Planning and Licensing Committee - Wednesday 14 January 2026, 2:00pm - Vote_events Tab - Cotswold District Council Webcasting

Planning and Licensing Committee
Wednesday, 14th January 2026 at 2:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
  2. Councillor Ian Watson
  3. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  4. Councillor Ray Brassington
  5. Councillor Julia Judd
  6. Councillor Michael Vann
  7. Councillor Daryl Corps
  8. Councillor Dilys Neill
  9. Legal Services
  10. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  11. Officer
  12. Officer
  13. Officer
  14. Officer
  15. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Julia Gibson, Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Councillor Ray Brassington
  4. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Ray Brassington
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Councillor Dilys Neill
  4. Councillor Julia Judd
  5. Councillor Dilys Neill
  6. Councillor Dilys Neill
  7. Councillor David Fowles
  8. Councillor Dilys Neill
  9. Councillor David Fowles
  10. Councillor Dilys Neill
  11. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  12. Councillor Dilys Neill
  13. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
  2. 04. Approve minutes of the meeting held 10 December 2025
    Status: In progress
  3. 04. Approve minutes of the meeting held 10 December 2025
    Status: Ended
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Councillor Andrea Pellegram
  4. Councillor Dilys Neill
  5. Councillor Ray Brassington
  6. Officer
  7. Councillor Ray Brassington
  8. Officer
  9. Councillor Dilys Neill
  10. Councillor Julia Judd
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. Councillor Julia Judd
  13. Councillor Dilys Neill
  14. Councillor David Fowles
  15. Officer
  16. Councillor Dilys Neill
  17. 08. New Fee for Primate License - Approve recs 1-2
    Status: In progress
  18. Councillor Dilys Neill
  19. 08. New Fee for Primate License - Approve recs 1-2
    Status: Ended
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Councillor Ray Brassington
  4. Councillor Dilys Neill
  5. Town/Parish Council
  6. Councillor Dilys Neill
  7. Applicant/Agent
  8. Councillor Dilys Neill
  9. Councillor Dilys Neill
  10. Councillor Ray Brassington
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. Officer
  13. Councillor Dilys Neill
  14. Councillor Ray Brassington
  15. Officer
  16. Councillor Ray Brassington
  17. Officer
  18. Councillor Ray Brassington
  19. Officer
  20. Councillor Ray Brassington
  21. Officer
  22. Councillor Ray Brassington
  23. Councillor Ray Brassington
  24. Officer
  25. Councillor Dilys Neill
  26. Councillor David Fowles
  27. Officer
  28. Councillor David Fowles
  29. Officer
  30. Councillor David Fowles
  31. Officer
  32. Officer
  33. Councillor Dilys Neill
  34. Officer
  35. Councillor David Fowles
  36. Officer
  37. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  38. Councillor Dilys Neill
  39. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  40. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  41. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  42. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  43. Officer
  44. Councillor Dilys Neill
  45. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  46. Officer
  47. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  48. Councillor Dilys Neill
  49. Officer
  50. Councillor Dilys Neill
  51. Officer
  52. Councillor Dilys Neill
  53. Officer
  54. Councillor Dilys Neill
  55. Councillor David Fowles
  56. Councillor Dilys Neill
  57. Councillor Julia Judd
  58. Councillor Dilys Neill
  59. Councillor Daryl Corps
  60. Councillor Dilys Neill
  61. Councillor Daryl Corps
  62. Councillor Dilys Neill
  63. Councillor Ray Brassington
  64. Councillor Dilys Neill
  65. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  66. Councillor Dilys Neill
  67. Councillor Ian Watson
  68. Councillor Dilys Neill
  69. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  70. Councillor Ray Brassington
  71. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  72. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  73. Officer
  74. Councillor Dilys Neill
  75. 09. 25/02763/REM - Chesterton Farm - Approve subject to condition(s)
    Status: In progress
  76. 09. 25/02763/REM - Chesterton Farm - Approve subject to condition(s)
    Status: Ended
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Town/Parish Council
  4. Councillor Dilys Neill
  5. Objector
  6. Councillor Dilys Neill
  7. Supporter
  8. Councillor Dilys Neill
  9. Supporter
  10. Applicant/Agent
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. Ward Member
  13. Councillor Dilys Neill
  14. Councillor David Fowles
  15. Councillor Dilys Neill
  16. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  17. Councillor Dilys Neill
  18. Councillor Ray Brassington
  19. Councillor Dilys Neill
  20. Councillor Julia Judd
  21. Councillor Dilys Neill
  22. Councillor Michael Vann
  23. Councillor Dilys Neill
  24. Councillor David Fowles
  25. Councillor Dilys Neill
  26. Councillor Daryl Corps
  27. Councillor Dilys Neill
  28. Councillor Daryl Corps
  29. Officer
  30. Councillor Daryl Corps
  31. Officer
  32. Councillor Daryl Corps
  33. Officer
  34. Councillor Dilys Neill
  35. Councillor Ian Watson
  36. Officer
  37. Councillor Dilys Neill
  38. Councillor David Fowles
  39. Officer
  40. Councillor David Fowles
  41. Officer
  42. Councillor Dilys Neill
  43. Councillor Julia Judd
  44. Officer
  45. Councillor Julia Judd
  46. Councillor Dilys Neill
  47. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  48. Officer
  49. Councillor Dilys Neill
  50. Councillor Julia Judd
  51. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  52. Councillor Julia Judd
  53. Councillor Dilys Neill
  54. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  55. Councillor Dilys Neill
  56. Councillor Ian Watson
  57. Councillor Dilys Neill
  58. Councillor Dilys Neill
  59. Councillor Michael Vann
  60. Councillor Dilys Neill
  61. 10. 25/02175/FUL - Thyme Southrop Estate Office - Permit
    Status: In progress
  62. Councillor Dilys Neill
  63. 10. 25/02175/FUL - Thyme Southrop Estate Office - Permit
    Status: Ended
  64. Officer
  65. Councillor Dilys Neill
  66. Councillor Julia Judd
  67. Councillor Dilys Neill
  68. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  69. Councillor Dilys Neill
  70. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  71. Councillor Dilys Neill
  72. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  73. Officer
  74. Councillor Dilys Neill
  75. Councillor Julia Judd
  76. Councillor Dilys Neill
  77. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  78. Councillor Julia Judd
  79. Councillor Dilys Neill
  80. Councillor Daryl Corps
  81. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  82. Officer
  83. Councillor Dilys Neill
  84. Officer
  85. Councillor Dilys Neill
  86. Councillor Dilys Neill
  87. Councillor Michael Vann
  88. Councillor Dilys Neill
  89. 11. 25/02722/LBC Thyme Southrop Estate Office - Permit
    Status: In progress
  90. 11. 25/02722/LBC Thyme Southrop Estate Office - Permit
    Status: Ended
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Objector
  4. Applicant/Agent
  5. Councillor Dilys Neill
  6. Ward Member
  7. Councillor Dilys Neill
  8. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  9. Councillor Dilys Neill
  10. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. Councillor Dilys Neill
  13. Officer
  14. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  15. Councillor Dilys Neill
  16. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  17. Councillor Dilys Neill
  18. Officer
  19. Councillor Dilys Neill
  20. Councillor David Fowles
  21. Officer
  22. Councillor David Fowles
  23. Councillor Dilys Neill
  24. Councillor Dilys Neill
  25. Councillor Dilys Neill
  26. Councillor David Fowles
  27. Councillor Dilys Neill
  28. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  29. Councillor Dilys Neill
  30. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  31. Councillor Daryl Corps
  32. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  33. Officer
  34. Councillor Dilys Neill
  35. Councillor Julia Judd
  36. Councillor Dilys Neill
  37. Councillor Ray Brassington
  38. Councillor Dilys Neill
  39. Councillor Dilys Neill
  40. Councillor David Fowles
  41. Councillor Dilys Neill
  42. Councillor David Fowles
  43. Councillor Dilys Neill
  44. Councillor David Fowles
  45. Councillor Dilys Neill
  46. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  47. Councillor Dilys Neill
  48. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  49. Councillor David Fowles
  50. Councillor Dilys Neill
  51. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  52. Councillor Dilys Neill
  53. Councillor Ray Brassington
  54. Councillor Dilys Neill
  55. Councillor Ray Brassington
  56. Councillor Dilys Neill
  57. Councillor Dilys Neill
  58. 12. 24/02513/FUL Siddington Park - Defer pending Site Inspection Briefing
    Status: In progress
  59. Councillor David Fowles
  60. Councillor Dilys Neill
  61. 12. 24/02513/FUL Siddington Park - Defer pending Site Inspection Briefing
    Status: Ended
  62. Councillor David Fowles
  63. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  64. Webcast Finished

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:06
Good afternoon and welcome to this meeting of the Cotswold District Council Planning
Committee. Is that better? Great. Thank you very much. My name is Dylis Neil. I am the
current chair of the planning committee and I am the ward member for Stow -in -the -Wolds
in the north of the district.
So I'd like to welcome anyone who's watching at home,
and I know there are a few regular people who watch,
and I'd like to thank them very much for their contributions
that they email us with comments and suggestions,
and for their interest.
And I'd like to welcome all you members
who've taken the trouble to come this afternoon.
So I'll just explain the voting system.
We use an electronic voting method now.
The votes are displayed on our screens and for anyone watching at home, the votes will
be displayed for you as you watch.
However, if there is a failure, we will revert to the old -fashioned methods of voting by
hand.
Can I ask anyone present in the room to switch off or silence their phone?
Just cheque I've done that myself.
Members of the public, you're very welcome to be here, but you mustn't talk to any members
of the committee, either during the meeting or when we have a, if we take a break, please
don't talk to any members of the committee or officers. And please don't interrupt our
proceedings. So, I know a lot of you have come with the same expression of interest.
So, each application, there are certain speakers entitled to speak, certain public speakers
entitled to speak. So somebody from the Town Hall Parish Council, an objector, a
supporter, the applicant or agent and then the local member. So everybody's
views should be represented by public speakers. So normally each public
speaker gets three minutes to present and we're pretty strict on the time
limit. So please put the most important things up first if you're doing a
presentation and we will cut you off after three minutes,
although we will let you finish a sentence or a thought.
For the presentation about the time,
as you'll see on the agenda,
there are two separate presentations about this time
South Shore State Office application.
So one is a full consent and one is a listed
building consent, so they're slightly different.
So each public speaker is entitled to present
for six minutes if you want to put both those speeches together but you should
you should cover both applications if you are the public speaker for those I
hope that's all clear and then councillor Fowles who is the local
member for Southrop will have ten minutes to speak so I hope that's all
clear. Thank you very much. No I'm going to ask each members to introduce
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:03:22
themselves starting with Councillor Watson. Good afternoon Councillor Ian
Watson, Teppery Town Ward. I am vice -chair of the Planning Committee. I'm Councillor
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:03:32
Patrick Coleman representing the village of Stratton in the town of
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:03:40
Syrinsester. Councillor Ray Brassington representing the Four Acres Ward of
Councillor Julia Judd - 0:03:46
Good afternoon, Councillor Julia Jard, Ermin Ward.
Michael van Fairford North.
Councillor Michael Vann - 0:03:52
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:03:55
Councillor Daryl Corr, Norman Marsh and Walton on the Hill.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:00
Now can I ask the officers to introduce themselves?
Legal Services - 0:04:06
Leonie Woodward, Head of Legal, the Legal Advisor to this committee today.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:04:13
Harrison Bowley, the Head of Planning Services for Cotswold District Council.
Julian Pyre, Planning Officer, Cotswold District Council.
Officer - 0:04:19
Officer - 0:04:24
Amy Hill, Senior Planning Officer. Laurie Davis, Senior Conservation and Design
Officer - 0:04:28
Officer - 0:04:33
Officer, Cotswold District. Justin Newton also Conservation and Design. Thank you

1 Apologies

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:37
very much. Now do we have any apologies? Yes we've had apologies from Councillor
Julia Gibson, Officer - 0:04:42
Nick Bridges and notification that Councillor David Fowles has been delayed
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:50
but is expected. Are there any such... Oh sorry Councillor Brasington.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:04:54
Unfortunately I've got a dental appointment at five o 'clock. Yes so if
still going still going at ten to five I shall have to leave I'm afraid. I'd rather
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:05:04
stay but... Thank you very much even we shall miss you and even with your
absence we'll still be core it so that's good. Are there any substitutions? I don't

3 Declarations of Interest

think there are. Are there any declarations of interests from members?
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:05:18
Councillor Bressington. Sorry I've mentioned this to the legal department
I'm declaring the interest because I live nearby to the steadiness
development but I'll be told I've been able to vote but I'm not the Ward
Councillor. Okay thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:05:33
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:05:41
Are there any other declarations of interest from members? Councillor Judd. It
Councillor Julia Judd - 0:05:47
is there I'm wasting all time but I think I've declared it last time that I
I know one of the applicants on the Sotherup things,
but from many years ago, and she was a child
last time I knew her, and I haven't seen her since.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:05:59
Okay, so our legal officer has just left the room
for a second, but that's fine, because at the last meeting,
you made exactly the same declaration.
Well, I just, I didn't know what.
Anyway, that was okay, so that's fine.
I didn't know whether to waste your time.
Thank you very much.
Yeah.
Anybody else?
Councillor Fales, would you like to introduce yourself?
My apologies.
We knew that they'd done that deliberately despite you.
Did you get my message?
Yes, we did.
Yes, we did.
Please sit down and introduce yourself.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:06:38
You can say who you are for anyone who's at home.
We are on to declarations of interest, but as we've done the introductions already, I'm
giving you the opportunity to introduce yourself.
Yes, as well, yes.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:06:54
So you're asking me who I am?
I'm Councillor David Fowles from the Foreign Valley,
also the ward member for Southrop, thank you.
Did you want to make a declaration of interest?
Yes, thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:07:08
Councillor David Fowles - 0:07:09
I'd like to make a declaration of interest
in respect to clarify actually the position that I have as not only the ward member but
a member of this committee. And if members remember on the 10th of December when the
application for time was first heard, members received a letter from Howard Cole, the agent,
and I received an email from Joey Hibbert, one of the applicants, expressing concern
that as a ward member for the Colne Valley who requested that the application was referred
to the Planning Committee that I may have a predetermined view on the
application and I want to state that that is not the case. I will be
presenting my views or rather the views of residents in my presentation later on
but I wish to confirm that as a member of this Planning Committee I'm
approaching this application with an open mind. Thank you, Jen. Thank you very
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:09
much for that clarification. Councillor Coleman. Just to record please chair that
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:08:14
with regard to the first application on the agenda Chesterton Farm which has
been responded to by Syr ancestor town council I am a member of Syr ancestor
town council and of their planning committee I don't recall that I played
a significant part in whatever submission they have made today and I
a predetermined view of the application titled
Chester and farm today.
Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:44
Thank you very much.
Is that, I think that's fine for our legal
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:08:51
representative has agreed that it's fine for you to
take part in the debate then.
Thank you very much.
Any declarations of interest from officers?
Nope.
Great.
So, shall we move on to the minutes?

4 Minutes

Does anyone have any comments on the minutes?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:09:11
of our meeting in December.
So can I have somebody to, thank you.
Councillor Faz has proposed that we accept the minutes.
Councillor Bratenton has seconded that.
So we'll move to the vote on that.
Okay.

5 Chair's Announcements

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:10:08
We were planning to have lunch with the committee and the officers tomorrow, but that's being
postponed because it's going to be easier if we have that sort of friendly lunchtime
gathering when we have a meeting which is proposed later in the year for a training
day for officers and members. So, I'll let you know about that in due course.
This is quite a long agenda, so we'll have a comfort break at approximately two hours.
And can I just remind members to be, of course we value your contribution enormously. Can
I remind you to be as brief as possible? If you're going to ask a question, come to the
as quickly as possible. And if somebody's already said what you wanted to say, please
don't repeat it again if you can avoid doing so, so that we can control the length of the

6 Public questions

meeting. Thank you very much. Now, are there any public questions? And are there any members'

7 Member questions

questions? I don't think there are. Great. Okay, so let's move on to the first item,

8 New Fee for Primate Licenses

which is an unusual item for us,
which is to do with fees for the primate licence.
Andrea Thomas from the licencing department
is going to tell us what this involves,
and she's supported by Andrea Pellegram,
who is the cabinet member
who's responsible for primates, it would seem.
Andrea, thanks.
Thank you, Chair.
Officer - 0:11:47
This report proposes the introduction of new fees in respect to primate licencing applications.
In 2024, the Department of Environmental, Food and Rural Affairs, through regulations
made under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, introduced the Animal Welfare Primate Licences Regulations
2024.
The licencing authority for the purposes of these regulations is the local authority in
in whose area the premise is of which the primate is kept or is to be situated.
The regulations introduce a licencing scheme setting strict rules to ensure that only private
keepers who can provide zoo level welfare standards will be able to keep primates.
The regulations came into force on the 6th of April 25, at which time existing private
primate keepers and people proposing to keep primates will be required to hold a licence.
From the 6th of April 2026 it will become an offence to keep a primate in England without a licence.
The regulations set out the application process and the conditions that must be placed on a licence if granted.
A licence must be granted for a period of three years or where the applicant has requested a licence for a period of less than three years for such shorter period than the applicant has requested.
There are also provisions in the regulation for the holder of the primate
licence to request to vary or surrender the licence as well as provisions for
the licencing authority to revoke or vary the primate licence. An application
fee may be charged and a fee can be charged in respect of any inspections.
The proposed fees in the table estimate the cover the cost of recovery of
undertaking this licencing function and is in line with the fees already in
such as for the horse riding establishment,
which is a similar in the application administration process.
These fees will be reviewed annually
when all discretionary licencing fees were reviewed.
The fees proposed are the application
for the grant of a licence is 530 pound,
the application for the renewal of the licence
would be 364 pound, and the application
for the variation of a licence is 30 pound.
So the recommendations are that the committee note the contents of the report and the implications
of the animal welfare primate's licence England regulations 2024 on the council and to recommend
to the council that the fees applicable to the primate keeper licence applications are
set as detailed in this report.
Thank you very much. Councillor Pager, did you want to say anything?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:14:30
No, thank you, Chair. I have nothing to add.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 0:14:33
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:14:38
Does anyone have any question or comment?
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:14:42
Yes, thank you, Chair. Two questions. Do we have any primates in our district that need to be licenced?
Officer - 0:14:52
We're not aware of any at the moment, but what we propose to do is contact local vets
to inform their clients if they know of any primates in the district that they would require
a licence, but we're not aware of any at the moment.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:15:06
My second question is related to the inspection. It says it could be carried out by a vet or
by a suitably qualified competent person. Do we have any guidance to tell us what a
to be qualified person is? Yes so at the moment so we will be using both we're
Officer - 0:15:23
going to be having a vet going out and doing the inspection which is what we do
for the writing scores at the moment and then they will be accompanied by an
officer from the licencing team that's why Kevin Dunford's not here today he's
currently on a licencing course for primates so once he once he's done that
he will be suitably qualified to go out with a vet to do the inspection.
Thank you.
Councillor Judd.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:15:44
Councillor Julia Judd - 0:15:47
I was just going to say, I think Councillor Brasonton answered my questions.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:15:54
Councillor Julia Judd - 0:15:55
How many keepers of primates, without trying to suppress obvious jokes, are there in the Cotswolds and is there are none?
I think perhaps we ought to just support officers' recommendation and move on.
Councillor Fowls had a comment he'd like to make or a question.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:16:09
Councillor David Fowles - 0:16:12
Albeit we don't know whether there are or there aren't. In the event of there being
a primate discovered somewhere and someone either not being able to afford the licence
or evading the licence, I would have thought under the risk assessment we should put something
to do with what then happens to the primate. What's the mechanism? I'm more concerned about
that than paying the fee. So if you have a primate who hasn't got a
effectively there's no licence what then happens to the animal?
Officer - 0:16:47
I'm not sure. I'm still to go on this. We have the enforcement powers we have
our prosecutions, rectification notices or revocation variations of a licence. If
If we did go out or we were aware of a primate that wasn't licenced, I mean, we wouldn't
just, that animal would have to be dealt with, you know, properly.
It couldn't just be released or, you know, we would have to look into how we would deal
with that.
But having not got to that situation at the moment, this is purely looking at bees.
I was going to say, dealt with properly doesn't reassure me.
Well, no, they would be rehomed.
Oh, honed.
Yeah, so they would be put in contact.
Not destroyed. No, I would imagine we would contact Zoos. I don't think we're looking at the disruption of any animal.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:17:37
Councillor Fance, we could see if we can get a sort of more detailed written response for you if you'd like.
Could you do that? That would be perfect. Thank you very much. Does anyone else have any question or comment?
Otherwise we'll proceed to the vote. Okay, so the first part is to be noted and the notice of the consent of the report.
and the second part is that we recommend to the council that the fees applicable to the
Primate Keepers licence as set out in paragraph 3 .9 are recommended to the council. So that's
what we're going to vote on that proposal. I would like to propose that we vote on that.
Perfect. And do I have a seconder for that? Thank you, Councillor Chad. Great. Thanks.
We have unanimously agreed to support that recommendation.
Good.

