DOCSLIB.ORG

APPLICATION NO: 07/0081/GLMAJW VALIDATION 20Th November DATE: 2007 DISTRICT REF: AGENT: P E Duncliffe Ltd, Stonecroft, Park Road, Nailsworth, GL6 0HW

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
APPLICATION NO: 07/0081/GLMAJW VALIDATION 20Th November DATE: 2007 DISTRICT REF: AGENT: P E Duncliffe Ltd, Stonecroft, Park Road, Nailsworth, GL6 0HW APPLICATION NO: 07/0081/GLMAJW VALIDATION 20th November DATE: 2007 DISTRICT REF: AGENT: P E Duncliffe Ltd, Stonecroft, Park Road, Nailsworth, GL6 0HW APPLICANT: Allstone Sand and Gravels, Myers Road, Gloucester, GL1 3QD SITE: Allstone House, Myers Road, Gloucester, GL1 3QD PROPOSAL: Variation of Condition 7 of Planning Permission 05/01126/FUL to allow the door on the east elevation to be used in association with the waste transfer station. PARISH OF N/A SITE AREA: 0.75 Ha GRID REF: 384687 218258 That planning permission be granted for the RECOMMENDED: reasons set out in this report and summarised at paragraphs 7.8–7.13, and subject to the conditions set out in section 8 of this report. 1.0 LOCATION 1.1 Allstone House is a portal steel frame warehouse building, 120m long and 30m wide, set on a 0.75 ha site within the built up area of Gloucester. The building accommodates a waste transfer station handling household, commercial and industrial wastes including putrescible and hazardous wastes. 1.2 The application site lies a short distance to the east of the city centre on former railway land immediately north of the main Gloucester to Birmingham railway. Access to the site is derived from a short private road that joins Myers Road to the west which in turn links with the A3042 Metz Way via Horton Road. Vehicles enter through a gateway in the north western corner of the fenced site and waste lorries track right to enter the building on the southern elevation. After depositing their load they leave via the same entrance and continue around the building in an anti-clockwise direction to leave via the gateway. 1.3 The building is set within a yard that accommodates the lorry route around the building, and to the east and north east accommodates an open storage area used for bulk storage of aggregates, and for storing skips. The yard area is enclosed by a railway sleeper fence beyond which the land falls to a watercourse and the residential area known as Armscroft Park. DC JULY08 3 GJ 1 1.4 To the north of the site lies Armscroft Park itself, an area of parkland with rugby pitch and a rugby club house immediately beyond the northern application site boundary. To the north west and north east of the site lie areas of residential development comprising Swallow Park and Armscroft Park respectively, the nearest residence being about 70m north east of the eastern gable of the building. 2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is for the variation of Condition 7 of planning permission reference 05/01126/FUL, granted 22 September 2005, to allow use of the door on the eastern elevation to be used in association with the waste transfer station. The door in question is a 6m width opening in the centre of the eastern elevation, with a roller shutter closure. Condition 7 of the 2005 permission was imposed “In the interests of the amenity of the area”. The condition reflects a similar earlier condition imposed at the time of the original permission granted on appeal in 1997for the use of the site as a Waste Transfer Station. An application to vary the condition to allow use of the door three times weekly was refused in 2001and that decision was upheld at appeal. 2.2 The applicant proposes to use the doorway for ‘bulking out’ residual waste. This is the process of removing from the building those wastes which it is not possible to recycle or transfer for further processing, and which need to be taken to licensed landfill for disposal. The process involves enclosed lorries entering the building to be loaded and then driving out and leaving the site by the normal lorry route. 2.3 The applicant wishes to use the doorway because the internal building arrangement, and scale of operation mean that using the southern doorway for the bulking out operation conflicts with incoming waste vehicles, leading to inefficiencies and potential danger to operatives. 2.4 The applicant’s agent has submitted a report in support of the application, which presents the results of an ambient noise monitoring exercise at the site. This concludes that: 2.5 The ambient noise levels at the site have noticeably increased since November 2005. The daytime ambient noise levels compared with those of November 2005 having risen to an average (in June 2007) of 59.2 dB LAeq at the site. This was recorded as 0.8 dB above the average (non site activity Table 3) level of 58.4 db LAeq at 0700 hours. 2.6 The on-site monitoring results confirm that the ambient noise levels exclusive of any Allstone’s activity have increased quite significantly in recent times. This is not at variance with national trends and the conclusion must be drawn that the increase is principally attributable to an increase in road traffic activity. DC JULY08 3 GJ 2 2.7 The most prominent noise source at the site in the absence of Allstone’s activity appears to be the motor traffic on the elevated roadway of Metz Way. The average background ambient noise level for the period 0400-0700 hours is close to that of the daytime level in the general vicinity of the site. 2.8 The question as to whether or not the status (open or shut) of the eastern door of the waste transfer building has any effect on the average ambient noise levels on the site and its general vicinity would appear to be answered by comparing the noise levels during those days when it was open with those when it was not. 2.9 No readily discernible difference appears to result from a direct comparison between the weekday LAeq averages of 14.05.07 to 21.05.07 (58.3 LAeq door open) with the period 25.06.07 to 30.06.07 (59.2 dB LAeq door closed). The result of the 1 day exercise of 28.09.07 (61.6 db LAeq door closed) serves also to illustrate the point. 