.

We'll let you know when the three minutes is up. We'll allow you to finish

a sentence but we'll cut you off. Thank you chair and good afternoon

members. My name is Laura Polly and I'm here to speak in support of the proposed

Applicant/Agent - 1:42:37

development on behalf of the Talend School of Equitation. Talend is a family

run riding centre offering lessons for beginners through to accomplished riders

in dressage, cross -country and show jumping. The school currently has indoor

and outdoor arenas and two cross -country courses. Talend has between 80 to 100

horses and is one of the largest equestrian centres in the UK offering a

variety of training opportunities from beginner and glass roots levels to

advanced Olympic and Paralympic training. TALEND is also host to one of the oldest

ridings for the disabled Association groups in the UK. The school aspired to

be an industry leader and are currently limited not by horsepower or the number

of trainers but the area in which they can train safely. This proposed riding

arena will enable the school to house a variety of training and competition

opportunities from additional international sized dressage arenas, show jumping arenas,

and adequate facilities to house arena eventing courses. It will enable the school to offer

these services year -round in addition to their current provision.

The school therefore proposes the construction of a new riding arena to enable the growth

of the school and to keep up with demand and changes within the industry. The proposed

arena would measure 80 metres by 80 metres and would be secured by post and rail fencing.

The importation of soil would mean that the levels would gently taper out so that they

would then meet with the current land levels as you approach the B road.

The proposal benefits from officers' support, who has found that the proposed development

accords with local planning policy and can be undertaken without harming the special

landscape character of the Cotswolds National Landscape.

The applicant has worked collaboratively with the Council's ecologists to ensure that the

proposals will not result in harm to protected species or their habitats and that proposals

will meet the mandatory 10 % biodiversity net gain on site. There have been no

public objections to this proposal, only letters of support. We therefore

respectfully request that members vote in favour of approving this additional

facility and supporting this thriving rural business. Thank you. Thank you very

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:44:43

much. If you'd like to go back to your seat. Do we have a report from Councillor Spivey

who's the ward member? No, okay. In that case, it's open to questions from

committee members.

You were just

Thank You, Chairman

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:44:57

it may be I'm suffering a bit with the cold but

Councillor David Fowles - 1:44:59

could you just remind us of just two questions the height and

Secondly I

Think I've got my head around the fact that it's gonna have a concrete base does that mean a sort of

Okay, so it's just going to be timber is it

There might be a concrete post to stick the post in.

But that's not a surround.

So where you say timber, is the colour going to be natural wood or what's the colour?

It can be untreated. I haven't specified that but we could condition it.

The question is with agricultural buildings, sometimes if the colour is quite significant

I don't know what the latest view is on agricultural buildings and what they should be coloured,

but I know if you've got the right colour it can soften the impact on the landscape.

So I was just interested in whether we have a view on it or can we condition it in any way, shape or form?

We could certainly condition it so that it's untreated and then it would silver down

so that you don't have any, I don't know, bright orange treatment or something.

but some silvering would be the most natural form of the wood.

I do know the site because it was my ward for 16 years.

Just thought I'd drop that in.

Will the landscaping help obscure it over time from the road?

The lands are common.

Because Tallinn sits on a junction, doesn't it?

There's a crossroads and there's two roads that basically...

It does and the B4 425 is set quite a lot lower than the actual school and you are

10, I mean I had to take life into my hands to take the picture from the road because it's

it's quite fast and there are no, there's nowhere to stop really. You would only see a grass slope,

the difference would be the gradient of that slope. More along the lines of the back road,

what I call the back road to Quennings.

The one that's parallel, yeah,

where you cut the exit comes off.

Again, that is, because that's a plateau

almost at that point, and you can,

because it's the opposite side

behind the buildings from that lane,

you wouldn't see it in that context either.

It's difficult from public view

to actually see it in any great, in a whole.

you just glimpse it. I'd say from the B4425 is the clearest views you'd have of it. But

again, you're generally moving at speed in a vehicle rather than walking. Public rights

of way to the east are the opposite side of that lane we're talking about and separated

by trees, et cetera. So it's very discrete, really, considering.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Councillor Coleman.