Schedule of Applications

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:18:40
So our first application,
is the application relating to Chesterton Farm,
the steadings.
It's a reserved matters application pursuant
to outline commission relating to the appearance,
layout, landscaping and scale for the erection
of 100 dwellings, landscaping and public open space
phase two A of the development.
And the discharge of conditions 11, 16, 18, 48 and 56
of Chesterton Farm, Cranan's lame, sorry,
and the development now known as the Steddings.
So the officer is Julian Pie
and the award member is Councillor Brasington.
Is that right?
Oh, no, sorry.
So as Andrew, Councillor Pellegram, sorry.
I've got the wrong word member down in my notes,

9 25/02763/REM - Chesterton Farm

but it's Councillor Pellegram.
Thank you very much.
Would you like to speak?
Thank you very much.
Officer - 0:20:09
Thank you chair. Afternoon all. If I may chair, there are a few updates, items,
additional representations on the late pages. These primarily relate to updates
to revised material and conditions. You will see there a consolidation of quite
extensive list of submitted plans which we can come back to later in the
presentation and also some suggested updates to the list of conditions
attached to the recommendation which again I'm happy to go through in turn
but you'll no doubt have seen those. Come back to and then the proposal chair
Thank you.
As you've said, reserve matters pursuant to the outline
permission there for the developments of the settings.
Now, there's the settings, and in this case, it's for the
development and erection of 100 dwellings, associated
landscaping, public open space for phase, subphase 2A of the
development as a whole.
And just on screen, Chair, you'll see that those conditions
you referred to just for information, those are listed
there again, I'm not going to read through those, but you will
see those conditions are on the outline approval and by virtue
of this submission it's in effect discharging those
conditions of the outline permission.
If I may, Chair, just briefly if I can, provide a little bit
of context and overview here.
It's a large scheme.
It's been some years since the outline permission was granted,
but other detailed proposals and components of this scheme have
come before you and members prior to this particular phase.
Worth noting then, as I've said, the overall scale of development
here by virtue of the outline claim permission up to 2 ,350
homes and you'll see there those associated components,
employment land, facilities, open space and so on.
So all those things that make up this important permission
and future housing delivery for this new neighbourhood
of Sire and Cessna.
Also note there that we'll come on to that all matters
except access were reserved for subsequent consideration.
So IE by virtue of reserved matters,
those matters that were reserved layout scale appearance
and landscaping are therefore subject to consideration
as part of this application.
Again, just to give a little bit of context
in terms of that outline permission
and the outline planning framework
that's in place for decision -making for this site and component parts of it.
There is an existing vision that's established as part of the Outland
Planning Commission. He has set out as part of one of those subsequent
documents the site -wide design code but you'll see there the aspiration for a
new neighbourhood for the town. It's offering those as well as new homes, a new
Centre, other facilities, other opportunities to connect, a new school, a
community hub, formal sports provision and of course 40 hectares of publicly
accessible open space. So we see if you like all those kind of components that
members considered at the time were all relevant to achieve the vision and that
sustainable new neighbourhood. And again it's probably a little bit of a crude
diagram, but just to give you an idea that what's before you today is, you know,
probably at the bottom of my crew diagram, the reserve matters, but that
outline planning permission and planning framework which is in place, you know,
includes a lot of work which has already been undertaken and the approval that's
there. So the principal advance is accepted. This is about approving the
details pursuant to that outline permission. But there is a suite of
conditions attached to the outline permission, some of which I've noted.
There are two legal agreements.
There are approved plans and key parameter plans
and high -level plans attached to the outline,
which this Reserve Matters application needs to accord with.
And there are also things I'll come on to briefly,
phasing plans, site -wide design codes, detailed design codes,
all associated with and helping you, Chair,
and members make decisions over the course of this development.
Also worth noting, I think, that the delivery strategy
for this project, for this site, which I think is a very positive one, is that
there is a massive developer, if you like, Bathurst Development Limited, who retain
the responsibility for the project as a whole and as you'll probably be aware
have been delivering some of that site -wide infrastructure. The primary
village streets and the strategic green infrastructure. There is a community
management trust which has been set up and is in place and which will evolve. So
I think not always achievable on projects of this scale,
but you have it in place for this project.
And I think it's really positive that you do.
And it also should enable consistency
in decision -making over time
as future proposals come before you.
So in terms of some of that information, if I may,
the high -level parameter plan
associated with the outlying planning permission,
this establishes, if you like,
those land uses at high levels.
So where development should go, what kinds of development, and
how they may be arranged spatially within the site.
You'll see there that's the extent of the site as a whole,
not for today's decision.
That's the whole development.
And you'll see its relationship to the south of the existing
turn, and you'll see there again that, you know, the majority of
those areas allocated for development are for delivery of
new homes, really important for the authority and the community,
but also that range of other uses and facilities that I
mentioned, along with the primary movement and connectivity and access and
you'll note the line of the primary village street there which essentially
that alignment, that provision has been approved as part of the outline
permission. So the building blocks are in place if you like for then consideration
of the phases and sub phases as they come before you and you'll probably
recall chair that there is already phase 1a to the east there part of master
planning phase one to the north of that parcel. I think it's I call it outlined
in orange, something like that. That's essentially complete now, 68 new homes
and the site and phase we're dealing with now is part of master planning
phase 2, MP2 if you like, towards the right -hand side in the centre of the
overarching master plan. And also consideration through the outline
planning framework has been an assumption on delivery. So how do we get
to that sort of up to figure of 2 ,350 homes or something close to that and
again just important for members to consider that's a really important point
because the related infrastructure that we require to make this place
sustainable is a course commensurate to the number of homes that are built, i .e.
scale is actually and development at scale is an opportunity that affords
then the provision of infrastructure to make places
work rather than just having housing and no facilities.
And you'll know all this, I'm sure, from your decision -making.
But, you know, we shouldn't lose sight of that.
So this, as a sub -phase, I've, again, probably crudely outlined
it in red there, you'll get an idea that the scale of what's
before you today is, you know, yes, a small but important
component of the whole.
And it's that area outlined in red towards the eastern side
of what I might say is the main part of the development.
Phase two I would add, you probably can't read those
numbers, but the whole of phase two is just over 600 dwellings
for that part of the phase, so added to the 68 that have
already been developed.
So that kind of buildup of numbers is also important for
delivery of infrastructure and support of infrastructure
as the place evolves.
And again, just back to my reference to the outline plane
framework, the outline plane permission, requirement for
site -wide design code that was approved in 2021 pursuant to condition 9 of the
outline plan permission and that gives you the basic structure of that
document and the important components set within that for the whole site for
phase 2a I would consider to be the relationship with the northern and
southern landscape edges the primary green infrastructure which almost wraps
around this sub phase key marker buildings which were noted in the
site -wide code and subsequently in the detailed design code and also the relationship with
the primary village street, which as you'll probably notice already been delivered on
the eastern side by BDL.
And again, this is all kind of background, but this gives you an idea again of that strategy
that sitting underneath the site -wide code is a requirement where development phases
come forward to produce further design consideration if you like, detailed design coding, which
builds upon the level of information set out in the site -wide code. So if you like, the rules for
design for future development that then inform the outcomes, the built form, the quality, the kind of
place that we aspire to that goes back to that vision. So all this kind of is tied together, if
you like, in the decision -making from start to finish and that's the way your officers will seek
to see this development continue to come forward. Just noting there that detailed design codes have
approved for this sub -phase and also 2B and C, also 2D and E, so
that kind of master plan phase two, and also for the strategic
open space as well.
So this process is, you know, is evolving and this is just one
component of it, and that was the extent of detailed design
code 2A to C within which sub -phase 2A you're considering
today falls within.
You'll see the primary street there outlined.
And it's sort of splitting the, that kind of sub -phase in half, if you like.
So key issues, as I've said, for consideration today, those matters reserved, not dealt with
in detail, outlined stage.
And I've also added on environmental performance there because it's at the heart of the
outline plan and permission.
The importance, if you like, of efficiency, of meeting and exceeding standards, and back
to the quality of development, but also the levels of aspiration innovation for future
occupiers which kind of runs through this scheme. And members have made that very clear
at outline stage and have made those points subsequently as well. And I know it's an item
of interest, which hopefully I'll come on to later.
In terms of the process that your officers have gone through, Chair, I mentioned the
consideration of the detailed design code
Which was in the early part of last year and that detailed design code has been approved that covers this sub phase
Your office has also then entered into
Extensive discussions and negotiations in a very collaborative way I should add with the applicant team
Pre -application stage and subsequently post submission, so there's been quite an extensive
Iteration I think of what's before you today
And I think that's also been quite a constructive,
well I would say it's been constructive
and positive process.
The applicant might have a slightly different view,
but I think it has.
And I think it's been a mutual process and understanding
of the kind of levels of quality that are required throughout the
scheme as a whole and how this phase can make
the relevant contributions.
And my sort of circles on there are a little bit crude.
That's not prescriptive or extensive, but that gives an
idea, for example, of some of the revisions to the layout
plan that's before you now and some of those kind of exchanges
along with some of the built form and the key areas of even
this sub -phase that have been part and parcel
of those discussions.
There is, of course, a potential to continue to manage the
quality through further detail and quality management through
conditions, and that will be wrapped up at the end
of my presentation.
Just with reference, I think, to, again, those matters
reserve just to give you some assurance chair layout at scale and massing in
accordance with the outline planning Commission there are those kind of rules
in place if you like for the height of buildings across the site as a whole and
and some opportunity for variety I should add but in this particular
subphase primarily this is a residential properties of two storeys with some two
half -storey buildings in identified locations and also back to that
site -wide code a need to respond to the opportunity for key marker buildings on
the eastern edge which are the tallest buildings at three storeys so I
definitely sense in a particularly extensive here in built form and as I
said I think it's wholly in accordance with the outline planning permission and
the strategy for bringing forward the developed as a whole. Also worth noting
on this in terms of layout, there is a simple hierarchy of streets. You'll see running through
the middle of the plan, if you like, almost the middle. East -west is that primary street,
which is already delivered. The scheme doesn't need to deliver that. That's the job of the
master developer, and that's in place. But you'll see coming off that, there's an access
to the north, so the northern block, and there's an access on the western side of the southern
block. So single sort of vehicle accesses but there are the pedestrian and cycling connexions
to the open space of the north and the open space to the south. And as I showed on my
previous diagram, there's been some kind of iteration and discussion and revision here
in terms of that internal layout. The potential of those streets and blocks, how dwellings
confront appropriate streets appropriately and also with the highway authority with some
of the detailing and tracking and future management of those streets.
I should also point out that the turning head shown on the western side of the northern
block is a temporary arrangement.
Having gone to all that trouble, that's not a permanent feature, but you'll note that
in terms of needing to construct this, vehicles need to get in and out and that's the most
appropriate way of doing it.
So that will be removed upon completion
and that will be subject to future development
of that adjacent parcel.
There is a reliance within this layout on parking,
some parking to the rear, there's some variety,
there's some on -plot parking, there's a range of parking,
but we've tried to avoid relying upon cars parking
on the street where we can to try and strengthen
that sort of built form response and quality of place.
I mean these are low order tertiary streets really they're not going to be busy streets at all
in respect of through traffic
But also there are restrictions on this part of the primary village street that means there's no frontage access
There's no vehicle access directly onto this part of the village street and by virtue of that if we want
Dwellings to front onto that Street, which I think we do
Then clearly the parking's got to go somewhere and the most appropriate way doing it is to the rear
Hopefully I'll give you some assurance on that in some of the images I'm going to show you.
But it's a balance.
And you'll note that there have been some concerns raised by a couple of consultations on that, which I'll come to.
But, you know, it's always that kind of balance of how we best try and sort of consider all these issues and bring it together as part of the whole.
In terms of housing mix, Chair, again, just to give some assurance, this is in accordance with the Outline Planning Commission.
in terms of the council's housing market assessment.
It's some years old now, but it's in general accordance
with that and importantly provides 31 percent
at affordable homes within this sub -phase.
And I think I'd also say that one of the challenges
of breaking the site down into smaller sub -phases is there's
a kind of repetition of this each time.
But, you know, so, you know, the smaller the sub -phase,
you might say, well, the less it can deliver as part
of the whole infrastructure, but we're very mindful of that.
But this is wholly in accordance with that,
and I've shown you the breakdown of affordable homes there,
which the council's housing officer is happy with,
and it complies with policy.
To give you an idea, then, if I may, I mean, these are kind
of two -dimensional, so it's a little bit tricky,
but there's some information to come,
which hopefully will give you more assurance as well.
You'll be glad to hear, I haven't shown you a series
of befores and afters given that extensive negotiation we've had with the applicant.
So these are definitely the afters.
But this is an idea of those key marker buildings and there have been various concepts and iterations
of these.
And the applicant was quite keen to explore some kind of contemporary built form here.
The outline permission allows for that.
It's kind of trickier in some ways of then how we relate that to a more vernacular sort
of style with the rest of the dwellings.
But what we have before us here is a proposal that three storeys, these are the sort of
key marker buildings if you like, that mark the entrance to this part of the development.
And some of the things we've discussed with the applicant who arrived at this is a greater
articulation of the roof form.
So if you like a breaking up of a single massive roof and height, which hopefully you'll see
from those drawings either side of the primary village, at Primivly Street.
and also more of a regular order and proportion of windows and door openings,
which I think is now a lot stronger and is acceptable.
And to give you an idea of other typical house types, this isn't all of them,
but I'm just giving you an idea of consistency.
So that regularity and ordering and placement of windows, of doors, of simple porches,
which essentially is a response to what we see in terms of local vernacular
or a local built form within the town.
And that's been very much the approach we've taken on this.
And also a simple palette of materials, again,
which I'll come to.
You may also note the placement of chimneys.
Not necessarily on the market buildings,
which are apartments, but placement of chimneys
on majority, if not all, of the dwellings.
Those chimneys aren't functional necessarily,
albeit they're functional in an aesthetic sense.
But I think we've considered both options here,
And I think you'll probably, I would refer to some phase 1A,
which has taken a similar approach.
So it's not to say there can't be variety across the scheme,
but it's a little bit like if these were contemporary designs,
which weren't responding so closely to more of a local vernacular,
then it might look a little bit odd to put a traditional chimney on it.
So it's either one thing or the other, and we've opted for this.
And I think when I come to some of the street scenes,
having those chimneys and features also help the understanding
that regularity of rhythm of composition.
So here I'm starting to look at, I'm starting to demonstrate to you how the building starts
to look collectively around the key entrance and the primary village street.
And also we've had a focus around that northern circle, around that focal space within the
northern block.
Again, I won't go through too much detail, but very briefly from top to bottom, you'll
note the variety here of response to different parts of the site and the edges.
The street scene going from the top image and the image below it essentially is a composite
of buildings responding to the northern open space.
So you'll see a looser mix, detached dwellings, more significant gaps between dwellings.
So that requirement of the site -wide code have a different response here than we might
have on the primary streets and some of the other tertiary streets.
And then you'll see as we work down how buildings might propose to respond to the focal space
within the northern block.
And you also get a sense again of that kind of some variety in materials, consistency
of form and window openings and placement of doors and windows and so on.
Similarly, we're now back to the primary street, north and south, and that gives you a greater
idea of the composition of that.
So in terms of that top street scene, looking north, we've got the key marker buildings,
the apartments.
Then we're down to two -storey dwellings.
We've got some punctuation with a two and a half storey dwelling to turn the corner.
You'll note windows all facing onto streets, natural surveillance, that idea of well -surveilled
streets feel safe and secure, I think for most users,
and I think that's an important principle,
and that approach to utilising perimeter blocks.
And similarly on the southern side,
and you'll get an idea again of that eastern edge
at the bottom image with buildings,
both sides of that entrance, those marker buildings,
either side of the primary street.
But also, and importantly, a nice,
the design terrace, I would suggest,
which sits on the eastern edge as well
faces onto the open space in the entrance.
Similarly again, hopefully not dwelling too much, but this is
the southern block and that again provides some assurance
chair on consistency of approach across this as a sub -phase of
the greater whole of phase two and the development as a whole.
You'll also note here actually there is a little bit of variety
in terms of some red brick, limited use on ancillary
buildings, garages, and that one building there set within that
block is a garage building, but it has accommodation above it.
So where there's a courtyard behind it, for example,
there's someone living in that dwelling,
and there's natural sort of activity and surveillance
of the parking court.
Just noting my earlier comments on having park into the rear
and not wanting those spaces to feel
like they're sort of not very safe, secure, and pleasant.
And this is my earlier reference about something
which is a little bit more interesting and brings us
to life.
The applicant very kindly agreed to produce
some more visuals and impressions of what this scheme might look like in three dimensions.
I think this brings it to life a little bit more than those two -dimensional drawings for approval.
They are to scale and they're accurate as far as I'm aware. So this is the eastern edge,
these are the key marker buildings as seen from the southern footpath from the primary street.
Again, all of those points I've raised, but it starts to give you more of a feel of
what that might be like as a pedestrian or anyone using and travelling along that part of the street.
Looking back from the primary street towards that eastern edge,
you'll see the junction there with the punctuation of two and a half dwellings, two and a half storey dwellings. You'll get a sense again
I think of potential enclosure, walling,
material, simple detailing, porches, but consistency. Also use of headers and sills
across the scheme as a whole,
both at fronts and rears of properties.
So I think that attention to detail
as part of those extensive negotiations
has been considered very importantly throughout the scheme.
Also the importance of the trees
that are planted along the primary street,
but also other landscaping and planting.
And this is an image of that focal space
in the northern block.
Looking north, you'll see the amateur mature tree, of course,
but you'll get a sense of what that particular part of the street and the development might look like.
Some variety in terms of surfacing, possibly a raised table, but the idea that this is a low -order,
tertiary residential street and should feel safe and secure for all users.
It's not just people and residents in cars and visitors alike.
This is an image showing that relationship with the north and open space.
So hopefully you get a sense again of a slightly different built form response here to that
strategic open space and the kind of relationship which we're aiming to achieve.
Some larger detached dwellings here offering that variety.
And similarly, this is the southern landscape edge as the internal street turns the corner
and those dwellings front onto that open space.
And obviously have a relationship with open space so future residents can easily access
that space as can all residents of the scheme throughout.
And this is an example of a parking court
in the southern block.
And it's that point I was raising about having the ability
to sort of have accommodation above garaging or a drive -through
into that court, have suitable planting.
But importantly, again, the quality
of these spaces is fundamental.
So we see here stonewalling to these are rear dwellings
and also fencing, and we see the use of headers and sills,
and also rear windows, habitable room windows,
which face into that court.
So that sense that if you were in that space and you were
parking your car, at all times, day and evening,
there would be lighting as well.
It kind of feels like a safe place to be,
and it's not something which is just sort of leftover and behind
the housing with no other purpose.
In terms of materials, fundamental, again,
really important in terms of consistency and future success of this place. We've
agreed a simple palette of materials in accordance with the site -wide design
code and the detailed design code, use of natural stone, stone effect tiles,
reconstituted stone, also rough cast render and render finish and some
limited use of red brick and natural slate and that palette of materials is all
acceptable as that it's all in accordance with the outline plan
permission and I think use appropriately as we've hopefully as I've shown you on
the images will also contribute to a high quality and successful place. In
terms of landscaping there is in the outline permission chair an allowance
where smaller sort of faces and faces come forward. There's a site -wide metric
and an approach here to managing the offer of the applicant outline planning
stage to achieve 10 percent improvement on site -wide
biodiversity net gain.
That's not to say that every sub -phase needs to achieve it.
So it's a site -wide approach, and there will be variety
within each sub -phase.
On this particular sub -phase, there is very limited
opportunity for significant open space within it, as you've seen
its relationship with the strategic open space.
So there is a net loss, a small net loss, but we expect that to
be picked up in terms of the development of the site as a
and particularly through delivery of the rest of the strategic open space. That's
it is in accordance with the outline planning permission but that's not to
say that we can't achieve appropriate street planting, there are two amenity
areas, there's the focal space and there's a pedestrian cycle route through to the open
space in the southern area and those are matters which our landscape consultants
as considered appropriate and which also we have included in the proposed
conditions for future management.
And then importantly, I think chair finally on energy
and sustainability, critical issue for us all,
and particularly the aspirations of this development.
The applicant has produced a very clear energy
and sustainability strategy, has revised that,
subsequent to officer's comments on it,
and the is considered all relevant options for this
as one smaller part of the development as a whole.
What's appropriate here is a reliance upon fabric first,
of solar and also low carbon technology.
So in that sense, if you like achieving
and actually going beyond the established building
regulations improved in 2021, but also going forward in terms