2.10 It should be noted that the steel roller shutter type eastern door has poor acoustically attenuating properties as does the fabric of the building itself. The reason for the imposition of the closed door ‘condition’ was, initially, twofold, arising from concerns relating to possible dust emissions as well as noise. 2.11 A full monitoring survey of atmospheric particulates undertaken in May 2005 disposed of this concern. Therefore the only overriding reason for the requirement to maintain the eastern door in the closed position during operational hours relates to noise attenuation. In view of the findings detailed in this report it would now appear that this requirement is superfluous. 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY Application Description of development Decision number /date 05/01126/FUL Variation of condition 2 of appeal decision ref Approved T/APP/U1620/A/98/294844/P7 to allow use 22/09/2005 of the site for putrescible and special wastes (in addition to the approved use of the site as a waste transfer station for household, industrial and commercial wastes. 01/00254/FUL Variation of condition 5 on planning Proposal to use permission 97/00789/COU to allow door in the eastern door west elevation to remain open during refused and operational hours and door on east elevation refusal upheld on to be opened three times per week for appeal. Inspector operational reasons. based decision on ‘precautionary principle’ in respect of potential noise DC JULY08 3 GJ 3 and dust impacts on neighbouring properties 01/00255/FUL Variation of condition 2 on planning Approved permission 97/00789/COU to allow use of 03/07/2001 East part of waste transfer station building for door to be used storage of building and garden products. only in emergency 97/00444/FUL Erection of 2 storey workshop with ancillary Approved offices. Installation of weighbridge and 01/10/1997 aggregate bays, construction of parking area, landscaping and planting works, demolition of storage building and open store. 97/00789/COU Change of use from warehouse (Class B8) to Refused Waste Transfer Station. 31/03/1998. Appeal allowed 09/10/1998 4.0 PLANNING POLICY Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10) 4.1 PPS10 encourages communities to take responsibility for their own waste and to enable waste to be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installations. The statement promotes sustainable waste management whereby waste is moved up the waste hierarchy of reduction, reuse, recycling and composting and waste to energy, with waste disposal to landfill as a last resort. 4.2 When determining planning applications the PPS is a material consideration which may supersede policies in development plans and Waste Planning Authorities should therefore not place requirements on applicants which are inconsistent with the PPS. 4.3 In considering application for waste management facilities the statement indicates that authorities should consider the likely impact on the local environment and amenity. 4.4 The requirement for applicants to demonstrate that their proposal represents the Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO), which was a requirement of previous guidance (PPG10) has been removed. Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control (PPS23) 4.5 PPS23 sets out the material considerations that should be taken into account determining planning applications for developments that may give rise to pollution. PPS23 notes that the planning and pollution control systems are separate but complementary. DC JULY08 3 GJ 4 4.6 PPS23 states that any air or water consideration is capable of being a material consideration in so far as it affects land use.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Value for Money Integration in the Renegotiation of Public Private Partnership Road Projects by Ajibola Oladipo Fatokun
    Value for Money Integration in the Renegotiation of Public Private Partnership Road Projects By Ajibola Oladipo Fatokun A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Central Lancashire October 2018 i STUDENT DECLARATION I declare that while registered as a candidate for the research degree, I have not been a registered candidate or enrolled student for another award of the University or other academic or professional institution I declare that no material contained in the thesis has been used in any other submission for an academic award and is solely my own work Signature of Candidate: ____________________________________________________ Type of Award: ________________________ PhD _______________________ School: ______________________ Engineering ____________________ ii ABSTRACT The governments of various countries have continued to adopt Public Private Partnership (PPP) for infrastructure projects delivery due to its many advantages over the traditional procurement method. However, concerns have been raised by stakeholders about the viability of PPP to deliver Value for Money (VfM), especially for the client. These discussions have generated debates and arguments in policy and advisory documents within the last decade mainly in the renegotiation of PPP water and transport projects and their VfM implications. Poor or non-achievement of VfM in PPP contracts renegotiation has led to this study in PPP road projects with the overall aim of integrating VfM considerations into the renegotiation process of PPP road projects. Mixed methodology research approach is used to achieve the objectives set for the study. Interviews and questionnaires of professionals involved in Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO) road projects in the UK are used in the study.