So, are we on questions or comments?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:48:11

Councillor David Fowles - 1:48:12

Oh, we're on questions. Did you have another question, Councillor Fowles? Okay, Councillor Coleman then.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:48:15

No, sorry.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:48:19

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:48:21

I've got a very minor point first of all which is a big first line in 1021 the

last word I'm wondering if it's actually the other discrete spelling in that it's

going to be the proposed outdoor school will be positioned in a unobtrusive

location as opposed to being in a single location but that's a very minor and

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:48:48

And it's a very pedantic of you. Absolutely. I can I am I am world champion pedant

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:48:51

Now my questions are about biodiversity really because I think it's it's I don't think I've come across such a

Put a lot of detail to to deal with this

But am I right in thinking they're gonna have to scrape off some of what's there in order to get this in place?

Is that the first that's my first question?

Officer - 1:49:12

They will do some scraping along the top, but they'd also have to import some soil to fill

And then the BNG elements, which are the bits you wouldn't really want to be disturbed by,

so you want to let them grow naturally around the edges on the whole.

Because at the moment it's obviously, it's grazed by horses, so it's really closely cropped

and yeah, there's not much exciting biodiversity there.

So by introducing some meadow around the edge and some trees dotted around, it will improve

biodiversity.

Thank you.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:49:52

Just going into this a bit further, so the meadow that they're going to introduce, which

is going to produce the, which is going to counterbalance or whatever the lost biodiversity

with some betel, is that likely to be grazed by horses as well?

or will horses be prevented from grazing the new bit

of biodiversity?

Dr. Anne Poulton -McKellen There is no fencing to fence it off,

Officer - 1:50:15

actually, but that would be agreed as part of the

biodiversity net gain condition.

So it's BNG is not about mitigating its 10 percent

improvement, so yeah.

That would be agreed in the biodiversity net gain under

that condition, how they protect that bit.

So there will be satisfaction on that at a later date.

As I said, it's secured via Section 106.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:50:45

Part of that is an ongoing monitoring process.

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:50:46

That's effectively what we're securing through Section 106

is monitoring.

So the idea is it should be retained as it in that condition

or developed into that condition over 30 years, and we would

be able to monitor that through the Section 106 provision.

Sorry, I just had that as well.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:51:05

I've been recently trying to learn more about biodiversity, particularly with regard to

the different types of grassland that we have, and there's a lot of it.

And there's a reference here to the landscape type, isn't there, that this is Dipslope lowland,

character type 11, this is paragraph 1017.

And I think you said that.

So is this likely to, does this site currently include, or is it going to include some

lowland meadow type? Because I was looking this up the other day and it told me that

lowland meadow is a type of

grassland, I think it is, that's only 1 % of what it used to be and therefore this is an example of how,

in that context it was,

it reflected how important it is to go for this 10 percent increase.

But on the other hand, is there already lowland meadow there?

They're wooden.

Oh, crikey.

That's loud.

Officer - 1:52:05

I'm not sure specifically what's there now.

I do know that it's not of particularly good quality.

They've suggested certain seed mixes in the biodiversity,

in the report. However, again, that would be agreed. The specifics, you know, I can

make reference to our biodiversity team that you were interested in that particular lowland

meadow, and we can see if that's what they'd suggest there, but I'm not an expert on what

would grow there, specifically on that slope.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:52:47

Thank you, Chair. Quite probably you and indeed Harrison Bowling were aware of my interest in Lowland Meadow

because of my enormous disappointment at being refused a chance to hear at this committee a strong case for the relocation of Garden Swift's distillery.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:53:06

We can't talk about that today, or ever, unfortunately.

Councillor Julia Judd - 1:53:17

Moving swiftly on, Councillor Judd. Thank you. I'm not sure if you can answer this Kerry, but I don't really understand why they don't build it on the flatland on the left of the drive where you wouldn't be able to see it from the main road, you wouldn't be able to see it on the small road between the main road and the smaller road in Barnsley.

and you wouldn't be able to see it from the Roman road which goes to

Quenington. So you wouldn't be able to see it, it's absolutely level, it would cost

a fraction of the price to build and caused none of the harm.

Officer - 1:53:57

I know the site well. And that is completely, it's like a tennis court that's so level that.

I don't know why they chose there. There obviously must be business reasons why they didn't choose

that particular point.