of improving on other standards set out in the council's carbon,
zero carbon toolkit and also other guidance we might find in,
for example, Lettie standards, this scheme is achieving greater
standards than those which I think should be applauded.
This is the kind of typical assumption, of course, that can
be carried out prior to development.
And I think, and I was just going to clarify, Chair, there's
a reference in the report, I think, on page 52, paragraph
10 .78, I just wanted to update on that, that the applicant
has confirmed through that revised submission of achieving
and exceeding those standards that we require.
So this includes air source heat pumps,
it includes the provision of photovoltaic solar panels
and improved insulation through Fabric First.
And the combination of those provides
that improved performance and is acceptable
in terms of both policy and also regulation.
In terms of consultations, Chair, perhaps not an extensive response, but worth noting
that we've had two rounds of consultation on this.
Two objections were submitted on the original consultation, which I've noted there, from
external consultees and also from our own conservation and design officers, and also
some concerns from a member of the public.
in addition to other concerns raised by the Highway Authority and Syrinsester
Civic Society, they've all been reconsulted and all come back with
further objections and concerns and I would hope that we've resolved the
majority of those through the revised, the process we've gone through to
achieving the revised plans and the revised scheme. Again I won't perhaps go
through them in turn but you'll see that a lot of detailed issues considered in
terms of the concerns raised through conservation through design and also
some of those external consultees and we've worked hard with the applicant to
resolve those and I would suggest that we have done so successfully. Some of the
issues raised by the Designing Out crime officer and then reiterated by the Town
Council come back to that balanced view I think and some of those points have
been raised about well there's no reliance on rear parking cuts for
example and shouldn't we turn development round and not have those
but it's that balance and I think it's really difficult on this sub parcel to
do that successfully as the layout that's been shown. There's also an
acceptance in the outline plan permission of the principles of having
perimeter blocks, of having buildings and dwellings that front onto streets and
also using parking courts where appropriate and where required if
they're designed positively as we've tried to do.
So I think we would respectfully have a slightly different
view than some of those points raised,
but this can still be a very successful development.
But we do note the concerns raised about where parking
courts have been delivered and they're not high quality
and people don't like using them.
That's not very successful.
That's not what we're trying to achieve.
And I hope that's come through in my presentation.
The concerns raised by the highway authority
have now been resolved and they've removed those concerns.
Also worth noting, the objection has been maintained by the member of public, and quite
rightly, they've raised the issue that the concept of this part of the scheme could have
been done differently.
It perhaps could have been more innovative.
It could have been more contemporary in design.
I wouldn't disagree with that.
It could have been, but that's not what's before you today.
I certainly wouldn't dismiss that thought.
We've taken a particular view on this that's responding to that
local vernacular.
And also, their view is that it could have been of a higher
density.
Well, I go back to my earlier comments on phasing and the
number of homes we require that was established
upon the outline permission.
What's before you is wholly in accordance with the outline
plan and permission.
I don't think density needs to be increased, but I take
the point.
But also worth noting that there is going to be some variety
across the settings as a whole, particularly where we look
development around the neighbourhood centre for example where you might expect development to be
a little bit of higher density and there's an allowance there for some taller buildings
and that's that kind of natural order of things in most places. So I think those comments are
important ones and I would hope that member of the public keeps an eye on this as it evolves and
you know we might have further discourse in terms of where we might agree on some of those factors.
Chair, if I may, thank you for your patience and members' patience.
I think to sum up really, the revised proposals here officers consider are in accordance with
the Act Line Planning Commission policy requirements and also the subject to the additional representations
on the late pages.
We would request, Chair, in the recommendation that you provide delegated authority to officers
to just make sure that the finer points of all those lists of plans, numbers and
details are correct and if we have to refine and tweak any of those you'll
give us delegated authority to do so. But on that basis the recommendation is to
grant permission subject to the conditions set out in the report.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:54:07
Thank you very much for that concise briefing. So Councillor
Councillor Ray Brassington - 0:54:16
Brasington did you? Thank you chair, thank you Julie, very comprehensive report, very detailed.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:54:20
So we haven't heard our public speakers were you going to just raise clarification?
Thank you very much. So I thought you were about to raise a point but clearly
we need our public speakers. So the first public speaker for the town council
is Andy Jop, if you'd like to come forward and then we have the applicants
agent, stroke, Ben Lever, would you like to come forward?
So following that consultation, three minutes that you've
got doesn't seem like that report. Three minutes that you've got
doesn't seem like very much, but please will you stick to your timing and
Councillor Jop, would you like to go first? Yes, I'm here today to represent the
Town/Parish Council - 0:55:19
City of City Town Council, Deputy Mayor and I was also vice -chair of the Town
Council's Planning Committee. We objected to the reserve matters application, the
meeting of the Council Planning Committee on the 18th of November and
there were 147 documents to look at. The objection is included in the papers for
today's meeting and it was in support of the views expressed by the District
Council's conservation officer, the Gloucestershire Constabulary
and the County Council highways officer as well as with regards to energy
efficiency and green infrastructure. The Town Council has not had an opportunity
to revisit the application since revised details have been submitted on the 28th
of November. Since the Town Council's objection was raised the conservation
Officer has confirmed that most of her concerns have now been addressed.
Similarly, Gloucestershire Highways have withdrawn their objection following the amendments to
the plans.
The Gloucestershire Constabulary objection, however, remains.
Whilst the Cotswold District local plan is silent on the issue of safety and fear of
crime with regard to parking provision, the NPPF in paragraphs 96b and 135f specifically
requires that developments are well designed to be safe and secure, and they mandate that
crime and disorder and the fear of crime are considered the design phase.
The NPPF is supported by practical frameworks and strategies that local authorities must
follow.
You are probably aware of Secured by Design, which is a flagship police initiative that
provides technical standards for both physical security and site layout, crime prevention
through environmental design.
I won't go into the rest of what I've written down here because clearly that's been covered
in the presentation you've just had.
But our concerns therefore remain anyway regarding the use
of parking courts at the rear of properties.
For energy efficiency, whilst the approach taken in the energy and sustainability statement
for a fabric first approach is welcomed and the repose homes are specified
to exceed the future home standard limit of 15 kilowatt hours per square metre per year.
There are no solar panels, PV panels or air source heat pumps shown on the plans.
Proposed conditions stipulate ongoing monitoring of the actual energy consumption of the homes,
but there is currently no condition on actual provision of solar panels, heat pumps or any indication of battery storage
which would help to power the heat pumps.
Furthermore, the energy and sustainability statement is merely an assessment of what
might be appropriate, not an agreement of what will actually be provided.
We maintain our objection on this aspect of the application.
Green infrastructure, we note that a new landscape plan and planting scheme has been submitted.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:58:21
And now Mr. Leather, would you like to speak for up to three minutes? Thank you.
Applicant/Agent - 0:58:28
Thank you, Chair and Councillors. My name is Ben Leather and I'm the Regional Managing
Director for Keating at Home South West, the applicants. I'm delighted to support our proposals
for new homes at the Steddings, which is the Council's largest allocation in the adopted
local plan and the main area of focus for housing growth in the district. The site already
benefits from outline permission and is subject to a suite of approved design
codes that set out parameters and guidance to ensure development in this
location is of an extremely high quality. I can confirm our proposals are in
accordance with these. Keepnote is a top 10 UK home builder with a five -star
rating from our customers. We are committed to building long -term
partnerships to deliver high quality new homes and create sustainable new
communities. To deliver this scheme we have partnered with Homes England who
with the current landowner and Bathurst Estates.
The key infrastructure serving the site
has already been installed,
providing an immediately deliverable site.
And should we receive permission,
we intend to start on site this spring
and deliver the first homes in early 27.
Therefore, the proposal will make a significant contribution
toward the council's housing targets
on an allocated site quickly.
The scheme proposes a mix of housing styles, types,
and sizes for both market and affordable housing,
meeting the needs of local people.
There are 31 affordable homes in line
with the outline planning permission.
The site forms the eastern entrance
to the main Steddings allocation
with key gateway buildings forming the eastern boundary
of the site.
As such, the importance of achieving a high quality scheme
in accordance with the vision for the Steddings
has been at the forefront of the proposals.
And you saw some of the images earlier in the presentation.
We have collaborated closely with officers and consultees throughout the pre -application
and application process and have made a number of amendments to develop the layout, the form,
design and detailing of some of the homes.
Those new homes will be constructed using a fabric first approach and are electric only,
which will exceed current building regulation requirements.
In answer to the Town Council's query, all of the new homes will have highly efficient
air source heat pumps installed and PV panels which will generate their own electricity.
The proposal will contribute towards a number of economic benefits to the local area both
during construction and operational stages such as supporting a number of employment
roles and generating expenditure in the local economy from residents once the Delwins are
occupied alongside the generation of council tax.
In summary, the proposal is for a high quality development that is in accordance with all
planning policies, the outline permission and design codes for the site.
It is therefore hoped that you will endorse the office's recommendation for approval
to enable Keatmote to deliver sustainable exemplar scheme and bring
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:01:21
the vision for the Stedings to life. Thank you. Thank you very much. Would you
like to return to your seats? Councillor Pedram, would you like to come forward?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:01:45
In that case, we will proceed to questions. As you know, last month we had the opportunity
to talk to Julian following his excellent presentation and briefing for us. If you have
any further questions to ask now, please fire away and Councillor Brasington, you are first
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:02:03
on the list. Thank you again Julie. My first question is looking at the
paperwork there doesn't appear to be a location plan. I mean I know where it is
I'm sure some members do but for a result one there should be. Moving on we
mentioned about requirements of what the the police have asked for and and you
mentioned the balance about having cars in the carport but the police have also
mentioned comments about tall garden enclosures, lack of defensible space and
drop -off points for apartments. Have these been addressed at all?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:02:46
Do you have further questions or would you like the officer to respond?
Okay, okay. Would you like to respond to that?
Yes, thank you Councillor.
Officer - 1:02:54
Well, if I deal with them in turn, hopefully.
There's definitely a location plan that's been submitted.
I think if you're referring to the updated list, then the
location plan didn't need to be updated.
But yes, the application was validated some time ago, so
there is a location plan as part of the overall suite of plans.
In terms of some of those detailed comments of the
Design and Outcrime Officer, I mean, certainly in my experience
it's not uncommon.
I think they're material considerations, but, you know,
one would have to balance those against the aspirations of the scheme in the same way
that I think we did for subphase 1a, which has been delivered, and that consistency of approach.
So I wouldn't necessarily, and also I would suggest that there's an expectation
that private gardens are that, that there is an appropriate level of privacy for rear gardens
to dwellings, so it's not necessarily appropriate in the main then to have sort of lower walling
or fencing.
That in itself might cause other problems.
So we're always balancing those things around between public relationship with public realm
and then privacy for all homeowners.
So I would expect private gardens to be suitably enclosed.
I don't see that as a negative in the same way that most developments have appropriate
enclosure to private gardens.
In terms of adequate parking and drop -off for the apartments, I think,
I'm not going to lay it plain in front of me, but there is suitable opportunity and space to do that.
And as part of the revised plans, there was a revision to those kind of parking and amenity
areas that come off the primary village street as well. My other point I would make is back to the
principles here on the outline planning permission. The importance of the primary village street of
having a really strong urban form.
So buildings that front onto it and the inability,
that's something which the highway authority
didn't want to see in this part of the scheme
of having direct vehicle access.
So it's always back to that choice.
Now, if we want to have include terraces of dwellings,
which are wholly appropriate in this location and the town,
then by virtue of that, one way of achieving it
is clearly to look to have parking to the rear,
otherwise it's going to be very difficult.
To redesign it, we probably would struggle to achieve
terraces because we couldn't put the parking anywhere else,
so it would be a completely different layout.
And I would suggest that would have a significant impact
on the number of homes that could be developed as part
of this sub -phase, but that would get rolled
out across the scheme.
So it's always a case of balancing.
And I wouldn't disagree with the points raised by the Design
and Outcrime Officer, but I would suggest in the images
I've shown you that we've also paid a lot of attention
to the quality of those outcomes.
So if we have parking courts, what's the quality of those spaces?
How are they naturally surveilled?
Can we have a residential property in those spaces or on the edge of those spaces?
Can they be lit?
Can they be seen from other properties?
And the answer to all of those is yes.
The other point I'd raise is if future residents living here can't park at the front of their
dwellings, they will use those spaces and they'll be used positively as we've seen on
subphase 1A.
And if the quality of those spaces, materials, planting,
enclosure, feels equal quality to the rest of the scheme,
and there's no reason in my view why it shouldn't just be seen
as part and parcel of it, as the overall delivery.
So on that point, I think there are always exceptions to some
of the points that are raised, and I would respectfully
disagree with the Design and Outcrime Office
on those points.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:06:36
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:06:38
On page 33, item 618 about conservation design, it says there remain a few outstanding detailed
matters that require further attention and refinement, including boundary treatment,
materials and finishes.
Have those been finalised now?
Officer - 1:06:59
Yes, they have, Councillor.
I mean, I think again, when the report was drafted,
as you've seen from the late pages,
we've received further revised plans and information.
I think in my recommendation,
it was also for chair to delegate authority to officers
to make sure that all of those updates are incorporated
within a final suite of plans and numbers that do just that.
So we've also in the late pages suggested
additional conditions and wording,
which also would cover those particular issues.
So I think a combination of the two, the applicants willing to continue to respond and those additional conditions
and that delegated authority should give you assurance that
we're on top of that and we've discussed with conservation design officers throughout to make sure that's the case.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:07:46
Thank you. The applicant in his submission said all houses gone off air source heat pumps and solar panels.
How, have we got a condition in there that says we have to be because looking through it
I can't see one.
Looking at condition 13 energy performance,
it doesn't actually specify that there should be
an air source heat from all solar panels.
Officer - 1:08:09
I think the suggestion in the additional representations
on condition 13 was to make sure that we,
it's clear that the applicant can submit exact locations
on where those particular facilities are gonna be provided.
So I think that's probably the best way of doing it.
I mean, I can't guarantee to you that it would be appropriate
for every single dwelling to have a PV panel.
So, for example, if the roof slopes don't suit an efficient
use of a photovoltaic panel, then it would be senseless
to put it on.
So I think what we'd like to see and continue working with
the applicant is that they submit a scheme of where they
and all air source heat pumps will be used throughout.
What we're talking about here is then how we can also add
photovoltaic panels to appropriate roof slopes and clearly stating the obvious
safe facing roof slopes are the most efficient for obvious reason because of
the passage of the Sun so that's what we would seek to do and that's what we're
asking members to support us in doing. Do we get a condition going in that say all
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:09:16
properties should have air source heat pumps? I think that's shown on a plan
Officer - 1:09:19
Councillor so I think we've got that up -to -date information that all
properties will be reliant upon air source heat pumps.
It was the point on photovoltaic panels I was referring to.
But I think it's, so yes, take it as read as the applicant
stated, that's the, it's an electric future,
that's the reliance upon the strategy
for air source heat pumps for heat.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:09:44
Things in writing rather than what's being relied on,
what's said, because I've been told by a solicitor once
that if it's not in writing, it's not being said.
It's also covered by other regulation, Councillor, but it's on a plan.
Officer - 1:09:57
We have it in writing and it's part of the submitted information, so I don't think we need to reiterate it in the way that you've described, but it's entirely up to you if you'd like us to do that.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:10:10
I'd like to see it incorporated into that, please.
Would that, sorry, be a, what would you, as in you'd like a plan detailing where all...
No, a condition.
So a condition requiring it applied, the problem is they might not want solar panels on all the properties,
there may be properties that are not effective or efficient to put them on,
so would a condition requiring details of where they will do them in response to their energy strategy,
would that be something that you'd be open to, similar to condition 13, but maybe with an added requirement
for where they will be proposing S or Z pumps and solar panels, they should submit a strategy to us detailing where they will be located.
And finally are all properties going to have electric charging points?
Yes, Councillor they are. Again is that in the condition?
Officer - 1:10:58
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:10:58
Also again subject to other regulations, so it's kind of double counting to a certain degree
But we've already got that information shown on submitting plans and supporting information
So I mean yeah condition 15 requires it building regulations also requires it for all new builds so yes
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Councillor Fowles.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:11:20
Councillor David Fowles - 1:11:23
Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Some of the questions I was going to ask have been asked, not surprising, by Councillor Brasington.
Can I also say I thought Julian's presentation was fantastic. Didn't draw a breath.
I wonder what you're going to say, Councillor.
I found it difficult to keep up. I've got several questions as well.
The first is a note on page 32 that there's been no objections
from Thames Water, my favourite utility company.
Does this mean that they haven't commented or they have commented
but they haven't got the objections?
That's question one.
And question two, I was interested to see
that the environment agency have chosen not to comment.
What does that actually mean?
That's my first two questions.
Officer - 1:12:10
Well, there's certainly no objections from Thames Water for
any particular reason, and don't forget the principle development
has been accepted here as part of the outline planning permission.
So once we get down to this level of detail, there were no
particular considerations on material issues, I think, both
for Thames Water and also the Environment Agency to comment
on, so perhaps we could probably have worded that slightly
differently in the report, but there's no kind of relevance,
if you like, or any issues which they would seek to comment
on at this stage.
Councillor David Fowles - 1:12:39
Thames Water don't foresee any problems whatsoever about connecting these houses to the network.
Officer - 1:12:47
Thames Water have been consulted and they've responded, raising no objection.
Councillor David Fowles - 1:12:52
Second question is in relation to 618, conservation and design. We have the advantage in Star
Ancestor and some of our other towns of having had developments over the last 20 years, thinking
of Tetbury, Fairford and so on, where we can see in reality what happens to these big schemes
that we deliver and then look at the impact. Now a number of us have had the privilege
of pounding the streets over the years in places like Carinium Vier and New Mills where,
for example, the comment made by the police, car parking to the rear of properties without
lighting is a real issue. If you go up to Corinium Via there's some really dark,
scary places up there, particularly around the apartment. So are you
reassured that the lighting scheme etc will deliver on that?
But secondly, I'd really like the input from conservation. In very broad terms,
what lessons do we think we've learned? We talk about the scheme and the
materials and the roof types and some buildings are rendered, some are natural
stone and so on. And then we create without saying to be shot down almost a
pastiche, okay. And I really would be interested to know what conservation
lessons have learnt from the other schemes that are in and around
Syrinsester in particular. So I would say in new mills there's some areas where
there's some wonderful, where the terraced housing is and some
wonderful vegetation really looks great but other parts are you know really not
very impressive.
And I'd just be interested to know what conservation
lessons are.
Then I've got one last question, which is do with biodiversity.
I respond on the first point.
Officer - 1:14:42
I could probably carry on the second one, but my colleague
might want to interject on that.
Just on the issue you raised about sort of quality of space
and lighting, then I think my answer is yes.
I think we would give you some assurance that we've considered
those sort of parking and shared spaces, if you like,
very carefully, as we also did on subphase 1A.
But it's a really, really important point because I've
also, you know, witnessed many schemes over the years where the
provision of poorly designed parking cords, which people
don't feel very welcoming, then they don't use them.
And that in itself is a failure.
So I would say yes.
My overarching point on it, though, is this is 100 dwellings
from the overall 2 ,350 up to overall.
So there will be plenty of opportunities throughout this
scheme as a whole to look at variety, to look at probably
more contemporary design where appropriate, to look at other
opportunities.
So it doesn't mean that every subphase that comes forward is
going to look exactly the same as this, and neither should it.
But what we do want is a consistency and a quality across
the scheme as a whole, and that might be through proportion of
buildings, that might be through placement of windows, that might
be an overall palette of materials which is set out in the design codes.
And I think those points are important, but there is always a case for really, really
good design where there might be an exception to it, and that might well come before you
in future years.
And good design is good design.
So let's kind of take a view on that as it comes forward.
But my general point is this is 100 dwellings of well over 2 ,000 dwellings.
There's quite a way to go on this, and there's plenty of opportunity for others and possibly
the applicant now to, you know, consider those points as the scheme evolves.
For this particular sub -phase, I take the point, but I think, you know, we've got this to a point where I think it's wholly acceptable in accordance with the Outline Planning permission.
Yes, I won't go to questions.
Officer - 1:16:43
Thank you, Chair. Yes, I agree with Councillor Fowle, it's an interesting exercise to look at other developments that have recently been completed in the district,
and I've done that too and I think that's fed into our day -to -day negotiation on new schemes.
I wouldn't agree that this scheme is in any way pastiche.
It's one of those that's a careful balance really,
it carries forward elements of the Cotswold vernacular into slightly more contemporary homes.
You'll notice it's not fully detailed in a vernacular manner,