    [Show full text]
  • 5304 Study of Land Surrounding Key
    Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District: Update Additional Sites 2015: Final Report to Cotswold District Council November 2015 Tel: 029 2043 7841 Email: [email protected] Web: www.whiteconsultants.co.uk Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update CONTENTS page PART 1 1 Introduction 3 2 Summary of findings 4 Tables Table 1 Additional sites landscape sensitivity: Housing/small scale mixed development PART 2 3 Site sensitivities Sites are considered in turn in settlement order with associated figures Andoversford 7 Down Ampney 10 Fairford 13 Lechlade 15 Mickleton 18 Moreton-in-Marsh 20 Northleach 22 Siddington 24 South Cerney 27 Stow-on-the-Wold 31 Tetbury 33 Willersey 36 Cover photo- Field adjacent to a development site north of Cirencester Road, Tetbury White Consultants 1 Additional sites 2015 final/021115 Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update PART 1 White Consultants 2 Additional sites 2015 final/021115 Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update 1. Introduction 1.1. White Consultants were appointed by Cotswold District Council in April 2014 to undertake an update of the landscape assessment around key settlements1 undertaken in 2000. 1.2. The scope of the study was to update the assessment taking into account the impact of any physical change since 2000, any revised assessments, policies and up-to-date guidance and focussing on the strategic housing land availability assessment (SHLAA) sites coming forward. The sites considered in this report are new sites that have been put forward for inclusion into the update of the SHLAA that is currently being carried out by Cotswold District Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Faringdon, Wantage & Wallingford
    CONTENTS 5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 5.2 History of the Route ......................................................................................................... 2 5.2.1 Stanford Road ................................................................................................... 2 5.2.2 Icknield Way/Portway ....................................................................................... 3 5.2.3 Wallingford Road .............................................................................................. 4 5.2.4 Early use of the Road ........................................................................................ 5 5.3 The First Act .................................................................................................................... 6 5.4 Implementing the Act ...................................................................................................... 7 5.5 Later Acts ......................................................................................................................... 7 5.6 Wallingford Toll-Bridge .................................................................................................. 9 5.7 The Trustees ..................................................................................................................... 10 5.8 Trust Officers and Finance............................................................................................... 11
    [Show full text]
  • Promoter Organisation Name Works Reference Address 1 Address 2
    Promoter Organisation Works Reference Address 1 Address 2 Works Location Works Type Traffic Management Start End Works Status Works C/W Name GLOUCESTERSHIRE CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 4 - UP TO EY102-GH1902000001769 SPOUT LANE ABENHALL Spout Lane, Abenhall MINOR GIVE & TAKE 28/01/2020 28/01/2020 PROPOSED WORKS COUNTY COUNCIL 0.5 MS CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 4 - UP TO Gigaclear KA030-CU004986 GRANGE COURT ROAD ADSETT Left hand fork by post box to By the right hand sign post STANDARD GIVE & TAKE 20/01/2020 31/01/2020 IN PROGRESS 0.5 MS CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 4 - UP TO Gigaclear KA030-CU005493 51488 ALDERLEY TO NEWMILLS FARM ALDERLEY Turning With Mount House On It to Outside Old Farm MINOR GIVE & TAKE 23/01/2020 27/01/2020 PROPOSED WORKS 0.5 MS CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 4 - UP TO Gigaclear KA030-CU005494 THE OLD RECTORY TO THE FURLONGS