We have to consider the application before us, whether it's acceptable.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:54:19

Absolutely. So I'm questioning when there might be an alternative,

Councillor Julia Judd - 1:54:25

why are we digging up the Cotswolds, levelling up bits of unleveled land

when there's a perfectly good piece of level land literally within feet?

But we have to ask ourselves whether this is acceptable,

even though we think there might be a better idea.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:54:42

Yeah, that's what I was asking.

Any other question?

Yeah, I just had one question, if that's okay.

So on page 102 at the top, talking about the LCA, the Landscape Character Areas,

Strategists and Guidelines, it clearly says where pastures need to be subdivided, etc.

It clearly says post and rails should be avoided in that paragraph.

That sort of stuck out to me.

Officer - 1:55:13

Yes, absolutely. However, a horse exercise area has to be enclosed in some way and that

is the most appropriate one there. And given the views, notwithstanding Councillor Judd's

there would be somewhere that was less visible. The way that you would really see the fence

because of the changes in levels, you know, it would be along the horizon, the top.

I'm trying to think of the word, sorry.

So it might have been better if that, so post and rail should be avoided where possible.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:55:50

Officer - 1:55:53

I think if you were enclosing entire fields in post and rail, that would be out of character

with the Cotswolds, whereas this has a specific job to do.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:56:03

Okay, if there's no more questions any comments?

Councillor Judd

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:56:12

Councillor Julia Judd - 1:56:21

I know this site well. It's a fantastic writing school and the Cotswolds should be really proud to have it here. I

I do

question

the position of the building because it could be the only reason I can think is

because it it it's not good for the house but I don't like the idea that you

come out of Barnsley and you'll end up seeing this huge writing school and so

I'd quite like to see planting that where the trees would be end up higher

than the side of the building.

But it is a remarkable school, this,

and I think that it's absolutely we are here

to support remarkable business achievements in the Cotswolds,

and especially one that promotes country life in a rural area.

Thank you.

Any other council members?

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:57:18

Thanks, Shannon.

Councillor David Fowles - 1:57:21

And like Julia, I know the site very well,

having lived in Barnsley and represented that whole area.

I take her point that there must be a reason

for it being cited there,

but it's interesting that we don't know why.

And I know we've got the,

is it the applicant who's speaking, who spoke?

We can't ask the applicant that question, can we?

It just seems crazy,

because we could deal with that now.

Because I do share Julia's concerns about the location.

But what I would say is that because it's been there for such a long time, forgetting

the success or otherwise of it, that open field has got this, it's got currently got

a house and a large structure on it, but this is something again, it's going to increase

the mass of the site that, you know, we should applaud the success of it.

And I for one, I remember an application I think a couple of years ago where we were

asked to refuse an application for a large cattle shed outside Chetworth.

Do you remember on the, in a very prominent position

and the officers were recommending refusal,

we all said no, we want to be seen to be supporting

agricultural or agricultural related businesses.

So I haven't got any problems with it at all.

But I share Julia's concern about the location.

If there's some way of softening it with landscaping,

then that would be great.

But I don't think we can, surely we can't permit it subject

to where it's located.

We either permit it or we don't, yeah?

There will be trees as part of the biodiversity net gain dotted around, so there will be softening.

The point I'm trying to make is not just Barnsley, it's Antony Cruces, and to be blunt without referencing the local plan,

if those 660 houses go forward, they will probably be right up against this site on the other side of the road.

But I think it's an established area for some form of

agricultural -related business, and residents will just assume

that it's a business that's succeeding and developing,

and that's great, and we should applaud it personally.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:59:37

Thank you. There is a condition about a landscaping plan as part of the

conditioning. It won't be in our lifetime that those trees will take a long time to grow.

Yes, of course they will. But nonetheless, the thought is there that there will be a consideration given to the

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:59:59

much wish to propose approval of this. This is not a building. I do not see any

reference to a building. What I do see is that I might be able to see the horses

that I can't see now. When I drive along that road probably at the limit it's

rather a quick way of getting to Burford as most of the people in Sire and Sestra

were because it used to be an A road if I looked at the old maps. So once upon a

time in my early days on the council I was taught that horses aren't agriculture.

However, horses are what you expect to see these days in the cotswolds.

And full marks to that because there are things worse, much worse than horses in the countryside

and that's golf courses.