the windows are slightly larger, they're divided in different ways.
I mean they're quite pared down and simple.
There's an overall importance of calm fenestration,
but there's key elements that we haven't let go of,
given the sort of more traditional approach,
and that's the materials, the general built form,
the roof pictures, chimneys, and the size and placement
of openings with hierarchy of windows,
and other features like porches and boundary treatments
that bring the whole together
into the public realm successfully.
And we've come a long way with this particular scheme.
I think you see a certain number of iterations within the
application, but more substantially a pre -application
in working towards something we felt we could support in policy.
Thank you.
My final question.
Yes, of course.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:18:05
Officer - 1:18:07
Councillor David Fowles - 1:18:11
It relates to page 67 and the biodiversity gain.
Unless I'm misunderstanding it, it says the matrix indicates
that phase 2A is not capable of delivering biodiversity net gain
on site, which as a sort of layperson that suggests to me
that we're perhaps not planting as much as we could.
And some of the street scenes you were showing looked
particularly thin on the ground in my visit.
And then it then goes on to say 37 percent of the designated
main open green spaces and 12 and a half percent
of the overall outline planning commission site area.
Am I right in saying therefore that the gain is going to come
from the surrounding land as opposed to what's going on
in the development itself.
And in particular, I'll go back to the same point I'm making,
look at some of those other schemes that we've got out there
where some sensible planting over the next 10 to 15 years
really does enable the scheme to sort of settle in.
So are you happy that you've achieved the best balance
as the case officer in terms of biodiversity on the site?
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor.
Officer - 1:19:19
I mean, the answer to the question is yes.
I mean, I think I'd point back to my earlier slides that because this is a much smaller subphase,
so if, for example, we were dealing with the whole of phase two,
it might be more meaningful to look at the provision of open space based within it and then its overall contribution.
Because this is a much smaller subphase in the way the delivery's been broken down,
So it's 100 dwellings in this particular location on the
eastern edge, and because the red line has been drawn adjacent
to those primary green infrastructure areas, then the
particular given nature of this parcel means that there is less
opportunity to provide and less requirement to provide
on -site open space.
But there's no, but there's two different things here.
There's no shortage of open space within the settings
as a whole.
I think as I showed you before, 40 hectares of open space,
strategic park circling, the development, I think that's significant. In terms of
biodiversity net gain, again it's back to perhaps retaining the overall aspiration
of 10 % improvement on the site as a whole, but in the outline planning
permission and understanding and allowance that will be variation
depending back to the delivery strategy and each individual parcel. There will be
other parcels that come forward that will also struggle to achieve 10 % net
So, for example, when the neighbourhood centre comes
forward, if the line was drawn very tightly around that, that's
going to be buildings, not open space.
So you just have to sort of understand that in context
of the whole.
I think what's important that, so I think it's acceptable in
terms of this sub -phase, what we need to and what the applicant
and the project team are doing is continuing to monitor the
overall performance on biodiversity net gain against
that unilateral undertaking as part of the outline permission
to achieve 10 percent biodiversity net gain.
It wasn't regulation at the time.
So this is voluntary offer, if you like, from the applicant.
But there's the, and through BDL, the town developer.
So that commitment is still in place, but we need to see how
that plays out over time.
I don't think there's any particular issue
with this particular sub -phase, given the relatively small
nature of the parcel and its relationship
with the strategic open space.
I just add to that.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:21:40
We did, the nature of this development means we're getting sub -phases
and different parcels coming forward.
Last year, the year before, we did approve a reserve matters application
which was for the strategic landscape area.
Normally when you have an application like this,
you'd have it all coming together.
So you have your strategic green space, your housing parcels,
all of those, the nature of this, they've divided that up.
So we have to the south east and north of this parcel of land,
there is a strategic open space with a circular walking route it's already
actually already mostly in place the developers have done a lot of the part
of the planting and that that infrastructure side of things early so
whilst it's not present in here obviously it's a very tightly controlled
state and contained around the housing. Thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:22:24
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:22:28
Councillor Coleman. Thank you very much chair. First very minor point of the
I can't find a definition for FOG, though I can find it in capitals and also in lowercase.
Friends of somebody, I suppose.
Could you?
Flats over garages.
Oh, flats over garages.
What is it?
Flats over garages.
And actually, I'm very grateful to my colleague for raising the comparison with sites developed
in Cirencester in the last 15 years and slightly more recently in some cases, where there are
some flat survey garages I can't say that they look particularly successful
particularly if there's an entrance to a ground floor property underneath the
actual over build however it all depends on the location and again if our
developers have been could I just ask whether we know whether our developers
were actually taken see I say our developers the master developer
remember that phrase we're taking to see some of the things we'd like to avoid
in our more recent developments, particularly vast areas of tarmac.
And some of those parking courts in some of those areas work okay.
Some of the buildings are quite a bit higher than the ones coming here
because at least new, I think it was called Kingsville Meadow,
was built when there was a government decree that we had to make a certain target for higher density.
So the next question I want to ask is about the time this is all taking.
If we agree this today, we will have agreed 7 % of our 2 ,350 properties.
We won't have agreed anything about the school or the air, indeed the possible surgery, or the district centre, or the old people's flats.
We have done none of that and it is nearly 10 years since the application was submitted and it is nearly 7 years since it was approved.
My first question is really to Harrison as Chief. Do you think the slow progress is related
to the battle, the unnecessary battle that took place over the noise protection in the
previous phase where rather than listen to our officers we had to give a refusal and
the applicant was unsuccessful in appealing against that noise protection? Time and money
wasted on both sides. Are our relationships with the master developer good enough to avoid
any more wasted time and money like that?
Yes, they are. As part of, we have Julian here as case officer, but we have entered into a
planning performance agreement with the developers. This involves a fortnightly project meeting and
it's been incredibly constructive and a very positive relationship. The development I think
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:25:09
you're referring to is the employment area which was a separate developer or separate partner
developer, it wasn't related to the Homes England site and it wasn't keep mode so it is a separate
part of the scheme. Obviously it's unfortunate that ended up where it is and we couldn't find a
successful way through that but no I don't believe that is a cause for any significant delays.
I think unfortunately there is a variety of reasons whether it be the market whether it be
Covid which has happened since then. I think there's a variety of factors that have contributed
towards delays but I don't know, I don't think that particular application is one of them.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:25:44
Thank you very much indeed, Harrison. One of the reasons I asked that question was very
disappointing to see seven objections really from our conservation design team on page
31 and then a confirmation sort as the eighth point. It doesn't sound like people have been
listening to our conservation people. Why is that?
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:26:06
An ongoing quite interesting process. So I think it's been constructive and it's been
an ongoing discussion and dialogue.
So I think they have been listening.
But obviously for a developer it's
a case of delivering something they're comfortable with,
it meets their aspirations.
And then also finding a middle ground
that works with us as well.
So I think it's been identifying those key components
and what we are willing to move on and what we aren't.
I'll hand it over to Julian about some of the more
sort of iterative process.
Officer - 1:26:31
Well, I think back to in my experience
over the last 12 months, it's been very helpful
and constructive.
Hopefully I've managed to be part of that sort of support.
But what we've managed to do, and I think Laura referred to,
is also include other disciplines and offices
at pre -application stage.
So we're not pushing everything to the sort of towards the end
of that consideration period.
And those, and we've had sort of collaborative workshops
with the applicant.
We've had other offices and disciplines sat
around the table.
And that's entirely the right thing to do in my experience.
And it's been wholly constructive to do so.
And I would go as far to say that that's also very helpful
to the applicant, saves time, doesn't waste time,
and provides them direct feedback and potential solutions.
I mean, the fact that the report refers to those concerns,
you'd expect it to do so.
That's where we started.
And the report also refers to that those concerns
have been satisfied.
So as a process, in the way I've just described it,
it's been very successful.
I think you've heard that from the conservation officer
as well.
That's the right way to do it.
That's the way that I would work on other schemes nationally,
and that's the way I would propose it to you and other
members and other applicants on other schemes.
So I think working collaboratively as part of
planning for this agreement is the right way forward,
and BDL, Bathurst, and Anstel images are fundamental
and part of that process.
Thank you, do you have another question?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:27:55
Councillor Colle.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:27:58
Yes, I could think just one more, which is the next question
of garages and I'm so sorry I want to look at just you know I think of as our
guru on design and appearance. Chimneys were mentioned, chimneys that won't
actually be chimneys. That's doesn't feel like authenticity, I'm not well versed in
conservation or design speak but chimney things that pretend to be something else
not something you should do when you start at least. And we have garages in
in their millions, in their tens of millions in this country which don't have cars in because you can't fit a car in them.
And yet we still allow developers to build garages into which you certainly won't be able to put future cars in.
I was very relieved to see that there aren't that many garages in the pictures.
Why are there any given that nobody is going to be able to fit in an electric car in any of these garages?
Because this is a, you know, because of the design.
And do we not have a clear view?
Can I have a clear view from our conservation team about
whether garages that can't be used as garages should be in
or out of our recommended designs?
I can't.
Officer - 1:29:10
Hello, thank you.
I can't really comment on the individuals' use of garages,
but there are a number through the scheme,
but care was taken to in their placement,
so they're well pushed back with doors under the eaves.
they're designed to be recessive features,
so they don't impact too much upon the actual unit
design and streetscapes.
So I think care has been taken over their design.
I don't know whether you wanted me to comment on chimneys
as well.
I know I'd rather the chimneys were functional,
if I'm honest.
But I, again, can't insist upon that.
But I think even though this is a contemporary interpretation
of the vernacular, there's enough elements
of the vernacular in overall traditional aesthetic
whereby the units would look wrong without chimneys. They provide, they
finish those designs, they provide interest in roofscape and yes I'd rather
they were functional but they're not by still consider that important and
integral to the designs. Many television aerials these days will have. Thank you
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:30:11
very much. Thank you for your questions. Does anyone else want to ask a question?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:30:15
I wanted to ask a couple of things.
Where is it proposed that the vehicular access for deliveries
and also for waste will be into the parking and courts?
Or are you expecting that to be to the front of the house?
Because if you're hoping not to have vehicles parked to the front,
having the dustbin lorry, you know, stopping along the way,
or having the Ocado delivery or whatever stopping along the way
is a problem.
are you anticipating? There's no sort of swept path analysis type thing to show
Officer - 1:30:51
where you'd expect those vehicles to go. Chair, yes there is. There's a plan
showing a strategy for refuse collection which is partly approved plans which the
Highway Authority have looked at and are now happy with and they've that's been
in accordance with swept paths and tracking for refuse vehicles amongst
other things. So that's certainly been considered. I think in terms of
individual deliveries. I think there's only so much that planning can do and manage the way people live their lives and you probably wouldn't expect to
try and do everything because it'd be unenforceable anyway. I think the point is that the dwellings have
public accesses that they're accessible from
some of the streets and there are, these are residential streets and are suitable places for vehicles to stop and pause. In terms of the
apartments then clearly there are
designed areas of amenity and parking associated with those buildings. So I
wouldn't envisage just saying there's any other development, that there's any
particular issue on this scheme and you know the schemes been designed
accordingly really. Highway Authority are happy with it within terms of the
street widths and the junction designs and arrangements on that basis then you
know we would be happy to go forward. And the refuge strategy does make use of the
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:32:05
Officer - 1:32:06
larger parking core. That's great thank you very much and then the other thing is I
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:32:12
just wanted to ask about the Community Management Trust is that sort of a
something for the whole of the site presumably and does that involve
residents paying a maintenance fee or how does that work? Yes chair it is
Officer - 1:32:29
something which you might recall I mean it's quite important components of the
outline permission of having that trust in place,
and it's in its early stages and it will evolve over time.
And yes, there is an assumption.
I mean, the trust will take on board the future management of
some of those sort of public realm and amenities,
and there will be a contribution towards it.
But the alternative would be perhaps a series of private
management companies, which wouldn't be anywhere
near as good.
So I think that's my earlier points on the strengths of this
project in looking at the 10 developer model of having a CMT,
of having strategic infrastructure delivered
and managed as a whole is a much stronger one than having
a series of piecemeal developments come forward
with individual management companies, which I think
can be really quite difficult.
So I think there's an opportunity, and the council
and others, of course, are part of that consideration,
as Harry mentioned as well, in terms of continuing
to work collaboratively with BDL over time.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:33:27
If there's no other questions, we'll move on to comments.
Councillor David Fowles - 1:33:35
Firstly, Chairman, I would just like to perhaps apologise to the Conservation Officer. One
man's vernacular may be another man's pastiche, but I take the point. There was no criticism
implied to keep Moat Homes or Pegasus or any of our offices. It's just that I'm very conscious
of the fact, the main point I wanted to make, is that because we're having to build so many
houses in the Cotswolds and in our key city centre, key towns such as Sire and Cestor.
We're not just creating housing targets and house types, we're creating communities and
homes and I think we just need to bear that in mind.
When Julian, when you say it's only 100 houses and it's a phase, phase 2A, whatever, there
are villages in the Cotswolds which have less than 100, which are communities.
I can think of one I've been around recently with Rissington. I'm gonna get another I lived in, Driffield.
We are creating communities and homes for the future. So some of the comments that were made by the police I
found quite illuminating that they are, no pun intended,
that they are looking at communities, defensible space, buildings facing in.
I just think we need to be mindful when we're building a hundred houses, people have got to live in them and that we're creating communities.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:35:01
Okay, thank you. Sorry, Councillor Judd, I was looking to my colleague. Oh, thank you.
Councillor Julia Judd - 1:35:08
I just wanted to say that I just think people are different, everybody's
different. You know, the world is a massive tapestry of heights, shapes, types of
people and it was refreshing to see that in the plans where you've got different
heights and different textures with the buildings. And I think sometimes we've all been on these
housing estates whereby you say such and such a road, but you get lost because they all
look the same. And you can't even say turn left at the lamp post because every single
street has got a lamp post on the corner. So it helps that this is small and in a regular
shape. So I just thought I'd throw that in, the different heights and things and the different
the widths between the buildings as well, I thought was refreshing and you could see
a bit of light coming through some of those buildings, which I just thought that was respectful
really of the way people want to live. The other thing I wanted to mention was green
space in the corners and on the south and east. I'm just thinking of dogs. I'm not
asking for a question now, but they're a massively important part of people's lives,
especially in the countryside. This is the Edgesire ancestor and for many people that
is what they would call the countryside. So where are they going to walk their dogs? I
am not saying they have to walk them on those corners but thought needs to be given to that.
We didn't hear much about the village or community space or hall but that's going to be important.
If you are a family where are you going to have your children's party and have all your
friends. And the other thing was just it's just member of the public talking
about these aren't contemporary enough. I hope that member of the public has got a
background in planning and is not a fan of Gaudi or something like that. I mean
it's just that get those comments in perspective. This is Sire ancestor and
that building on Ashcroft Road a few years ago that went up I mean there was
an uproar about that for years and years and years and so I just be careful what
you wish for this is a quiet Cotswold market town and not not an exciting
Spanish metropolitan city where anything too bold would go down well. Thank you
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:37:41
that was very interesting comment councillor Caul. I think I'm actually just
Councillor Daryl Corps - 1:37:47
reiterating your point, did us about the importance of having a community trust.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:37:54
There's a lot of estates up in around Moreton in March, like my inbox is
Councillor Daryl Corps - 1:37:55
pretty much full most Monday mornings with mismanagement issues of dog poop
bins not being collected, grass not being cut, footpaths over being overgrown.
So I just hope that that is maintained through the next phases of the
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:38:17
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:38:20
of the Stedings development. Thank you. Councillor Bressington. This development is
really the first phase of the Stedings development for the main part of the
area so it's essential that we get it right. I'm still concerned about what the
police have said about the car parking courtyard. I'm still not in
of that. I think looking at the plans that the density is quite intense it all
seems to be crammed in. Regarding the lack of open space to say that's going
to be offset by having open space further off the site I just don't think
that's acceptable because how many people got to move that distance I think
there should be more open space on this site itself. Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:39:06
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:39:09
Councillor Coleman. I'd like to respond to that last point by Councillor Brassington
but also take the opportunity to try and move things on a little bit by proposing to accept
the officer's recommendations. If we look at page 69, it's in very small print, it's
that rather colourful picture, you can see that what we have here is a hundred homes
surrounded on three sides by substantial existing and future trees, pathways, bushes and no
doubt this is illustrative rather than precise. But one thing I'm confident about is that
it will be a pleasant place to live because you'll never be more than about 50 yards from
trees, paths, bushes and okay not countryside but something close to it. So
it's just an accident to where the red line was drawn. It could have been drawn
and all that grass and trees shown on page 69. But yes I'm not with a huge
amount of enthusiasm but I have been very impressed by the persistence and
and listening perhaps of the applicants and certainly the skill and
professionalism of our officers. So I think given that it would be awful to
delay progress on the site any more than it's already been delayed, let us agree
today the officers recommendations. Thank you. Thank you very much Councillor
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:40:37
Councillor Ian Watson - 1:40:41
Watson. Thank you chair. I would like to echo Councillor Coleman's points about
our officers. I think there's been a lot of work done here and a lot of good work
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:40:57
and I would like to second this proposal. Councillor Fowle are you going to office a
second as well or if you got some other comment. Thank you very much. Could you
could you tell us exactly what you wanted to put in about the delegation in order for us to
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:41:14
proceed to vote? So we mentioned to start but it was just for officers assuming officers are
sorry members are happy with it we will obviously recommend to go with officer's recommendation to
approve but we would like delegated authority just to tidy up and tweak some of the conditions just
to ensure approved plans are absolutely accurate tidy up some of the wording of those amended ones
we wouldn't change them or make them deviate from what we've put in front of you but it is just a
If members are happy we would like delegates for authority granted to us so we can just
make sure they are right before we issue any decision.
Plus heat pumps.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 1:41:41
We did say plus heat pumps.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 1:41:45
Did we want, well obviously it would be up to Councillor Coleman whether he wants to
include it in his recommendation, but did we want to amend condition 13 with regard
to including reference to the delivery of or a strategy of where heat pumps and solar
panels will be placed within the development or are we happy that a condition requiring
compliance effectively with the submitted energy statement is sufficient.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:42:08
On the one hand I'm speaking to with a colleague here who understands this
stuff rather better than we do because it was part of his professional work
before he retired. On the other hand I can see that you can be over specific
and as I understand it in very broad terms and this is almost a question. What
What we're seeking to do is guarantee energy efficiency down at a really low base of use
of power, of use of electric.
It was actually a huge success, I wish I'd mentioned it, to persuade Bathurst Developments
not to put gas in.
On the other hand, we didn't persuade them to put solar panels on all of their first
mini -phase, the 69, which are now all occupied.
So we've made progress in a number of ways.
So I'm not certain that we need to say yes every house must have a heat pump,
every flat, every apartment or whatever of all designs, just in case that proves to be over prescriptive.
So I guess I need to ask a question which is, is it can we actually
rely on a measure of heat of energy efficiency
to be achieved and to be proven as an alternative to saying there's got to be
a heat pump in every house.
Officer - 1:43:29
Chair Fisley, I think just to clarify all houses will have an air source heat
pump in this development so that's already been stated it's part the
application and the applicants confirmed it. What the condition, the
recommended revision was was just to have further detail in terms of where
sensible placement of photovoltaic panels should take place.
I won't repeat what I said earlier, but it might not be suitable for every single house
because of the orientation with the passage of the sun.
But just take as a given, and it will also be subject to other regulation,
every house will have an air source heat pump.
There's no referring back to it.
So, for example, it's a bit like saying,
can you put a condition on that every house will have a roof?
I don't think you need to do it, for obvious reason.
I don't think we need a condition saying every house will have an air source heat pump. They will.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:44:22
Thank you. In that case, Councillor Coleman, are you happy that we go to the vote based on the fact that
our officers are able to make minor tweaks to the conditions? And you're happy to second that? Absolutely. Okay, in that case we're now going to
vote on to approve
the reserve matter subject to the conditions
and allowing delegated authority to our offices
to make minor tweaks to the conditions.
Is it worth taking a break now?
Yes.
That's great.
Thank you very much.
So that application is approved by seven votes for and one abstention.
So we've now been going for an hour and three quarters.
Would you like to take a comfort break now or to move on?
Okay.
10 minutes max.
We'll be back here at five to four.
Sorry, five minutes? Come back as soon as you can.