ALDERLEY 200m Before The Gate House to End Of The Road MINOR GIVE & TAKE 23/01/2020 27/01/2020 PROPOSED WORKS 0.5 MS PRIVATE STREET (NO DESIGN. Bristol Water AY009-2561804 WINTERSPRING LANE ALDERLEY OUTSIDE KINERWELL COTTAGE MINOR GIVE & TAKE 28/01/2020 30/01/2020 PROPOSED WORKS INFO. HELD) Thames Water Utilities LAYBY BY REAR OF EAGLE LINE, UNIT 3, ANDOVERSFORD CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 2 - 2.5 TO MU305-000031399394-001 A40 FROM ANDOVERSFORD BY PASS TO A436 ANDOVERSFORD MINOR TWO-WAY SIGNALS 25/01/2020 29/01/2020 PROPOSED WORKS Ltd INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,GLOUCESTER ROAD, ANDOVERSFORD, C 10 MS CARRIAGEWAY TYPE 4 - UP TO Gigaclear KA030-CU005381 ARLINGHAM ROAD ARLINGHAM Outside The Villa to Outside St Mary Church STANDARD MULTI-WAY SIGNALS 27/01/2020 31/01/2020
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding Survey June 1990 River Tame Catchment
    Flooding Survey June 1990 River Tame Catchment NRA National Rivers Authority Severn-Trent Region A RIVER CATCHMENT AREAS En v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE HEAD OFFICE Rio House, Waterside Drive, Aztec West, Almondsbury. Bristol BS32 4UD W EISH NRA Cardiff Bristol Severn-Trent Region Boundary Catchment Boundaries Adjacent NRA Regions 1. Upper Severn 2. Lower Severn 3. Avon 4. Soar 5. Lower Trent 6. Derwent 7. Upper Trent 8. Tame - National Rivers Authority Severn-Trent Region* FLOODING SURVEY JUNE 1990 SECTION 136(1) WATER ACT 1989 (Supersedes Section 2 4 (5 ) W a te r A c t 1973 Land Drainage Survey dated January 1986) RIVER TAME CATCHMENT AND WEST MIDLANDS Environment Agency FLOOD DEFENCE DEPARTMENT Information Centre NATONAL RIVERS AUTHORrTY SEVERN-TRENT REGION Head Office SAPPHIRE EAST Class N o 550 STREETSBROOK ROAD SOLIHULL cession No W MIDLANDS B91 1QT ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 0 9 9 8 0 6 CONTENTS Contents List of Tables List of Associated Reports List of Appendices References G1ossary of Terms Preface CHAPTER 1 SUMMARY 1.1 Introducti on 1.2 Coding System 1.3 Priority Categories 1.4 Summary of Problem Evaluations 1.5 Summary by Priority Category 1.6 Identification of Problems and their Evaluation CHAPTER 2 THE SURVEY Z.l Introduction 2.2 Purposes of Survey 2.3 Extent of Survey 2.4 Procedure 2.5 Hydrological Criteria 2.6 Hydraulic Criteria 2.7 Land Potential Category 2.8 Improvement Costs 2.9 Benefit Assessment 2.10 Test Discount Rate 2.11 Benefit/Cost Ratios 2.12 Priority Category 2.13 Inflation Factors
    [Show full text]
  • Upton – Chilton Road, Station Road and A417 London Road: Proposed Traffic Management Measures, Speed Limit and Toucan Crossing
    Divisions affected: Hendreds & Harwell CABINET MEMBER FOR ENVIRONMENT – 25 MARCH 2021 UPTON – CHILTON ROAD, STATION ROAD AND A417 LONDON ROAD: PROPOSED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES, SPEED LIMIT AND TOUCAN CROSSING Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place RECOMMENDATION 1. The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the following as advertised: Chilton Road a) 30mph Speed Limit – from its current terminal point, to the junction with Hagbourne Hill, replacing in the whole existing 40mph speed limit as a result. b) Banned Turning movements from Hagbourne Hill into Chilton Road from both directions, supported by No entry signs at the junction for vehicles approaching from the west. c) Traffic Calming Chicane (to be wide enough to accommodate non- standard cycles & wheelchairs) to be located on Chilton Road approx. 5 metres from Hagbourne Hill. d) Gate feature (with 1.5-metre-wide cycle bypass) to be located approx. 240 metres west of London Road. e) Raised table approximately 6 metres long, sited approximately 80 metres west of London Road A417 London Road f) a Toucan Crossing (controlled crossing for use by pedestrians & pedal cycles) to be located on London Road approx. 12 metres South of Chilton Road Station Road g) Raised table approximately 14.5 metres long, sited at its junction with London Road CMDE8 Executive summary 2. This report presents responses received to the statutory consultation on the proposals outlined in paragraph 1. Chilton Road is a missing link in an otherwise traffic-free or low traffic cycle route from Didcot to Harwell Campus and is part of the National Cycle Network (NCN) Route 544.