Fortunately the spate of building golf courses appears to have quietened down a bit but we

Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:00:44

did have it in the 90s.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 2:00:45

Mr Coleman, you're going off on a tangent.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:00:47

I'm just explaining all the positive background.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 2:00:51

I'm proposing, I'm looking for a seconder to approve this and I should also be educating

myself about why this lowland grassland can be looked after by by an university

net game and other lowland grassland can't. Thank you very much for your

Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:01:10

comment. Councillor Faust are you seconding? I was seconding. Okay, excellent. Are there any further

comments or shall we proceed to the vote to accept the office's recommendation to

approve this application. Okay we'll go to the vote then, thank you.

Okay, so now let's return to the agenda.

Thank you.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:02:06

So there will be, as discussed, a site inspection briefing on the 7th of January at time.

If any of you want to go and partake, you will have to do that privately on another

occasion.

But there will be a site inspection briefing, so that's a full panel one.

We'll expect you all there on the 7th of January.

licencing subcommittee there isn't one before the next Planning Committee

meeting so it just remains to me to say thank you very much for attending today

and to wish you a very happy Christmas Councillor Fowles. I don't know how to

Councillor David Fowles - 2:02:52

ask this question Chairman but given given Andrew McLean's very sad news I

I don't know whether it's appropriate to sound out colleagues because he was such an active member of this committee whether we could send him some card.

I know it sounds, not going to send him a card saying get well soon, but a card that says we're thinking of him.

I just thought that might be something that you might consider organising.

Yes, I'm sorry I should have thought to bring a card.

It would be a very nice gesture from all of us.

Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:03:23

To bring a card here.

I don't know what other people think.

Yeah.

Sorry I could have.

just wishing him all the very best with his family.

Something, I don't know the words,

but what does everyone think?

Yeah, thanking for his involvement.

Thanking for his involvement as a Councillor

and a member of this committee, he'll be missed.

Maybe, could you get me a piece of paper, Julia?

I've got a piece here.

A piece of paper.

If you'd all like to write your own message

on the piece of paper, I will purchase a card

and I'll deliver it to him by hand.

He doesn't live very far away from me.

Thank you very much.

That's a great idea.

This is high quality paper. What's that?

Is that council paper?

This is really thick.

If we use this.

If you fold it like that.

Hold on. Make cut.

Okay. Sorry. I'm sorry.

I'm ending the meeting now. Sorry.

Please provide any feedback/comments relating to the live webcast here. Any feedback submitted will be received to the Democratic Services team.

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hChaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Cotswold District Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

There are currently no votes to display

Planning and Licensing Committee - Wednesday 10 December 2025, 2:00pm - Cotswold District Council Webcasting

Planning and Licensing CommitteeWednesday, 10th December 2025 at 2:00pm

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Feedback

Votes

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:01

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:06

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:02:34

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:02:43

Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:02:45

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:02:48

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:02:57

Councillor David Fowles - 0:03:00

Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:03:10

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:03:15

Legal Services - 0:03:21

Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:03:27

Officer - 0:03:32

Officer - 0:03:47

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:03:49

Julia Gibson, Officer - 0:03:57

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:04

3 Declarations of Interest

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:24

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:04:26

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:38

Legal Services - 0:04:41

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:44

Councillor David Fowles - 0:04:49

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:56

Councillor David Fowles - 0:04:59

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:06:43

Legal Services - 0:06:50

Councillor David Fowles - 0:07:10

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:25

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:07:30

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:39

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:07:40

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:45

4 Minutes

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:16

Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:08:31

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:56

5 Chair's Announcements

6 Public questions

7 Member questions

Schedule of Applications

8 25/02175/FUL - Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Officer - 0:12:37

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:19:51

Town/Parish Council - 0:20:57

Town/Parish Council - 0:25:51

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:30:47

Supporter - 0:30:57

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:34:36

Supporter - 0:34:43

Applicant/Agent - 0:34:46

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:40:38

Public Speaker - 0:41:22

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:49:51

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:50:51

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:50:54

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:50:57

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:51:06

Councillor Julia Judd - 0:51:07

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:51:11

Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:51:22

Officer - 0:51:40

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:53:24

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:53:46

Officer - 0:55:01

Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:55:26

Officer - 0:55:44

Planning and Licensing Committee
Wednesday, 10th December 2025 at 2:00pm