9 25/02763/REM - Chesterton Farm

Thank you very much. Thank you for your patience and waiting for us to have a comfort break.
This may be quite a long discussion.
So, I have just been asked to clarify about the membership of the planning committee.
We're normally 10, aren't we? Is that right? 11. We're normally 11. So, one person is off
sick at the moment, Councillor Bridges, and then we're missing two people, Councillor
Wilkinson who's resigned and Councillor McLean who has left the council and there is a by -election
coming up in the Rislington. So until the memberships, we're not a political committee.
We don't vote by political party. We have a completely free decision between each of
the members. The way we're sitting reflects the fact that this is not a party political
committee. However, the seats are allocated per party and until we have the new by -election
with a new member, we don't know who is going to have
that seat and we're also waiting for a replacement
for Councillor Wilkinson.
So we're eight people today rather than 11,
but the quorum for the planning committee is three.
So we are perfectly quarant, but that's just to clarify
why we're perhaps slightly shorter of members today
than you would expect.
Is that okay?
So now we are moving on to our next application.
So there are two associated applications coming up,

10 25/02175/FUL Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Agenda Item 10 and Agenda Item 11.
Agenda Item 10 is for the erection of three new
structures and associated landscaping to provide
additional spa facilities and hotel accommodation at
time Southrop Estate offices.
And then the second application is a listed
building application because one of the buildings affected is a listed building
so the second extension second agenda item 11 is erection of glazed
extension to curtilage listed building at the time Southrop State Office etc
so we have to take those two applications separately because one is
a full application consent and the other is a listed building application
consent. But as they are both related, I'm going to ask the public speakers if they would
like to speak on both applications at the same time. So you have the option of speaking
for three minutes on each application or if you prefer to have six minutes, which you
can present up front before this application. I think that's the thing that would be preferred.
Does anyone have a disagreement with that? Okay I'll call you forwards.
So just to continue our case officer is Amy Hill and the wood
counsellor is Councillor David Fowles and after our case officer has done the
presentation I'll call the public speakers forwards and you'll each have
six minutes to speak. Amy, could you do an update for us now? Thank you.
Officer - 1:49:20
Thank you, Chair. So we've had a couple of further comments during your late pages.
There's a letter of comment and support as well as a further objection received
in those late pages and there's also additional information received from the
agent with some public footpath viewpoints and photo montages. Those are
actually on the slides themselves so I'll show those in a moment. In addition
that we're having a number of correspondence received from third
parties who have advised that they couldn't attend today but that they
should that they're still objecting over they reiterated their objection to the
application as the applications one that we saw last month I will go through this
relatively quickly as we're hopefully familiar with it following the site
visit as well so the sites outlined in red so it's in the Southrop conservation
area near a number of listed buildings and to the south our fields which are
have the public rights of ways through that we walked as part of that site visit.
I should say the time is a restaurant hotel area so it's comprising
of a number of listed barns that were converted as part of that development
and this is an extension to those providing additional bedrooms and
providing additional bedrooms and also some sparse facilities.
Sorry, I think people are struggling, so I'll lean in.
So just to show a picture of the scenario view of the site,
so you can see the car park where we met on site,
sort of the south of the screen, the barns,
or the converted barns north of that,
that form the main part of the hotel,
and then our site off the left.
Zooming in a little bit, you can see sort of where the swimming pool is to the north
and pool house and the existing buildings to the right sort of used by the hotel.
To the left is the Dovecock, Dovecock barn and its ancillary structure sort of adjoining
onto the site and then just the north of that Neiman's house which are both Grade 2 listed.
Also included here is some maps from the Tyth maps, so in the 1840s and then the first Depotch
maps just to show how the site and surrounding boundaries have changed in that time.
And then back to Fochgossal site.
I'll go through this relatively quickly as people are hopefully familiar with it, but
that's looking in from the south, so fields in the public right of way towards the site
in front of us and then Dovecot to the left of us,
or to the left of the screen.
And then just sort of turn slightly
so the site's directly to the front,
but you're still seeing a side of Dovecot on the left.
And these are from the field to the south of the site.
Then further, that you're sort of directed more towards
the time complex with the site just on the left hand
part screen as we go around,
hopefully the arrow directing.
And then just to give a context of where sort of the site is
of what you're looking out to in terms of fields or where you'd be looking directly
from the site to the site for the public rights away along here. Just a couple of those images
around. That's on the poet right away so you've got Dovcott directly in front of you and then
the site on the other side of the wall to the right hand side of the screen. And then
just to go through the development itself so you can see sort of the site plan here
So that main area is where sort of the main part of the site
and then that little up to the north.
So that part there is a relaxation room.
That's the part that also needs listed building consent
because this building here is considered to be
curtly listed to the lodge.
You've got sparse facilities here and a yoga studio,
sort of say wellness centre.
And then the area to the right hand side of the screen.
So that's actually the south
are where the proposed bedrooms would be,
which can be slightly illustrated.
You can see that the majority of the site
or the proposals are single storey only
with the exception of the bedroom to the north,
that's right, bedroom to the east.
So it's the top of the screen,
which is proposed to be sort of a one and a half,
two storey structure.
And then on this plan,
you can see better the actual prose layout
with the bedrooms, yoga studio, some spa facilities,
and a relaxation room.
Just have some elevations through the site.
So if you were standing at the park on the east,
looking towards the west, you'd be looking sort of,
so you're looking towards Dovecot,
would be in the background,
and you can see a cut through of where the hotel,
so the bedrooms would be, the yoga rooms and spa area.
And then the relax, so this is the section
that were taken from sort of horizontally through the site.
So you've got the curtlish listed, build the cottage to the side with the relaxation room
and then the spa building and sort of cut a section through the yoga studio.
And then we're taking from the south facing up towards, so these are the hotel rooms.
So your single storey one closest to the Dovecot and then a two storey or one and a half storey
closer to the Time Hotel.
And then just take it from the other side. So if you were signing in the site now looking out,
this would be the image you'd see of those two of that building. And then the end gave
all the elevations of that two and a half storey section mainly, and also the side of the single
storey. And then we move on to the wellness studio. As you can see on screen, that's that bit just
there with the yoga studio with glazing facing in towards the site and gable end.
And then the rear of it, so this is side facing towards Dovecote, is the blank elevation.
And then we're looking at the spa room.
So we're actually looking at the internal elevations, you can see, of those spa buildings
with the glazing and sort of more contemporary design.
and then the rear, so this one sort of on that boundary with Dovcutt and Newman's house
with the high -level windows rather than the full amount of glazing as per the previous side,
and then just the part which sort of faces on towards where the yoga studio is.
And then the relaxation room attached to the listed building and the opening up through there.
And took elevations off of that relaxation room.
These are the photo montages sent in by the agent.
So it's a bit of a spot the difference in the background there.
So just to give an intro, that's the Devcourt in front of us and we've got the site in there.
So that's where they've proposed the additions.
We're showing the additions just in the background.
And again, we've come in slightly closer, so we're looking for the buildings here.
You can see them added in and taken along the boundary and then with those buildings
in there.
And that's all.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you very much.
Can I ask the public speakers to come forward?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 1:56:26
So for the Town and Parish Council, Councillor Timothy Ghez.
The objectors for the objectors, Jonathan Turnack. You are representing a large number
of objectors, some of whom cannot be here today, so you have a very important role.
The supporter, Kirsty Wills. Thank you. And the applicant, Kamala Hibbert. Are you all
happy to do your six minutes in one go rather than two separate blocks? Okie dokie. So my
colleague will be timing you. So you have six minutes. Can I ask a Councillor
Timothy Guest to kick off? Thanks. I've been on the Southrop Parish Council now
Town/Parish Council - 1:57:28
for 14 years and Chairman for the last six. I apologise for being unable to
attend your last meeting on the 10th of December last year but would like to
thank Cathy Brickley for doing that in my place and delivering the parish council's
statement. I should like to confirm that this statement was carefully considered by all
the parish councillors and represented our unanimous view then and still does now, since
we think little if anything has changed. So rather than repeating or trying to summarise
it, the points made previously, I would therefore commend this statement as the best summary
of the Parish Council's position.
Site inspection.
We are of course aware that the committee unanimously decided to hold a site inspection
last week.
We are pleased that they did so because we think that the proposal is quite complex.
Almost 30 documents accompanied the original application and we think it's difficult to
form a view on the scheme just from plans and drawings without a site inspection.
However, we were of course not allowed to attend the site inspection nor discuss it
with those who did.
So we don't know what conclusions may have been reached.
Rationale of the proposal.
Times Design, Access and Heritage statement made as part of their planning application
makes it very clear that their main purpose is to increase room numbers.
Quotes, rooms are our main source of revenue.
unquote. The point is also made that the running costs are high and that the model is, quotes,
small footfall and high spend per head rather than low spend, high footfall, end quote.
So the aim is to spread the cost of 138 staff over a larger number of rooms and try to achieve
better occupancy, especially during winter months. This is all perfectly sensible and
and understandable of course.
Many of us on the parish council have had careers in business,
so well understand and sympathise with the commercial pressures
of trying to run a successful enterprise such as Time.
I myself work as a company commercial solicitor,
then as an investment banker in the city.
I can't think of a much more commercial environment than that.
So I think three questions arise here, three key questions.
One, Time's ambition to expand and run a more profitable business with the local employment
benefits which are to be welcomed is perfectly legitimate. At what point, though, should
that ambition be tempered by villagers' equally legitimate concerns that the business is starting
to intrude unduly on their lifestyles and enjoyment of a peaceful and beautiful environment?
49 villagers who posted objections on the CDC portal clearly believe that that point
is now. That is a high number given that there are only 127 homes in the village.
Two, what protection is really offered by conservation area and listed building status
if a new build project like this is allowed in the centre of the village alongside Grade
two listed buildings and quite close to our grade one listed church. We have been
asked this question by many villagers. The answer to both questions of course
is a judgement call that CDC must make.
Third question, if the project proceeds can some of the concerns raised be
mitigated by design changes and clear and enforceable conditions such as
imposing some restriction on further development and ensuring minimal
disruption and access issues during the building works. This has always been the
parish council's position. We do not oppose in principle but we do seek
mitigation. Finally I should like to thank the Planning and Licencing Committee for
considering this application at the highest level within CDC and for
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:01:39
arranging the site inspection. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now can I ask Mr.
Objector - 2:01:45
Turnock to speak. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before the Planning
Committee again. To briefly reintroduce myself, I am Dr. Jonathan Turnock, an
Associate Heritage Consultant at Pegasus Group and a full member of the
Institute of Historic Building Conservation. I'm speaking again today
on behalf of Sue Dale and Julian Gleek, the owners and residents
of Grade 2 listed Dovecote, formerly known as Price's Barn.
I've previously set out my concerns regarding the proposed development
in formal representations to officers and at the last committee meeting.
I greatly appreciate these professional views being taken into account.
In light of the committee site visit made last Wednesday
and the new viewpoint photo montages submitted by the applicant,
I did want to clarify three points which are the issues of visual impact, design and proximity of development to listed buildings.
The three submitted photo montages demonstrate the development will be readily perceived from the historic public footpath to the south.
My concern is that the viewpoints have been curated to show the development in the best possible light,
particularly from vantage points where there is intervening vegetation.
There are numerous other viewpoints where the site and the development will be seen
much more clearly.
I presented two examples in my letter to officers dated the 21st of August, 2025, in which you
can see full extent of the site directly in conjunction with neighbouring listed buildings.
If photo montages had been produced for these views, the negative visual impact of the development
would be very much evident.
In my professional view, it's the substantial hotel
accommodation block proposed south of the spa buildings,
which will have the greatest visual impact.
This block will fill the open end of the field.
The photo montages submitted by the applicant demonstrate
the flat roof and large expansive glazing will be
readily perceived by people walking the open
countryside to the south.
The visual impact will be exacerbated at night due to
light spill from the many glazed openings.
Officers have described the development as being low density, visually permeable and
capable of sustaining the soft and broken edge of the village.
This assessment does not hold up to scrutiny.
The development is tightly clustered and overly dense when compared to the surrounding buildings.
The accommodation block in particular will create a hard built edge to what is currently
an important open green gap and it will obscure views of the village from the public footpaths.
It is concerning how close development will be to the greater list of buildings,
Newman's House and the Dovecote. The new yoga studio will be positioned less than two metres,
1 .85 metres to be precise from the living accommodation of the Dovecote.
This living accommodation is a converted agricultural building dating from the 1800s.
You will have seen during the site visit and from the photo montage submitted by my clients
that the hotel accommodation block will dominate the skyline when viewed from the dovecoat,
as it is over three times the height of the existing boundary wall.
In my professional opinion, it can only be reasonably concluded that the development
will have a permanent and harmful impact on the significance of the conservation area
and would also harm the significance of Grade 2 listed the dovecoat, Grade 2 listed Newman's house,
House, and potentially also greatly listed, Southern Up Lodge.
I have explained the reasons for this in my previous representations to officers.
The magnitude of heritage harm would therefore be considerably greater than that identified
by officers, who have suggested that there would only be extremely limited harm to one
asset, the conservation area.
I would therefore respectfully urge the committee to refuse the development based on harm to
significance of the southern conservation area and listed buildings within.
To summarise, this harm would arise from firstly the loss of an important green gap within
the conservation area, secondly the negative visual impact of the development on significant
views, thirdly the density, design and materiality of the new buildings, especially the hotel
accommodation block, fourthly the immediate proximity of development to nearby listed
buildings, especially the Dovecote, Newman's House and Kircher's listed buildings.
And fifthly, the loss of legibility of the historic functional link between the open
land and the adjacent listed buildings.
Consequently, there is clear and convincing justification for refusing the applications,
because the development would be contrary to the 1990 Planning Act, Section 16 of the
and policies EN1, EN10 and EN11 of the local plan. Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:06:50
Thank you very much. Now, can I ask the supporter, Kirsty Wills, to speak for up to six minutes?
Good afternoon. My name is Kirsty. I'm a resident of Southrop and I also run a local business
in Lechlade where we have 42 employees. We've lived in Southrop itself for coming up 10
years. I've been going to the pub with friends for over 20 years and my husband grew up in
Supporter - 2:07:16
Lechlade. So my husband and I, and now our young family, have been around throughout
the growth of time, including the opening of the Ox Barn and the changes to the pub.
I run a lot, walk our dogs, our children, and I ride our children's ponies through the
village multiple times a week.
Visitors to Time have to pass my clothes just off of
Lechelade Road to reach the Time driveway.
In all these years of running, walking, and riding,
there is genuinely so few cars that would pull into Time,
and certainly not speeding, as most of the time they're
looking at the lovely properties and or looking
lost seeking the entrance.
Visitors are always smiling at my countryside children,
dogs, and ponies, and it feels a privilege to be in the
village and think, yes, we actually live here.
And yes, Time have bought some cottages in the village,
but I'd rather have grateful visitors in a few cottages or the hotel than second homeowners
who fly in and out at weekends like they are in the village and look down on us.
We as a family use the pub every week. All of my school parent friends and all of my
family have used time in one way or another regularly. They probably haven't all had the
time to comment on this planning application, but knowing my local friends with local businesses
and customers of my own thriving business, I know they'd be in support.
I have been to this bar multiple times and although I don't eat at the Ox Bar as often
as I'd like, mainly because of lack of time with young family.
In all honesty, it is good value for an exceptional menu and really spoiling to have on our doorstep.
The staff are amazing and nothing seems too much trouble, so how lucky we are.
As a local business owner and someone who tries to look at things personally from a
helicopter perspective, what I see is a family -owned business in our village who have created a
really beautiful space and whom want to develop it further.
I assume to make their business sustainable year round.
From the staff I have frequently met, it is clear they have retained long -standing year -round
staff. If you are an employer, you need diversity and growth in your business to sustain the
quieter months and maintain or grow with your competitors. The new spa facility seems an
ideal way to quietly improve the facilities on offer. I don't know the Hibbert family
personally but felt driven to offer support for what is a wonderful local business and
a real asset to Southrop, including the value of my home and that supporting voice has not
properly being represented.
Saying that time is not really aimed at locals is not
representative either.
They provide not only direct employment but likely use local
suppliers, support local charity and support indirect employment
of the electrician or the plumber, the self -employed
artist or my nursery mum friend selling her pre -loved clothing
at the local Christmas fair.
There is no end to opportunities for local people,
but the reality is that the business has to be sustainable.
For this reason, I asked to see the detailed plans and spent
time looking at these as well as understanding why the business
needs the facilities that it will to gain from this application. Looking at the
design with the field where it lays, I appreciate it is
neighbouring to the Dovecote which also has a beautiful south facing view but on
the spa side it is really unimposing from what I can see on the visuals. The
neighbouring gardens will be beautiful, the buildings in keeping aesthetically
with our villages heritage and it would be quiet because it's a spa. People are
simply there to relax.
There could be much worse uses to develop, such as sports
facilities, children's play areas, a music concert hall.
Looking at capacity and bearing in mind that I have 250 car
movements up a single track driveway at our own business
within an hour.
In Southrop, riding our ponies through the village is a
priority for me.
But the extra rims and spa doing the math simply will not
increase traffic significantly.
We'd be better off, for example, targeting a band
through the village on riot weekend.
And remember, time is not a members only club like Estelle Manor, Bamford and Soho Farmhouse.
I can take my mum for a drink or a spa day. I can walk across the land. They have improved over time.
And I hope my children will have their first job in the village where we live, as so many other families have.
And not for working for some multi -billionaire who flies in and occasionally in a helicopter.
We all know of Gerry, Karen, Millie and Charlie.
So how heartwarming to have this family providing this beautiful escape a place where our well -being and our mental health could be benefited
I understand that Jerry is also involved with the church and time has been fundamental to village or school fundraising
And I've seen Jerry himself out litter picking
with time as this
Non -exclusive family owned and diverse business in a beautiful location for villagers to use will only benefit our houses
for our house prices for our children who inherit or our children's children.
The reality, my strong opinion, is that the benefits far outweigh the low
impact on some visibility from some already beautiful homes who look onto
other beautiful fields and the low likelihood of a few more car movements.
I think of it this way, the Hibbert families have invested in the landscape
over the last 10 years and have been here have turned a horse yard from
muddy fields into beautiful grazing parkland. They have small events not
regular huge weddings or festivals which are loud late at night which many other venues
will push for. The Hibbits live here in Southrop themselves. If we want that kind of positive
sense sensitive investment to continue we have to support the future of it because not
all owners would take this approach. As I say from an outsider's point of view it does
look like the owners have been considerate, sympathetic and sensitive to the area's heritage.
I'm speaking today as a local business owner and resident.
Running a rural business right now is hard and it is of utmost
importance to retain value in our homes as an asset.
The economic climate is challenging but we ought to