    [Show full text]
  • 5302 Study of Land Surrounding Key
    Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District: Update Additional Sites: Final Report to Cotswold District Council October 2014 Tel: 029 2043 7841 Email: [email protected] Web: www.whiteconsultants.co.uk Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update CONTENTS page PART 1 1 Introduction 4 2 Summary of findings 5 Tables Table 1A Additional sites landscape sensitivity: Housing Table 1B Additional sites landscape sensitivity: Economic Development PART 2 3 Site sensitivities Sites are considered in turn in settlement order with associated figures Andoversford 8 Blockley 10 Chipping Campden 14 Cirencester 18 Fairford 21 Lechlade 24 Northleach 28 Siddington 31 Tetbury 42 Willersey 45 White Consultants 1 Additional sites final/281014 Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update PART 1 White Consultants 2 Additional sites final/281014 Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update White Consultants 3 Additional sites final/281014 Cotswold District Council Study of land surrounding Key Settlements in Cotswold District Update 1. Introduction 1.1. White Consultants were appointed by Cotswold District Council in April 2014 to undertake an update of the landscape assessment around key settlements1 undertaken in 2000. 1.2. The scope of the study is to update the assessment taking into account the impact of any physical change since 2000, any revised assessments, policies and up-to-date guidance and focussing on the strategic housing land availability assessment (SHLAA) sites coming forward. The sites considered in this report are those considered by Cotswold District Council as not being deliverable but which may be put forward by developers as part of a challenge to the emerging Local Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.2 COTSWOLD DISTRICT COUNCIL AREA Rationale for Proposed
    7.2 COTSWOLD DISTRICT COUNCIL AREA Number of Proposed Divisions: 8 Total Electorate for District in 2010: 68,324 Forecast Electorate for District in 2016: 71,392 Forecast District Average Number of Electors per 8,924 Councillor in 2016: Forecast County Average Number of Electors per 9,220 Councillor in 2016: % Co-terminosity with District Wards 75% Rationale for Proposed Divisions The Cotswold district area is largely rural mainly comprising rural parishes, small market towns and the large historic town of Cirencester. The proposed divisions are formed around established market towns which have strong local community identity. By using existing district wards as the building bricks, it has been possible to achieve 75% coterminosity with district wards. The largest town of Cirencester requires two divisions. The existing division is currently represented by two councillors. The proposed two new divisions (divisions CO 4 and CO 5) are formed by using existing district wards to create an East and West split. The East division also includes some rural areas which are linked along the major A419 road. The centre of the Cotswold District area is the most sparsely populated area of Gloucestershire. A geographically large division CO 3 is necessary here. The largest settlement is Northleach. Two major routes traverse the area, the old Cirencester Road A435 and the A40 London Road. Both along and between these on the “top of the Cotswolds” are many small rural communities but no major settlements. Other divisions are largely dictated by the shape of the county. Starting in the southwest, a division has been created around the market town of Tetbury and the area to the east towards Cirencester.