protect local employment and avoid closures and redundancies
our local economy.
The written objections, albeit valid, are not significant in
numbers versus the actual very busy local people that truly
benefit from time and who I genuinely believe would support
the application. We are known to be a nation better at complaining than we are
at praising or writing to support campaigns. I do hope you feel that you
can support your officers recommendation and allow this beautiful well -managed
business to continue contributing positively to our village of Southrop.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:13:27
Thank you very much. Can I ask Camilla Hibbert to speak?
Supporter - 2:13:32
Good afternoon and thank you for allowing me to speak again today.
Applicant/Agent - 2:13:35
I'd also like to thank those members who were able to attend the site visit.
I hope you enjoyed your walk around time.
By way of a reminder, my name is Millie Hibbert.
I'm the General Manager of Time and my family have lived in Southwark for nearly 25 years.
Over that time, we have restored the derelict farmstead into what is now an important rural business.
Keeping listed buildings alive and useful is something we take seriously and something we are incredibly proud of,
particularly given the challenges facing rural hospitality today.
As I explained at the last hearing, the winter months are by far the hardest.
Our occupancy drops sharply from around 80 % in peak season to 30%.
For the business to remain healthy and to continue supporting local employment,
we need greater year -round resilience.
Having consulted hospitality experts and undertaken extensive industry research,
It is clear that hot spa facilities are the single biggest driver of off -season demand.
Market data shows that hotels with strong wellness offerings
significantly outperform those without,
turning a full facility spa from a nice addition into a primary reason to travel in poor weather months.
As I have previously explained to the parish council, this also lengthens guest stays,
which in turn has a positive impact on traffic as longer stays reduce arrivals.
This approach directly supports the Council's green economic growth strategy,
improving the quality of tourism, increasing visitor spend outside peak periods and strengthening the resilience of the local economy.
The context for this is important. In 2025, the UK saw
570 pubs and restaurants close with the majority in rural areas.
Since 2020, food and non -alcoholic drink costs have risen 37%, far outpacing general inflation.
We're seeing increases in taxes, business rates and labour costs.
Against this backdrop, maintaining a viable rural business is increasingly challenging.
Time has to adapt and evolve to survive, and year -round occupancy is critical to this.
At time, we generate an annual payroll of over three million pounds.
Our workforce is drawn entirely from the local area, Sotherup, and yes, neighbouring villages
and towns such as East Leach, Consem -Albourn, Lechlade and Fairford.
That represents a direct and meaningful contribution to the local economy and the local community.
Having identified the urgent business need to increase winter occupancy and to increase
our length of stay year -round, we have worked with your planning officers to create a scheme
that delivers the business solutions but also that is in a position to be recommended for approval.
To summarise the planning merits, your natural built and historic environment team manager
has confirmed they have no objections and recommend approval. Your environmental health
officer has recommended conditions including those to manage plant noise. Noting that we
We already operate a silent plant room on site,
and indeed we assume the dove pit next door does too
for their own pool.
But with these conditions in mind,
they recommend approval.
Your principal highway development officer confirmed
there would be no unacceptable highway
or congestion impacts,
and that there are no justifiable grounds for objection
and recommend approval.
Historic England deferred to your specialist offices
and confirmed there was no need for further consultation.
Your conservation officer concluded that the proposals are acceptable.
They would sustain the significance of the Sotherup conservation area
and would not harm the setting of nearby listed buildings.
They recommend approval and gave a robust defence of their view at last month's committee.
At the committee, the conservation officer was clear that this site sits within a soft edge of settlement context,
where sensitive low -scale development is acceptable in principle.
The paddock is not an significant open green space.
It is enclosed on three sides and reads as part of a low -density rural transition zone,
not an important green corridor.
There is no evidence of a direct functional relationship between the paddock and the adjacent listed buildings,
and the proposal does not sever them from the wider countryside.
As the area is already designated for hotel use, there is no planning change.
In terms of visibility, the development cannot be seen from any public road.
It is not visible from Blisted Building, Southernate Lodge or Newman's House.
It is visible from part of the Southern Footpath, but it's set back across the paddock and screened by Stonewalling and Hedge Rose.
It is visible from the Dovecote's pool area, but mainly in winter, with summer tree cover nearly entirely
screening views and the roof apex
underneath the high hedge line as shown in previously submitted visuals.
In summary, this application is low impact, well considered and
sympathetic to its surroundings.
It meets officers' approval following a constructive dialogue with your experts.
It is in keeping with the character of the conservation area and is sympathetic to the
setting of the list of buildings, and it represents a crucial investment in the long -term sustainability
of a local rural business.
I am proud of what has been created at the time, and I very much hope to be the custodian
of its sensitive, sustainable development for a long time to come.
And I hope that you will feel able to support your recommend it your officers recommendation today
Thank you very much
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:19:43
Thank you with the speakers like to return to their seats and
Councillor Fels, would you like to come forward you have ten minutes to speak?
Ten minutes.
If you need it.
Ward Member - 2:20:37
So I thought I'd sit in the middle rather than be sidelined.
Good afternoon members and members of the public.
I'd like to thank the planning review panel for agreeing to refer the application to the
committee originally for determination, recognising the officer's recommendation to permit and
of course, the long dialogue and pre -application that had taken
place with Time and their agents.
I'd also like to thank the residents of Southrop, many of
whom who are here today for their patience, and for several
people who were unable to come today who, for the first time in
my experience, actually wrote letters of apology saying they
couldn't be here because there would be an awful lot more
people here today.
As we've already heard, the number was actually now 50
residents, not 49, who have objected, which represents about
40 percent of the village.
However, I have to acknowledge that 36 people have also written
letters of support.
As you heard previously, quite a few of those people, quite
rightly, are employees and their views we have to take
account of.
In addition, recently you have read that a third -party
representation has been received by an associate heritage
consultant, objecting because of the concerns about the potential impact of the development
on the heritage asset.
At the last committee meeting on the 10th of December, the committee voted unanimously
to hold an all -members site meeting, which took place last week.
The applicant very kindly arranged not only for the site meeting, but also for a 3D model
and photographs of the application site, which really brought it to life compared with the
documentation that we have received today. I'd just like to clarify for the
members of the public that the applicant, their agents and members of staff were
not present at the site meeting so it was only us as a committee with our
officers who attended the site meeting. And I know that we've received
requests from the objectors that the application site was viewed from the
public rights -of -way and neighbouring properties and I would urge you members
when we look at the comments that were made, or are going to be made about the site meeting,
that you also look at the photographs that were submitted by a member of the public to
get a real feel for the impact of this site. On the day, the committee who attended the
sites meeting decided that they would really only need to view the site from the site,
and they decided on the day not to actually go to the neighbouring properties, although
we were invited by neighbours to go and look at the property, to look at the site from
their properties. But it was the decision of the committee, not the officer or me, to
basically stay in the field and look at the site and look at the rights of way.
Running in parallel with the application, I'd also like to thank the applicant for the
way in which they've started to engage with the parish council, covering issues to do
with the events that they put on,
delivery vehicles, and you've heard from Millie,
a member of the family, that there is positive engagement
now between the village and the parish council
and indeed the applicant.
I don't propose to restate the comments that
are made by the parish council, the supporter, the objectors,
and so on.
And I thought the speakers today gave you
a very balanced view of the two sides of the argument.
I would, however, like to summarise the issues.
Firstly, the Objectives have made it clear that they acknowledge the achievements of
time and they recognise the contribution that it makes to their community.
You've heard from the applicant and you've read previously that the applicant moved to
Southrop in 2002 and then started to restore the buildings in 2007.
And the advantage we had of going over the site was we didn't just see the application
site.
A number of us commented on how wonderful the buildings were that had been converted
over time, no pun intended. So we've got an internationally renowned restaurant,
cookery school and hotel in an old manor house and associated farm buildings and
this has been developed over the last 18 years and I'd like to acknowledge the
contribution of Councillor Ray Theodolio, my predecessor, who worked closely with
the parish council and the applicant to undertake sensitive and create and
creative conversions of the buildings and this is acknowledged by the parish council and indeed up to this application
It's been broadly very supportive of time
But this application is for new buildings in open countryside, which is very different to previous applications. I
Think we also have to acknowledge the contribution that time makes to the local economy and the wider economy
employing over 138 people and
and we acknowledge that they don't all live in Southrop,
they live in GL7 so they could be as far away as Syrinsester,
but there's no doubt that it obviously makes a contribution to the economy.
Time have stated in their applications in order for them to compete at the top end of the market,
particularly in the winter months, this application is vital.
Time have also stated that they have regular customers who live locally,
but this is not their core business.
On the Time website, as I commented on before, Time states that,
"'Time is a restored Cotswold manor and farm. It is a family storey where a passion for the land, food, and entertaining merge with a love of local heritage, beauty, and conservation.'"
And this is sort of the tilted balance that we're used to referring to.
The community and the parish council feel that this is the nub of the problem.
Southrop is a small Cotswold village that you had the opportunity of visiting.
It has a very large, very successful business right smack bang in the middle of it.
There are 125 dwellings in the village and over 50 residents have commented on it.
So that's getting on for 50 % of the village are concerned about this.
And their comments are detailed on pages 84, 85 and 86 of this report.
They cover areas such as overdevelopment, harm to the Cotswold national landscape, noise,
light pollution, concern over future expansion, impact on creating a village within a village,
concern over historical compliance of previous applications, concern that there was no public
engagement, concern over loss of open countryside, impact on the amenity, and so on.
It also has to be acknowledged that there are 36 letters of support.
And I thought the speaker today, the supporter there,
spoke very well about time as a business.
And these comments really do differ very markedly from the
comments from residents.
They're focusing on job creation,
on support for the rural economy, and so on and so forth,
all of which we acknowledge the need for continued investment
and growth.
But this has to be weighed against the impact of this site
in that location on the amenity and the national landscape.
The Parish Council's comments are detailed in the report.
The Parish Council and I fully recognise the efforts made by the applicant
to mitigate the impact of the development on the immediate neighbours.
The Parish Council detail their concerns on highway safety and speeding and so on.
The village is used as a cut -through but that's not totally attributed to time, but it is a factor.
The parish council are concerned about the impact of this development on the area on listed buildings and the wider
conservation area in the open countryside.
The principal objectors Sue Dale and Julian Glieck have employed an expert who spoke very well about the impact and focused very
heavily on the harm this scheme will have to the grade two listed buildings, the Dovcutt Newman's house and potentially
Southrop Lodge. The proposed development will remove a vital and historic open
field between the farmstead and adjacent buildings. Members, this is a very finely
balanced application and for me personally it's a very difficult one
because I'm also a member of the committee. It is one thing to hear the
speakers, to read the reports and to see the photographs. It was quite another for
you to be able to go over and see the proposed scheme in its setting. I'm
the site meeting last week and to hear whether you members support the views
expressed by the parish council and the objectives that this application will
cause potential harm to the conservation area and surrounded listed buildings and
impacts on the amenity enjoyed by the neighbouring residents and wider
community. Mindful of the tilted balance does this does the potential harm outweigh
the benefits of this application? Thank you very much.
Thank you very much, Councillor Fowles.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:29:34
David.
Sorry?
How many bucks have I got?
It's still President's trade.
Great. Thank you very much. So I'm going to move on to ask people who attended the site
inspection briefing to say, give their comments. Before I do that, has everybody had a chance
to review the additional pages? We were sent them out by email, so you've had the opportunity
to see the photos, montages, and so you've all had enough time to look at that. Great.
In that case I'm going to move on to ask people who were at the site inspection briefing to make their comments.
Council Farrs, did you want to say anything else about the briefing?
Councillor David Fowles - 2:30:37
Having just spoken Chairman, I'd like to conclude my presentation.
I'd like to hear the views of those members who went and then I'll make my comments if I may at the end.
If you don't object to that, thank you.
I would also just like to say it's very sad.
I understand that certain members of the committee weren't able to attend.
I know they had other commitments, which is unfortunate because I think Councillor Judd
spoke very well at the last meeting, she always does, saying I don't really understand this
until I actually go and see it.
So I do think the importance of the members who went to sites is very, very important
to this application.
Thank you.
Yeah, I agree.
It was a very useful visit and I shall make my own comment in the end.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:31:14
But there were six of us there, which is quite a good turnout.
So Councillor Coleman.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 2:31:24
Yes, thank you, Chair. A great opportunity to visit a really rather special place, it
seemed to me, a little while since we've been there on a previous planning application issue
in the earlier days of time. The landscape was, is quite high but flat in sort of upper
Thames I think overall. I don't look up what the landscape characterisation was but it's
very gentle slopes and the buildings stand clear and you can begin to understand how
to read the buildings in terms of their respective age and how the agriculture and other businesses
more recently was carried out. Another interesting point was how well used the footpaths were
I was glad we took the opportunity to walk some of the way along the footpath and look
back at the site.
And overall, I can certainly come to the view in agreement with the local member that this
is a finely balanced approach.
I also think it's a model in the way both the opponents and the proposers have dealt
with their differences in a very civilised and traditionally British way.
So now I sound like an old buffer myself, I suppose I am.
It's because you are.
Yes, thank you.
Young fella.
Cheers, thank you.
Never mind, old buffers are entitled to their opinion, so that's good.
Councillor Brassington.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:32:54
Yes, thank you, Chair.
Councillor Ray Brassington - 2:32:57
Yeah, I found the visit very informative.
We did spend a long time there.
I think it's one of the longest sites visits I've been on since I've been on the committee,
which is 10 years now.
We did not need to go into the Dovecock property because we could see the situation by looking over the boundary wall from a current field.
We also walked around some of the many public footpaths to get a perspective from different angles.
That was particularly useful and in relation to any light pollution that might be from the buildings there.
We also noted the current location of the church and the listed buildings, so it was
all very informative.
And again, it's a delicate balance.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Judd.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:33:46
Thank you, Chair.
Yes, it was a beautiful day, wasn't it?
Councillor Julia Judd - 2:33:51
It was cold, bright, high pressure.
We were very lucky.
And Southwark was looking at it as its glittering best.
And boy, does time glitter.
and which I found a little tiny bit in Congress in the middle of a Cotswold
Cotswold village but it was beautiful, everything you looked at was
beautiful. I completely understand the owner of the dovecock really
urging us to have gone into his or her garden but it really was so incredibly
close to where we were. I didn't think it was necessary at the time but I regret
now that we didn't, only to have made them feel that they were listened to and we really
did respect their request. The only other thing I would say is that after
I left the group, the site inspection group, I took my dog for a walk and I walked every
single footpath and I went further higher than probably the rest of the committee and
got a proper view of the site from all three because it's there are a lot of
footpaths there it's not just one or two
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:35:09
Councillor Michael Vann - 2:35:11
thank you very much council van I found the site visit very helpful indeed
sorry the owners of the neighbouring property thought it was remiss of us not
to go into it but I do assure everyone here that we gave a good detailed look at the site
and relevant features. It was seriously a very well well visited and assisted greatly
in my thinking.
Thank you very much.
I also visited it.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:35:51
I thought it was extremely useful.
As Councillor Brassington said, it was a very long visit.
And thank you very much to our officers
for showing us around in so much detail.
It was very useful to look at the existing facilities
at time and to see what,
to get a bit of an idea of what their expansion plans
would mean to them.
We did also spend a lot of time looking at the Dovecote
and Newman's House to see how they were situated
in relation to the potential development.
So we did give those things a lot of consideration.
We walked a lot of footpaths and as Councillor Coleman
I think said it was very impressive
how well used the footpaths seem to be.
So we were able to look back onto the site
and to assess the impact that the development might have.
So, all in all, it was an excellent visit,
a lovely day.
Oh, and it was very useful to actually,
for me to drive down the lanes, the country lanes,
to actually get to Southrop and through the village
to see what the roads were like as well.
So, Councillor Folles, do you want to add anything to that?
Yes, if I could.
Councillor David Fowles - 2:37:05
And I'm grateful to members for their comments
about the documents that have been supplied
by Sue Dale and her partner because I think we've got to look at the site visit in the
context of what we saw there physically and what we've seen today because obviously what
we saw was an open field.
We had the advantage of seeing the model which I thought was very, very useful in terms of
the heights and so on.
And of course having got the CGI's from Mrs. Dale, sorry, Sue Dale,
that you get a different perspective on what's going to happen once this open field is actually built.
I do have a slight advantage on the rest of the members because having been the ward member
I have walked on those footpaths with my dog and
I have also
been into Mrs. Dale's property
and I have seen it from that side.
I was invited to do that previously when I went
onto the site.
At the same time, I did go and see the model as well,
so it was a sort of balance thing there.
The one thing I am disappointed about is when you have a big
development like this, it's really unfortunate that we
can't go out in the dark because one of the issues here is the
impact in terms of light pollution.
And so I think we got to sort of bear that in mind,
that there's an open field at the moment, some wonderfully converted buildings, the
time concept is great, but is this a step too far? We are effectively going to fill
an open field and unfortunately we weren't able to see it at night and get any impression
as to what that is, but one can assume that there will be lights there, but there aren't
lights there now. So it is finally balanced as I've already said, but essentially there's
an open field, you will be able to see it and you've got to judge it in that context.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. I'm going to open...
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:39:05
Do you want to say anything before you leave, Councillor Brasington?
Yes, sorry, I'm going to leave.
No, you can be the first...
He might still be going when I come back.
Yes, OK. Did you want to say anything about this or ask any questions?
OK.
He won't be answering anything.
Yeah, no.
But he might like to make a...
...perceptive comment.
He may do. Yeah, but he can't...
Obviously, he won't be able to vote on this application.
He won't be able to vote on this question,
but he's coming back for the last one.
This is for clarification.
He now can't take part in this particular debate.
He can't take part in this debate and he can't vote.
Just to comment, Chairman, there was me that mentioned to you before for members of the public that we've got a reduced committee.
We've now even got a smaller committee. I just want to make that comment.
We're still core it.
And that's how it is. Yes. So anyone would like to ask any questions?
Councillor Caul.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 2:40:02
Thank you, Chair. Despite my enthusiasm for a site visit, I was unable to make it, so
obviously your insights, other committee members, is very, very important to me. But when can
I ask the other members questions, or can I put an open question to the committee?
I don't think you're allowed to ask questions of the committee. You'll have to direct them
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:40:22
through me to the officer. To the officer in that case, okay. So the
Councillor Daryl Corps - 2:40:27
The paddock is enclosed on three sides.
In your assessment of the application, obviously I can't ask members now,
do you feel that it's not necessarily an expansion out of the village in a sense?
It's kind of
contained within the boundary, at least the visible boundary of that of the village.
I guess I'd go with it obviously is currently a grass area, but it's not an open space in
the way that you often have at the edge of villages and like going into the fields. I
Officer - 2:41:02
mean, given the boundary wall that comes out beyond that into the sort of the wider paddock,
it still reads as relatively enclosed. So does it expand somewhat into the grass area?
Yes, but I wouldn't consider it to encroach in the same way that the development would
if it was in sort of different locations of going out of the village proper. And also
Councillor Daryl Corps - 2:41:28
just on the the Duffer pool area and obviously we've got some visuals
provided here from the from the residents of that property showing
indicative of the of the structures in the development site. I'm trying to
struggle to look back at the plans.
There are no windows looking back in that direction
on that side of the, especially on that two -storey building.
So the building that is sort of adjacent to that boundary
are single -storey ones.
Officer - 2:42:03
What you can see for the, on the late pages,
I'll get up the plan just a minute.
On the late pages that you can see
the photo montage by the neighbour,
that gable end that's sort of closest
is the one that's a single storey and then beyond it you're seeing the roof of
the two the one -and -a -half storey building that's at the other side of it
so if I get to the relevant plan and then if we could share my screen so yeah
you're seeing so this is single this part of its single storey and you're
seeing the gable end and then the roof line of the one -and -a -half storey bit
that's back here.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 2:42:40
potential overlooking so that won't be through glazed windows on the building
there. So neither of the buildings on that side have sorry the buildings on
Officer - 2:42:49
elevation so the spa so the yoga studio and the side building don't have
windows in them on the elevations if I find the relevant one so you're looking
at that's the end gable so there's no windows in that and yeah and that's the
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:43:14
rear of the yoga studio. Thank You. Councillor Watson you had it. Thank you chair.
Councillor Ian Watson - 2:43:20
Amy thank you for the report. I'm looking at the observations of the
consultees and 6 .3 is the flood risk management officer requesting
additional information or pre -commencement condition. Can you explain to me what that means?
Officer - 2:43:43
Let me just find the pre -commencement. Essentially, sometimes when drainage come back to us, they either ask if more information could be
submitted as part of the application or for it to be submitted prior to the
commencement of the development. In this case, the agents agreed to a pre -commencement
condition for the drainage, so it will come in as a, but should be
granted then an applicator will come in for drainage matters prior to them then commencing on the worksite.
Councillor Fowles.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:44:08
Thank you Chairman. I've got two questions. They're both directed at the conservation officer who I asked questions of last time.
Councillor David Fowles - 2:44:16
The comment was made by the applicant about the fact this is a very important development because of the winter months and
and the occupancy levels and so on.
Out there, it's five to five and it's dark.
I just wanted to get a view from Justin
in terms of this issue of the impact it could have
on the conservation area, which is that the village
is very dark, if you go in there at this time.
Yeah, but there's obviously gonna be light there, Justin.
Do you have a view on, well, I'd use the word
light pollution, but the impact on the conservation area
of the light, particularly in the evenings,
because no doubt there will be people in this part of the site in the evenings when it's
dark, not even in the evenings, in the afternoons or the winter.
Could you get your view on that, please?
Officer - 2:45:15
Southrop, like most settlements, there are houses, there are businesses that will have
lights on in the evenings.
So I think to have some light on this site is not going to be out of character with the
general context.
I think the main area of glazing that you would see from the outside is the lightweight
link between the two stone buildings, which was intended to be visually permeable by day.
But I don't think it will read as particularly out of character with what is a residential
settlement where you will have people there at night with lights behind windows.
Councillor David Fowles - 2:45:51
The second question relates to really the issue about what we are looking at here. This
is not about time as a successful business and all those issues and how many people they
employ. It is what is referred to in 2 -2. It is considering the balance and the potential
harm to the conservation area and the surrounded listed buildings. So I want to ask Justin
in his view of the impact of this development on the dove, the dove cut. Okay? Surely Justin,
you know, at the moment there's a field and there's a clear green buffer between time
and the dove cut, but this particular development, will that encroach on the dove cut or not?
Officer - 2:46:38
Well, physically it will encroach on the dove cut. Change is not intrinsically harmful.
that has to be changed to significance.
If, Amy, you could possibly put up the slide
with the two historic maps on that would be quite useful.
This we have on the left, we have the 1840s tide map.
And on the right, we have the first edition OS map.
The 1840s tide map was done at the time
when the application site was part of 400 acres that
were in the same tenancy as the barn and Newman's house
to the north. It clearly was not part of the domestic curtled of newmans and it
was there was another field boundary between it and the barn. So whilst
there was a functional relationship it was no more so than any of the other 400
acres that were in agricultural use. What's also interesting is when you look
that the field boundaries are actually different. The left -hand boundary is
completely different from the first edition OS map as indeed as the southern
boundary. When we get to the first edition OS map it's interesting that
the site has taken on its current form
and is included within a specific sweep of wall
that now is aligned to Southrop Lodge, Vicarage
because we see how their garden's been laid out,
their Southern sort of areas been laid out
and this is a continuation of that sweep.
So which strongly suggests that at this time,
it had become part of the curtilage of the Vicarage.
It's not shown as garden,
so presumably it was some sort of
utilitarian back of house space,
but it clearly seems to have been associated with them.
So its main significance seems to be as part of the general soft development,
not as a specific open space function related to the tithe barn.
So I don't think development per se is intrinsically harmful.
Most historic barns have other agricultural buildings around them.
We've permitted barn conversions where we have allowed other buildings around them
in an appropriate style.
The development here was all aimed to be the sort of small scale broken massing
that is typical of farmsteads.
Indeed, the linear spa building that would back onto this
is not dissimilar to some of the existing buildings
already in the time complex.
So the idea is they would be agricultural style buildings
in close proximity to an agricultural building
exactly as one might get in the original farmstead.
I think we also have to consider that the setting
of the barn itself has already been changed
because the view that they sent was very telling
in that instead of looking over the sort of setting
that one would expect around a barn,
we looked over a domestic swimming pool.
So I think, I think no there is change here but there is not a significant erosion of the agricultural soft edge of settlement character.
So there is change, there is encroachment but I do not think that there is harm to the significance of all the listed buildings.
Thank you. Councillor Judd.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:49:24
Councillor Julia Judd - 2:49:28
I just, I think that the height of the, sorry Justin's been looking at you but you know
why, I think the height of the walls is a blurred line. I feel very strongly that if
the wall heights were of a normal height, the impact of the proposal would hit us harder
And the walls are that high.
I don't know how long they've been that high.
But it does feel enclosed.
It does feel as though the agricultural side belongs
beyond those high walls.
I mean, I just wondered if that's the case, whether
the height of the wall.
Who do I ask?
Chair?
Whether the height of the wall actually makes any difference from a conservation and design
point of view.
I don't think so.
Officer - 2:50:32
I mean the height of the wall, the wall itself seems to be part of this wall that appears
by the first edition OS map which is when the site wall appears from the map to have
been part of the context of the lodge.
So I think the height of the wall probably relates to when this was a utilitarian space
in relation to the lodge rather than part of the field, which you see in the type map,
that had been completely changed by that date.
So no, I don't think that did make a particular difference.
It was the scale of the new build that we were looking at and whether the new build
of that scale and that position would be inappropriate in that context.
Thank you.
Cleared up that confusion in my head.
Thank you.
Councillor Julia Judd - 2:51:07
Are there any other questions?
Councillor Coleman.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:51:08
Yes, thank you, Chair. You may have asked this last time. I apologise for the repetition
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 2:51:15
if I did. In a number of the drawings supplied, we've got a biodiverse green roof shown, I
suppose, as a treatment of a single storey flat roofed new construction. And I just wanted
to ask whether that possibly is not necessary or even potentially slightly harmful because
while the structures adjacent look a bit barn -like in some cases and look a bit
yes they do because if some of them are quite blank quite barn -like and a
biodiverse green roofs rather does it not rather shout oh I'm modern because
you don't see many of them on buildings more than about 10 years old. Yes it does
Officer - 2:52:03
but then it is it's intentionally used on the buildings that are are more
contemporary because there is a clear juxtaposition
with the development between the buildings that
are meant to look much more traditional
and have the pitch trees.
And then the buildings that are kept low.
And the idea was by a green roof,
what we were discussing was sort of a meadow grass roof
rather than just a sedum roof,
which can look rather Mediterranean.
So the idea was both to keep them low
but also to keep them soft and naturalistic.
So there was still very much a green sense to this space
and they were almost blending in more with the topography
and the planting than with just being built structures
with metal flat roofs, which would be much harsher and less
soft.
So it was, again, all part of trying
to have this soft, gentle, green, rural edge.
Any other questions?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:52:49
I just had a very slight question.
Looking at some of the objections, on page 85,
objection 22, it says impact of traffic going to and from
hotel, including helicopters.
And I just found that there is obviously not a helipad
suggested there, but can you place a restriction to stop
helicopters going backwards and forwards, or is that
impossible, because I can imagine that would be an
nuisance actually. I'm not aware of there being a helipads
officially you have permitted development rights that would allow sort
of the landing and taking off of the helicopters to a degree what I would say
in regards to this application is that I don't consider the addition of three
extra bedrooms and okay this bar would actually have a material so I don't think it would be reasonable to put a condition on even if possible.
Thank you and now we'll move on to comments. Does anyone like to make a
I've got quite a few comments, observations.
Councillor Julia Judd - 2:53:55
I mean, the site visit really was so helpful
because it is really confusing,
just to see on paper, it's really, really confusing.
But I thought, I mean, the site's already cluttered.
I mean, if half those buildings which are there already
that came before the planning committee,
you wouldn't get planning for them.
I mean, I do think it's already cluttered and confusing.
The other thing I would say is that this has nothing to do with the application, but on
the other hand, it's the whole sort of mood of the place.
It's that the single storey residential building to the far hand side of time has a garden
that outlooks onto the field.
It's really inappropriate.
You know, it's got these massive pots and a fence and it looks a little bit twee and
urbanised coming from the countryside.
I mean, it's nothing to do with this application,
but it's just setting the tone for the difference
between time and the village and the countryside.
And surely we are hoping for some amalgamation of the
three things which go hand in hand.
I would just go say that.
The field that I went to when I was walking the dog and looking down, you can actually
see the grass where the site is going to be, which is why the wall, I think, is a blurred
line.
The height of the wall, I think, slightly confuses the application.
And my last thing is I wonder if the tilted balance has...
I know that this tilted balance refers to a completely different
type of application, but can that be applied?
I mean, is that being applied?
Have you applied that to this?
No, tilted balance only applies to development
related to housing, new housing.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 2:55:57
For this, you're looking at paragraph 215 of the MPPF,
which is a balancing exercise, but it's weighing less than
substantial harm against the public benefits
arising from the developments.
So it's not a tilted balance, but it's the planning balance
sort of in the rapid.
Thank you.
Councillor Julia Judd - 2:56:13
Didn't think it had but I thought it was worth mentioning just in case you had built that into the into your
Considerations on this one and the up my last thing was that I feel so sorry for the people who live in the dove cut
Because whatever happens if if that field is used they are so close
they will be able to hear a whisper of a mouse from their garden from their very very private garden and
And if they're stashing about having their swimming pool,
they're not going to upset anybody at the moment.
But when those women come out of all men, sorry, sorry,
sorry, come out of the sauna, if they're anything like me,
they'll be so annoyingly loud.
And I think that that's just the human thing.
Those are people on holiday coming out,
having enjoyed themselves, and they're relieved with
their friends and I think it will drive those people at the dovcock insane and there won't
be anything they can do about it. Thank you councillor Judd, councillor Coleman. I think
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:57:17
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 2:57:19
we're still on questions are we? No comment. Well the point about tilted balance and it
being to do with dwellings reminded me that I would wished I still have nowadays I don't
current copy of the MPPF but I think the relevant balance that might be in the
MPPF and perhaps somebody knows the words by heart is how important economic
prosperity in other words jobs is when we are considering any form of
development and what struck me and I could have mentioned this earlier I
appreciate so this is a comment was just how many vehicles staff vehicles were in
that car park when we arrived on one of the quietest operating days of the year
as we know early January is in this type of place.
And then I began to think more recently, just today,
just how rare it is to have that many sustainable, worthwhile,
creative jobs in such a relatively small village
and how important that is, leaving aside all the positive,
but taking note of all the very positive comments generally
made about the way time has helped that village keep
its school, keep its village hall in good condition and keep its pub. It contrasts,
I've just ended my question comment, with Rob Martin which we recently visited
which does have a school and a telephone box I was photographed at recently not
currently in use and is as quiet as the proverbial. There might be one child in
in Rob Martin that goes to Rob Martin's school. I suspect there are rather more
than one going in Sultra. So all in all I thought the economic benefit unusually
has rather more impact in this case than we generally find when we're looking at
listed building consent and precious holder buildings. Thank you very much.
Anyone else want to make a comment?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 2:59:17
Councillor Ian Watson - 2:59:26
Councillor Watson. Thank you, Chair. I feel, and it's been mentioned
several times, that this is really well balanced. There's obviously a local feeling involved
here, but I go back to my training and we should be
deciding not on feeling but on planning considerations.
And reading the consultees list here, I don't see any serious
planning considerations that would go against this.
I
I don't believe I can go against the officers
Recommendation that we permit this
Application so are you making a proposal there? I would like to propose if we accept
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:00:19
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:00:27
Council event I should like to second that
Councillor Michael Vann - 3:00:31
really detailed examination in the papers and the site inspection which we
made didn't change that at all. Thank you very much. So are we ready to move to a
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:00:49
vote on the proposal to accept the officers recommendation? Yes, thank you
very much.
Sorry.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:01:31
Sorry, we have five proposals to accept.
The office's recommendation one to refuse
and one abstention.
So that application is passed.
So we will move swiftly onto the next application
which is associated with this.
Amy, do you want to do any further presentation?
I mean, I'm happy not to, but I can just go through.
Do we want to maybe just briefly summarise what we did?
Yes.
Specifically.
Yes.
I think we're going to briefly summarise the listed building parts of the application.
Thank you, Amy.
Are you...
Yeah.
So the next application is for listed buildings.
So this relates solely to the area for the...
Officer - 3:02:24
No, no, no, we're looking.
Sorry, this relates solely to the relaxation room
that's at the end of that building there.
So the LBC, it's just that building there,
which I will flick to the correct plans for,
just so you can have that in your mind again.
Okay, so we were talking about,
so it's just the existing,
the cartilage listed, cottage,
and the relaxation room at the end.
So we're just talking about this flat roof structure here.
Thank you.
And so we're only considering here
impact on the listed building.
Thank you.
Okay, does anyone have any questions
about this particular part of the application,
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:03:06
the listed building consent?
Does anyone have any comments?
Councillor Judd.
Councillor Julia Judd - 3:03:20
I think you've got a Grade 1 listed church and a very, very pretty listed house and another
very pretty listed house, which is slightly obscured from view behind that pretty orchard.
So we couldn't actually see that, but we could feel it.
We could feel it was just there.
And we've got new building in a conservation area.
I can't see that this can get listed building consent.
Any other comments?
Councillor Conlon.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:03:57
Let me just get it clear in my own mind please, Chair.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:04:01
We're not looking at the listed building that's the neighbour
we're looking at just the glazed extension
in the planning application to a Curtin listed building. So we're not
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:04:20
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:04:21
looking at the whole thing just the glazed extension this is glazed I think
we've understood on the inside looks like a barn some of the outside I think
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:04:31
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:04:33
mostly a wall and Curtin is listing is one of the weaker forms of listing if I
rightly. So can I just be clear which is what is the Kertelich listed building
that we're looking at? I might have got that wrong. Okay if we can get the presentation back up
Officer - 3:04:49
again. So it's stable cottage so the primary building is the lodge so when we
looked at the plans earlier it was the one that was the old Rickeridge so if
you're looking at this you have the lodge building up here which is what
sort of the site as a whole sort of being associated with and then that
building there which it's attaching to is the building which is considered
Curtledge listed. So that one's your primary listed lodge and that's stable
cottage which is the Curtledge listed building to the to the lodge.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:05:27
Sorry I'm obviously being really thick does that mean to say I'm not
Councillor Julia Judd - 3:05:28
allowed to take into account the the other buildings that I have to only
consider those two buildings. Not that it makes any difference the way I feel but
just out of interest. Does that mean to say in my head I have to imagine that
there isn't a Grade 1 listed house, that the Dovecock isn't listed and the other
ones not listed just because you're only talking about the curtilage?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:05:57
To clarify, curtilage listing means the building is by, but there's a number of
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:06:01
criteria, by historic association with the listed building it is itself
considered to be listed so whilst it doesn't form part of the list
description the main listing it is by association whether that is storey I mean
just you might want to correct me or if he wants to clarify anything but by
association there's a number of factors it is itself considered to be listed.
For the conversion rather than the... So we've already permitted obviously this
extension has just been granted planning permission we're now considering
separately does it also work because it also requires this to building extent
because it's an extension that physically attaches to that
I'm sorry, I've really made a mistake. Thank you very much for clarifying.
Councillor Julia Judd - 3:06:36
OK, are you happy with that? Councillor Cauls.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:06:39
Councillor Daryl Corps - 3:06:46
Yeah, thanks Harrison. So when it's a curtlish listed are we saying it's as important or it's not as important or it's part of the estate so to speak?
I'm going to hand over to Justin who will be able to explain this far better than I am.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:07:00
Officer - 3:07:03
The Act states that when there's a structure within the curtilage of a listed building
that predates 1948 and is under serious use, it is treated as if it were a part of the
primary building.
So the coverage and protection is identical.
Because form is legally part of the same building.
No, it's treated as part of the same building.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:07:24
The concerns about setting of other listed buildings will be considered under planning
Officer - 3:07:25
permission.
The listed building consent just looks at the impact on this building.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:07:37
Are you clear? Excellent. Councillor Coleman. Are there any other consents?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:07:45
Any other consents? Any other comments? Does anyone want to make a proposal on
this listed building consent. Councillor Fan.
Councillor Michael Vann - 3:08:02
I propose we accept the advice of the case officer.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:08:10
So the proposal is to accept this recommendation to permit this listed building consent. Is
there anyone who would like to second that? Councillor Watson. Great. If there are no
for the comments we're going to proceed to the vote on the recommendation to
permit the listed building consent the erection of the glazed extension to
Kertelijs Bistu building at time Southern State Office. Does everybody
completely understand now what they're voting on? Yes, good.
Okay, so we have four in favour, one against and two abstentions, so that listed building
consent is approved. Thank you very much.
.
.

11 25/02722/LBC Thyme - Southrop Estate Office

Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:10:37
Right, the final application that we're looking at today is a full application.

12 24/02513/FUL Siddington Park

As for agenda item 12, is for the development of lands and erection of buildings to expand
an existing integrated retirement community use class C2, including landscaping, parking,
access and associated works at Sytington Park, Syrinsester Road, Gloucestershire.
The case officer is Andrew Moody and the ward member is Councillor Eberly.
So Mr Moody, would you be kind to present any updates?
Thank you chair. First up there is an additional officer assessment I revised
in the paragraph in respect of meeting for such a levy.
Thank you.
So we're getting some feedback at this end.
Second up, additional consultee response.
The tree officer condition recommended was included
Officer - 3:11:36
within your agenda.
Unfortunately, that wasn't excluded
from the list of consultees.
That's just to clarify that point.
And secondly, which you've had sight of now
for a couple of days,
revised comments from the parish council raising the objection to the proposal.
So I will move on without further ado.
So the application site is located off the Silent Sister Road by the
roundabout on the A419. Then the left -hand side of the screen to the west
to the site is the South Cerny Road.
And phase one of the development is to the southeast.
And the house is built at Preston -Lee directly to the north.
So there will be six blocks of development
within the area to the red.
So pointing on the screen at the moment,
hope you can see that it's block one.
That is block two, block three, and four
along the north and boundary of the site.
Then moving to the south, you've got block five
and block six. Aerial photograph, this is the most up -to -date aerial photograph we
can we have at the present time. So the area was basically used as a site
compound during the construction of phase one. Having looked on the Rangford
website, that's the applicants early on today, they've now sold 80 % of the units
on phase one. I think there were 171 in total.
This plan just basically shows the, gives you an indication, just the hard and soft landscaping around the site.
So this is block one towards the north eastern corner of the site.
This will contain three units, all of which will be three bedrooms.
Moving on to block two, this is then therefore, if you look towards the bottom right hand corner of the screen, shaded in is the block that you're looking at.
That's still where it is located on the plot.
So again, this two -storey building has got a total of eight units within it, a mixture
of one, two, and three bedrooms.
This is block three, moving up to three storeys in height.
This contains a total of 11 units, again, with a mix of one, two, and three bedrooms.
Block four, towards the northwestern corner of the site, a mixture of three and four storeys
in height.
This contains a total of 15 units, including a mixture of
one, two, and three beds.
One thing to note, within your agenda pack and the appendices,
there are the levels plans shown.
It's worth noting that there are, there is a three metre
difference in the floor levels between block one and block four
with block four being lower.
A further half metre down, so three and a half metres below
the height of block one. You come to block five. This contains nine units with
a mixture of one and two beds. And finally you have block six down towards
the southern southwestern corner of the site. Nine units again with a mixture of
one and two bedroom properties. We've also concluded shadow diagrams. These are
within your agenda pack, so you will have had sight of these
before today.
But this shows the existing proposal wins the solstice,
so obviously on December 21st to 10 o 'clock in the morning
on the top, then midday in the middle and 4 p .m.
at the bottom.
Spring equinox, so again, this is March 21st, and obviously
it will also be September 21st, 10 o 'clock, 12 o 'clock, and 4
clock from the top to the bottom of the screen, existing on the left and proposed on the right.
And this would be the summer solstice on June 21st, again, at 10, 12, and 4 p .m.
Finally some photographs for you.
So this is within the site, within the site compound, and looking towards the northeastern
corner of the site.
So VA419, Silenstier Road, is just about to see a road sign at the entrance to the site
there and up there. That's again looking further along the northern boundary of the site towards
the northwestern corner. This will be the area behind where blocks 2, 3 and 4 are. Worth
noting that all the trees on the site are subject to an air tree preservation order.
That's the view towards the western boundary. So beyond those trees is the south Cerny Road.
So that will be in the area where blocks 4, 5 and 6 would be sited. Just to give you a
back to the existing phase one development.
So that's looking south from the application site.
On the original layer, that is block three.
Oops, sorry, we're on the wrong way.
There we go.
Those are blocks one and two and three, which lead out towards
the entrance to the site and the roundabout.
And the final photograph we have is down towards block 11.
This is down towards the southwestern corner of the site.
so block six would be in the area
that I'm currently circling there.
Therefore, Chair, the recommendation is for permission
to be granted, thank you.
Thanks very much, we've got two speakers.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:17:17
First of all, John Vale, who's an objector,
and Mr. Rob Henderson, who is the agent,
would you like to come forward?
Yeah, he is here.
Yes. So just for clarification, because we're just looking at one separate application,
you each have three minutes, so you need to be pretty concise, okay? And my colleague
is timing you here. And Mr. Vale, you get to speak first.
Is that done?
Yep, I think so.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Objector - 3:18:03
I am a planning consultant and associate director at Plan A, and I am here to speak on behalf of numbers 1, 3, 5, and 6, Preston Lee and Preston Milbarn.
The planning officer has stated that this was a finely balanced recommendation.
In my professional opinion, the scheme as presented is flawed in a number of ways.
Incorrect assessments of the impact of the proposals have been undertaken and
as currently standing results should not be used to assess the merits or
otherwise or otherwise of this application. Furthermore the
recommendation goes against that of the council's conservation officer who
still has outstanding concerns and in relation to the application. There have
also been objections to the application from local residents and to the head of
in his capacity as Councillor for Siddington and Cerny. We are concerned
that the proposals represent an overdevelopment of the site as a result
of their scale and density resulting in overlooking and harm to residential
amenity. In particular the applicant's September shadow study relied upon by
the council's heritage and planning officer is flawed and cannot be relied
upon. It does not identify the large gaps in the existing tree cover, the changing
nature of the deciduous trees, or the large number of trees due to be failed,
thereby leading to a loss of privacy for residents of Preston Lee. There are 13
trees due to be taken down along the boundary line, all mature and between 25
and 30 metres in height. They will be replaced by trees of approximately two
and a half to three metres in height. As it currently stands there for Preston
will lose this critical tree line protection. The proposals include
buildings of three to four storeys with windows facing towards Preston Lee.
These will some of which will directly look directly on to southerly south
facing gardens and some with habitable rooms thereby causing harm to privacy
and residential amenity both from direct and perceived overlooking. This
uncomfortable relationship we believe is the result of over development of the
and is an attempt to overlook the site sensitivities.
In contrast to the phase one scheme, the phase two scheme is more exposed,
or the sites are more exposed, and has an elevation profile that necessitates a sensitive response.
The application plan shows a series of buildings that increase in height following the elevation profile,
rather than building heights that respond to the natural changes in elevation, and thereby reducing in height.
Furthermore, the proximity to what are low -rise residential dwellings on the northern boundary
creates a significant juxtaposition between the buildings, something I'm sure the architects
were trying to avoid.
The result is an uncomfortable relationship between the buildings and the wider context.
Thank you very much.
Accordingly, I would urge members to go against the officer's recommendation and refuse the
proposals.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Applicant/Agent - 3:21:20
Thank you very much chair. Yes, I'm Rob Henderson from Pegasus Group. I'm the agent for Rangford
Villages who are the developer and will be the operator of the expansion of the existing
integrated retirement community at Sippington Park. I'm pleased to say that we've been working
very closely with your officer team both prior to and during the 16 months that the application
has been with you, making significant design revisions to bring forward the best possible
balance of all of the range of considerations which includes a number
of those that you've heard from Mr. Vale and that's in particular been in
consultation with your conservation officer who has had
several meetings and that interaction has really led to some very
useful improvements to the overall design and of course it also includes
revisions to the interaction of the development with the homes at Preston
Lee which will which has secured as the planning officers report says
separation distances that exceed all of your adopted standards and in addition
to that further improvements to the design to avoid any direct overlooking
from windows or balconies and this is hopefully something that you've seen in
the representations I issued to you separately but as is reflected by the
officer's report. I think it's just important to note that obviously the
the Care Village is a very particular model of accommodation it's not just a
residential community it has a range of supporting services and the density and
an interaction of the the additional homes within the extension with the
established features of the village are fundamental to its its operation and
And essentially the density of the development is a product of that.
It's important that there is proximity, but it's also important that the quantum of development
is balanced with the facilities that have already been provided in anticipation of those
additional residents joining the community.
As I say, we're aware that obviously significant concern or some concerns have been raised
about density and the way in which the building heights actually interact with one another.
This has been very carefully reconsidered in consultation with your conservation officer
to arrive at the design that we now have.
And whilst obviously we're very sorry that there are some residual concerns, I would
say that to a large extent we've addressed 90 % of the matters that were raised to us
through those consultations with your officer.
We've got the parking resolved and I'm pleased that the highway authority are satisfied that
We're on point on that.
And essentially, we've got 96 % biodiversity net gain,
a very significant excess, loads of green space.
And the experience of this part of the extended part of the
village will be very, very similar to our existing village,
which we're very, very happy with,
I think has been very successful and a very attractive addition
to the area.
I'll stop there.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Thank you very much to both of you.
would you like to return to your seats?
Councillor Evermy, would you like to come
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:24:31
and you've got five minutes to talk.
Ward Member - 3:24:58
Thank you, Chair, thank you, members. Thank you for bringing this to the committee. I
felt given its size, particularly it was appropriate that the committee consider this application
as it came in, I think just about a week after we changed our scheme of delegations to automatically
refer schemes of this size.
The other, there were three areas.
So there was the size, the reason I brought it to you, the
impact and the scale of this application, and, you know,
obviously we've heard both on that particularly from the
objector who's spoken this afternoon, and in my view that's
the main area of contention for the committee to determine
whether this application should be permitted or not. But I also wanted to
touch on the housing elements. So clearly 55 units dwellings for older people is
obviously a value in the community and I understand and obviously in the
documentation that the applicant has demonstrated that there is demand for
those units and noting, I think as it's mentioned by the case officer, that
the site is largely, the existing site next door is now 80 % occupied and you
know I've observed that they're nearly all full now when I've been on the site.
But I am aware that there are places in other parts of the district where
retirement villages are very under occupied and so you know that is a
for maybe you might want to question the case officer on that but certainly you
know the understanding and clearly obviously the applicant believes that
there is a demand that there was they wouldn't be bringing the scheme forward.
The fact for me though that there are no affordable units and on the site is very
disappointing so it will be a hundred percent market site and you know
therefore you know it's been the our officers have obviously looked at that
and our housing officers have looked at that
and are comfortable that there is,
we can't ask for affordable housing.
But I think, I would just want to put on record,
I think that's disappointing in this location
that there aren't any affordable units
on the application that you're considering this afternoon.
So I think what that leaves us with is essentially
a decision on 55 market rate units in six blocks.
one that's four storeys high. Now clearly there is a principle that development of
the site would come forward and there have been previously permitted
applications. But what I would like the committee to consider is whether this
proposal is too big and it's too close to the neighbouring properties in
Preston Lye. My real outstanding concern for the committee I think to probe and
come to a view on
Is the impact on those and we've heard from the objector about the potential removal of trees?
And I think it would be useful to hear a response from the case officer on that because clearly those mature trees are very significant
in terms of
separating the
properties that Preston live from the application site
And I would be very concerned if you need essentially those were lost as a consequence of this application
and what looks on paper you know what we're looking at now is not what
actually ends up if the application is committed is permitted. I recognise
clearly that the committee is looking and the tilted balance is in play
because you know we have don't have a five -year land supply so therefore you
know obviously delivery of housing is important and obviously we have a
Demographics change in our district. We're already on average older than average districts and clearly
We need more accommodation for older people who want to move out of their more traditional
Houses into something like this property and as you know I visited the site
And it's very well liked by people that live there and it provides a community feel for those people that don't want to
Say live in their their previous homes
So I will finish off really by saying to the committee please do give very
careful consideration to whether whether or not this is essentially too big and
too close to the neighbouring properties because particularly I think for the
property block 4 and number 6 Preston lie the proximity of those two buildings
and the size of block four these are the the properties at Preston Lye I think
is is why I'm very concerned and why I wanted you to make that determination as
an informed planning committee on this matter. Thank you chair.
I'm just gonna start at Councillor Brastinton. I'm afraid you're not gonna be
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:30:15
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:30:16
able to vote on the item as you weren't here to see the office of presentation
the most interest you're aware it so I just thought perfect might just like
stepping in cover that straight away I'm guessing that you can ask questions
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:30:25
that can you can yeah you can make ask questions and presumably make comments
just not vote yeah the Constitution special what specifies voting so yeah
that's fine good has everybody had a chance to yes everybody had a chance to
look at the additional pages as they apply to this particular application. In that case,
I'll throw the floor questions over to the floor and Councillor Coleman.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:31:03
Thank you, Chair. Would you be willing to consider at an early stage deferring this item for a site
visit? I appreciate we have to have a few questions before we do that, but not too many.
Secondly, I'm a bit surprised that the officer's reports, as far as I can tell,
didn't include any reference to the Preston neighbourhood plan. Admittedly, Preston Parish
Council didn't cover itself in glory in thinking it didn't have a problem with this and then
suddenly realising in the documents that have been given today that they did have a problem
with it. But the neighbourhood plan carries similar weight to our own local plan and therefore
I would have thought it was a material consideration.
And thirdly, I know that there are plenty of vacant properties of this type in Sarensestor
because about 20 of them are in my ward in Stratton Court Village and they've been sitting
empty for something like five years.
And I feel joined to you now, Chair, in your annoyance that people go on building these
things when we've already got too many.
However, I mustn't pre -touch any future vote.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:32:12
So the question is, can we have a site visit
and why can't we be told about the neighbourhood
development plan until suddenly Preston realises
it's got one.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:32:24
I think we should discuss the site inspection visit
after the debate, after the questions.
So we'll look at questions first,
and then when we get to comments,
please feel free to raise the issue
of the site inspection briefing.
Is that okay?
So your question for Mr. Moody.
Yes, you chair, yes, no apologies for that.
Should have been referred to,
Officer - 3:32:45
although I've read it in depth today
and I don't consider it makes any change
to the recommendation.
The design policies are not radically different
and officers are formed a view with regard
to the design proposal, the comments made
by the senior conservation design officer.
This area is within part area six,
as referred to in the Preston neighbourhood plan,
which I've got here.
and it talks about sensitive receptors.
It uses the A419, Ermin Way, Swindon Road,
the lane to Sidenton Village, and uses a public footpath
within area four being the village residence.
It's historically, Preston was an agricultural village
surrounded by countryside and scattered isolated farmsteads.
There's now been a significant amount of development
to this area, which recently is resulting
in its agricultural setting being eroded
from both the southwest and the west.
Any frigid large -scale development to the northwest
of Preston Bridge, i .e. adjacent to Tesco development,
would have the potential to link built development
from Dobby's garden centre to Sy ancestor. By nature of the low lying land in close proximity
to the river, churn development is anticipated to be unlikely.
With regards to this site, as referred to in the report, it was allocated for employment
use in the previous local plan which I think was adopted in 2006.
Owing to the fact that the council did have a housing land supply around 2011 and the
fact that it hadn't come forward for employment use, then that's why we ended up with a C2
development in the 2011 outline application that's established the
principal residential development upon the site. So in answer to that
question yes we should have referred to the neighbourhood development plan if you do
defer for site visits I will cover it in a revised version of the report to come
back to you but I do not consider the amended recommendation in any way. Next
up in terms of need yes and note what you say I similarly have dealt with other
applications that were in the district where uptake has been slow but with
With regards to this site, we are now up to 80 percent occupancy, or 80 percent of the
units haven't been sold.
And in terms of the requirements, we'll refer to your report.
Paragraph 1021 refers to C2 development.
Paragraph 1022 refers to the supporting text, which first anticipates a dramatic growth
in the older population in Cotswold District with higher levels of disability and health
problems amongst older people.
There is a requirement for 665 shelters and extra care housing
units between 2017 and 2031.
This forms part of the OAN, the OAN being the objectively
assessed need against which the figure of 8 ,400 houses in the
currently adopted local plan was derived.
There's also a requirement for 580 nursing and bed potential
bed spaces in that same period of time.
If I then move on to paragraph 1025, the Gloucestershire local
housing needs assessment identifies that the population age 75 plus within the Cotswold
district is likely to increase by 8 ,998 persons over the 20 -year period, 2021 to 41, and identified
a need for 1 ,699 units of owned sheltered housing and 149 units of owned extra care
units in Cotswold district by 2041. So if we are to say there is no need for that, then
we would be arguing to the planning inspector against publications, for example, our own
local plan and also the Gloucestershire local housing needs assessment which as far as I'm
aware is across districts. All the authorities within the county have an input into that.
Thank you.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:36:17
Would the officers agree that we need to make certain that we make realistic estimates as
we're updating our local plan and we don't have put numbers that make us look stupid
in our local plan. And the second part of that question is how many hundred empty old people's
sheltered dwellings do we have to have lying around not just Stowe and Stratton but the rest
of our district before somebody realises that older people in Stratton are old enough to look
after themselves for the most part and many that otherwise in other parts of the country might want
sheltered accommodation don't want it here. I have asked that question about how many empty
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:36:52
properties for older people there are and I haven't really had an answer
except for Stowe but do you want to answer that council Mr. Moody?
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:37:04
I mean obviously any appraisal by Gloucestershire County Council is separate from the
cultural district council so I wouldn't be able to comment on that. Yes we would be
updating that as part of the local plan that we would be reviewing the housing
need as part of that process albeit obviously we are not at that point yet. I
I think it's also probably worth just highlighting that they've
also, as part of the application,
there was a needs assessment produced by the developers which
broke down that need.
Whether you give that weight and how much you want to,
you know, obviously have to decision -maker.
But there is a needs assessment that does provide a breakdown of
the demand from the various different reports and the
delivered housing in the area as well.
Sorry, Chair, if I could also add that that needs assessment
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:37:44
was also appraised by the strategic housing team who were
Officer - 3:37:46
satisfied with the content and that it was a need demonstrated. Thank you very
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:37:53
much. So we move on to Councillor Fowles. I know you want to allow debate before
Councillor David Fowles - 3:37:59
we make a decision on the site meeting but I would like to second that site
meeting if and when it gets to that point bearing in mind what the ward
members said. I'll come on to that later. I'm a bit confused about this
issue of affordable because the ward members said there's no affordable and
yet the definition of affordable on page 186 says all housing developments to provide 11
or more new dwellings with floor space etc should have some affordable element. But I'm
sure there's a reason for there being no affordable and I wondered whether on 1025 when you say
there's 1699 units in terms of a need of owned in inverted commas, what does owned in inverted
mean? Is that open market or subsidised in some way shape or form? It seems that
we've got 55 units here, no affordable, lots of numbers that say
there's a need but the reality is where we have these similar schemes, not
identical, that there's vacant occupancy. So I'm just a
confused about this whole issue of affordable? In terms of affordable, if you look at Paragraph
1036 and 1038 of the report, financial viability assessment was submitted with the application.
As you appreciate, we don't put commercially sensitive information into the public domain,
but members can rest assured that officers have sought independent evaluation of this
from external consultants that we utilise to give us expert advice on these matters.
They have responded to say that they concur with the findings of that report and the strategic
housing team have looked at both the financial viability assessment and the report from the
external consultants and are satisfied that in this instance we can't insist upon any
affordable housing provision.
As you appreciate the strategic housing team aren't going to necessarily say that unless
they are satisfied that the case has been made ultimately because clearly their role
is to promote provision of affordable housing within the district.
In terms of the owned in quotation marks, I'm afraid I don't know what is meant by owned in quotation marks.
And that was just basically a quote from the housing needs assessment produced by the county council.
So just to clarify, the reason for the affordable housing is because of financial problems.
Yes.
Officer - 3:40:28
And I've...
Who has seen that? Do you as officers see that?
Yes, we have seen it.
We have employed external consultants that we use in such cases, not just this site,
but lots of other sites to have a look at it.
They are obviously of greater understanding of matters financial in that matter than your
officers would be expected to be.
They are satisfied with the findings that were made on behalf of the applicant and both,
as I said, both results of the agreed budget.
Historically, I remember nothing quite like this scheme,
but I remember when we've looked at applications where there's a
Councillor David Fowles - 3:41:10
financial viability assessment, that that has been included in
pink papers, and we've been able to, I think, for example,
closing a pub and giving it change of use.
The steadies.
The red line, and so on.
Is this usual, looking at the legal representation that we're
asked to make a decision based on information to some extent that we haven't, we're not
privy to seeing. I'm a bit confused. I know I'm not a financial expert but...
There will be some information in the report that will be commercially sensitive. I haven't
seen the report but I assume this is what is referred to and this can't be put in the
public domain until it's built.
Okay, so we just have to accept that. And the second question if I may, Chairman, is
in relation to the parish council. The speaker said that after consultation most of the concerns
have been addressed. Does that include or exclude the concerns expressed by the parish
council of 177? I'm assuming that those concerns still stand even though the parish council
made subsequent representation on late papers. But there's clearly some fundamental concerns
some of which have been articulated very clearly by the ward member, do they still stand?
There's been no dialogue with the parish council has there?
No, there's not been any direct dialogue between officers and the parish council.
Officers are satisfied with the recommendation as it is.
So the consultation is with you, not with the parish council?
Yes, that's correct.
Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:42:53
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:42:56
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:43:00
zz
Councillor David Fowles - 3:43:30
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:43:33
I think that law still applies.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:43:36
I'm going to have to ask our legal team to look into that and give you an answer.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:43:38
Thank you very much.
Councillor Caul.
Thank you, Chair.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:43:44
Let's ask a question because the board member raises as well.
Just about the need assessment again.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 3:43:54
So this need assessment is paid for by the applicant,
is that right?
Yes, it's paid for by the applicant.
Okay.
So does that mean that other recent developments in the
COTS world also would have had the same need assessment
attached to the development?
I refer to Esmea Care home in Morton that I imagine it has a 10 % occupancy and
Beechwood Park in Stowe minimal occupancy and even Edward Stowe that has
been there for I'm sure the board member will let me know how many years but
several years again that is it's certainly not a capacity. Does that mean
that these these would have had the same need assessment attached to them and
and clearly that need assessment hasn't worked.
For other developments without seeing the details of them,
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:44:44
generally we would expect a needs appraisal to be undertaken.
Andrew might be able to speak about whether we peer reviewed that
or the processes we go through in order to verify that information,
but I couldn't speak to other developments in the area.
The Brio living one you're referring to at Stowe,
Officer - 3:44:58
I was the case officer for, but that was in about 2013,
so I'm afraid my memory doesn't go back that far.
All I can say is that the applicants here have told us
that they've sold sufficient units now on phase one
of the Symington Park development
to be able to fund phase two.
So and as I previously stated,
the needs assessment isn't just been taken
as face value by officers,
it's been looked at by the strategic housing team
who are satisfied with the content.
Okay, I can confer with you afterwards
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:45:31
is about some of the figures for stone which yeah and Councillor judge
Councillor Julia Judd - 3:45:41
55 units in all how many people in could sleep there and how many parking spaces
are there sorry I'm not very good at math sorry I should just do a quick bit
mathematics for you. 109 bedrooms are provided.
109 bedrooms?
So...
But that doesn't necessarily mean that you're going to have
multiple, complete occupancy of three bedrooms.
Some units will have provision made for say,
family to come and stay.
So some of those are spare rooms?
Yes, some of them will be spare rooms, yes.
Because there are 13 three beds.
So, yeah, and some people will be couples, won't they?
They won't have somebody living with them.
And they may slip separately.
But...
Yes, indeed.
But there are 109 bedrooms in total.
The 68 car park in space is provided.
68.
There is also part of the legal agreement that's waiting being completed is a travel plan to promote sustainable forms of development and to provide for residents to get travel to go elsewhere.
There is already existing travel schemes for the existing residents of phase one.
And what sort of gardens?
So how are the gardens the outside space?
They are, if I, excuse me, can I put the screen back up please?
I mean can they put a residence in their own gardening?
No, it's communal grounds, they are apartments, they are communal grounds, there is no individual grounds.
It all looks like a car park to me, I can't see any communal grounds, I can see a little tiny bit in the top right hand corner.
Oh it's slither in the top left hand corner, is that it?
But they would have the use of any areas in phase one to this isn't phase two in isolation you got phase one as well
And there are grounds within phase one because I said there are bits that they can use which aren't on that plan
Yes, it's not going to be isolated phase two phase one
Never the twin shall meet residents of phase two would be able to utilise all facilities within phase one
Okay, thank you very much
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:47:46
Councillor Bressington your move. Yeah thank you. Am I correct in assuming there's no
Councillor Ray Brassington - 3:47:50
provision for bungalows on this site?
No bungalows.
That's a shame. I can't see anything in the report that says we've got to have air source, heat pumps or solar panels.
We will have to meet the latest building regulation standards. If members wish to have that added on as an additional condition, then we can add it on.
Thank you. And finally, the noise condition, number 29, I'm afraid I'm not happy with that one. I don't think it's sufficiently strong and I think there's some wording there which is a bit dubious.
So I would like to recommend we have a different condition on that,
delegate that to the chair and the head of planning to sort out.
That can be done, Chair.
My input.
For example, the condition would be change to refer to just basically first occupation of any of the units
and in terms of NPF paragraphs to refer to if you want to specifically nail that down,
you can talk about paragraph 135F and paragraph 198.
But if you are minded to support the proposal that decision isn't going to be issued imminently because firstly the legal agreements
Still got to be completed to ensure the financial contributions are set out
And we're also still awaiting the payment of the financial contribution towards the North meadow
Special area conservation as this is within the outer zone of influence
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:49:23
Okay, thank you. Right Patrick. Did you have something else you wanted to say Councillor Conlon?
Okay, Councillor Fowles, did you have anything else you wanted to add?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:49:30
Councillor David Fowles - 3:49:34
Yes, Chairman. If the committee is not minded to support when we get to that point,
I don't know what point in the debate we can get to it. The proposal from
Councillor Coleman for a site visit. I think we have to defer this because there seems to be some
confusion over what the case officer has referred to as 1036, a financial viability assessment has
been provided, but owing to the commercial sensitivity, it's not being put into the public
domain. And what Councillor Coleman has said, feeling that it should be in the public domain,
or at least we should have access to it, and our legal colleague needs to clarify whether
that's the case or not. So I can't see how we can proceed if we've got a vital piece
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:50:17
Councillor David Fowles - 3:50:18
of information which I'm sure needs to be clarified, because Councillor Coleman is adamant
that we should have it.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:50:23
Well, yeah, it might be in pink pages.
We'll move on.
Even on pink pages to help us make a decision.
We'll move on to that.
Let's just see if anyone has any further questions.
I'd like to make a point.
Have you got a question?
Can you make a point, Jen?
A question.
Can you make a question?
It is a question.
Councillor David Fowles - 3:50:43
The ward member who is also the former deputy leader here responsible for finance and is
now the leader is also concerned that there's an issue to do with no affordable housing.
So I think it's a really important issue.
And maybe that's more of a comment than a question.
It is more of a comment, but we'll bear it in mind that you
said that.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:50:56
Would you agree with me?
Would you agree with me?
Yes.
I also had a query, 10 .37, which is also about the valuation
report, it says the residual land value generated by 100
percent private scheme is below the benchmark land value.
I would like some clarification about what that means, being
a bear of little brain.
Yeah.
but yeah let's are there any further questions if not we'll move on to the
comments in which case we can then discuss the site inspection briefing
okay no further questions okay we're now into the comments section this is your
moment Councillor Colman. I request the sites inspection briefing for committee.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:51:43
Okay, we do we have someone to second it? Councillor Fouts. Okay, so this...
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:51:48
Any give reasons?
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 3:51:56
Yes, the to judge the impact on neighbouring properties of buildings three and four storeys high
to
consider the impact on trees and the
loss of trees and the overall massing and to...
We can't do affordability on a site visit, but we can also see the setting of these new buildings in the context of Preston Lea.
Councillor David Fowles - 3:52:40
The seconder, could I, I don't know if it's possible to get an indication if we do vote
on a sites meeting to get an indication as to which trees are going to be lost.
Bearing in mind what the board member said.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:52:53
I'm sure we could be told which trees would be lost.
Okay.
So have you got adequate reasons to request a site inspection briefing?
Would you like to sort of articulate the reason we're going to vote?
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:53:09
For an SIB the criteria are the character appearance of the development itself is fundamental planning consideration,
a judgement is required on visual impact and the setting and surroundings are fundamental to determination of the applications,
I am satisfied with the impact on the neighbours, the potential loss of trees, the point, we've covered those points,
I am satisfied that it's in accordance with the constitution.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:53:29
Councillor Ray Brassington - 3:53:30
Is this a full member visit?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:53:31
Councillor Ray Brassington - 3:53:33
That would be on the 4th of February, I'm going to guess.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:53:39
Which is the first Wednesday in the month.
That is correct.
Okay.
We will go straight to the vote to defer this decision for a site inspection briefing.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:53:53
Councillor David Fowles - 3:53:58
Councillor Dilys Neill - 3:54:12
We are all in favour of the site inspection briefing. I look forward to seeing you there
on the 4th of February. So that decision is deferred until the next planning committee.
Is that a Wednesday?
Councillor David Fowles - 3:54:28
I just want to let you know, thank you very much to everyone who has attended.
The next meeting is Wednesday, the 11th of February.
At which time will you have a response to the consultation on the identity act?
Do you want to tell me what you think about that?
I would say there is currently a consultation on the National Planning Policy Framework.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 3:55:14
The government obviously there's about 128 questions or something along those lines that
we are members of the public councils, anywhere we're invited to respond to.
The council intends to provide a response.
I believe it needs to first come to this planning committee, then to overview and scrutiny committee
and then I believe it gets signed up by cabinet, although I'm just looking for clarification
on that.
But that would mean its first point of call will be this planning committee.
I believe the intention is for that to come to the February meeting.
I need to clarify that with Geraldine and Helen, but I thought I'd just pre -warn you
that it may be at the end of the agenda in February that we have a review of that consultation
response and a discussion with members about whether they're happy.
So is that just about before the panel meets?
Probably after.
Do you remember when we did the review of it was the National Scheme of Delegation and
though we sort of prepared a report since of the draught responses and we sort of briefed
members effectively on that and had a discussion, so we'll probably do something similar, but
I'll look to clarify whether Geraldine and Helen, how they'd like to approach that.
But I thought I'd pre -warn you that it's coming, just so you're not surprising us
and then something unusual at the end of your agenda packs.
.

There are currently no votes to display