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding Survey June 1990 River Avon Catchment
    Flooding Survey June 1990 River Avon Catchment NRA National Rivers Authority Severn-Trent Region RIVER CATCHMENT AREAS ? Severn-Trent Region Boundary Catchment Boundaries Adjacent NRA Regions 1. Upper Severn 2. Lower Severn 3- Avon 4. Soar 5. Lower Trent 6. Derwent 7. Upper Trent 8. Tame @ E n v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE HEAD OFFICE Rio House, Waterside Drive, Aztec W»st. Almondsbury. National Rivers Authority Bristol BS32 4UD * ‘ Severn-Trent Re&idn i c-yi * . FLOODING SURVEY JUNE 1990 SECTION 136(1) WATER ACT 1989 (Supersedes Section 24(5) W ater Act 1973 Land Drainage Survey dated January 1986) RIVER AVON CATCHMENT AND WARWICKSHIRE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 099804 FLOOD DEFENCE DEPARTMENT m ivironment Agency NATIONAL RIVERS AUTHORITY information Centre SEVERN-TRENT REGION Head Office SAPPHIRE EAST 550 STREETSBROOK ROAD Class N o ......................... SOLIHULL W MIDLANDS B91 1QT Accession No.................... COHTENTS Contents List of Tables List of Associated Reports List of Appendices References Glossary of Terms Preface CHAPTER 1 SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Coding System 1.3 Priority Categories 1.4 Summary of Problem Evaluations 1.5 Summary by Priority Category 1.6 Identification of Problems and their Evaluation CHAPTER 2 THE SURVEY 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Purposes of Survey 2.3 Extent of Survey 2.4 Procedure 2.5 Hydrological Criteria 2.6 Hydraulic Criteria 2.7 Land Potential Category 2.8 Improvement Costs 2.9 Benefit Assessment 2.10 Test Discount Rate 2.11 Benefit/Cost Ratios 2.12 Priority Category
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report
    Local Government -V* Boundary Commission For England Report No. Principal Area Boundary Review C TY OF GLOUCESTE 30ROUGH OF CHELTENHAM ) STR CT OF COTSWOLD ST R CT OF STROO OFTEWKESBim LOCAL BOUNDARY COMMISSION t'Olt ENGLAND REPORT NO. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CHAIRMAN • Mr G J Ellerton CMC MBE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN Mr J G Powell CBE FRIGS FSVA MEMBERS Mr K F J Ennals CB Mr G R Prentice Professor G E Cherry Mr B Scholes THE RIGHT HONOURABLE NICHOLAS RIDLEY MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT PRINCIPAL AREA REVIEW CITY"OF GLOUCESTER/BOROUGH OF CHELTENHAM/DISTRICT OF COTSWOLD/DISTRICT OF STROUD/BOROUGH OF TEWKESBURY INTRODUCTION 1. On 8 August 1979, Gloucester City Council asked us to review the City's boundaries, principally on the grounds that these had been overtaken by development and yet had been left unchanged during local government reorganisation. The City Council claimed that the transfer of a number of parishes from the District of Stroud and from the Borough of Tewkesbury would reflect the pattern of community life and be conducive to the effective operation of local government services. We noted from the prior consultations undertaken by the City Council that its request was opposed by Stroud District Council, Tewkesbury Borough Council and all the. parish councils concerned. 2. We considered Gloucester City Council's request, as required by section 48(5) of the Local Government Act 1972. We recalled that in our Report No 1, dealing with our proposals for the creation of new districts in the non- metropolitan counties, we had considered the alternatives of'having five or six districts in Gloucestershire.
    [Show full text]
  • LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN REVIEW December 2014 FEEDBACK FROM
    LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN REVIEW December 2014 FEEDBACK FROM STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS AUTUMN 2014 Version 1.0 Last Revised December 2014 Review Date Ongoing Category Strategic Infrastructure Owner Ben Watts Anyone wishing to obtain information on Gloucestershire County Target Audience Council’s Local Transport Plan consultation process GLOUCESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Local Transport Plan Review December 2014 Feedback from stakeholder workshops Contents Amendment Record This report has been issued and amended as follows: Issue Revision Description Date Signed 1.0 Agreed document 08/01/15 BW Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Workshops 1 3.1 Tewkesbury 3rd October 2014 3 3.2 Moreton-in-Marsh 7th October 2014 4 3.3 Cirencester 8th October 2014 5 3.4 Brockworth 9th October 2014 6 3.5 Nailsworth 22nd October 2014 8 3.6 Mitcheldean 24th October 2014 9 3.7 Cheltenham 28th October 2014 11 3.8 Stow-on-the-Wold 11th November 2014 13 1.0 Introduction In response to feedback received by Stakeholders at the Information Sharing event in July 2014 a revised consultation strategy was developed for the Local Transport Plan (LTP) Review which included a series of stakeholder workshops held during the autumn 2014. This document sets out the headlines from those workshops alongside the secondary documents which form part of the wider evidence base to inform the development of the Connecting Places Strategies (CPS). A public consultation on the Local Transport Plan Review including details of the Connecting Places Strategies is planned for spring 2015. Please note that the information provided within this summary document does not provide a definitive record of everything which was discussed at the consultation events and are not representative of the views of Gloucestershire County Council, Atkins or Harris Ethical.
    [Show full text]
  • Itlay, Dalingworth, Cirencester, Gloucestershire GL7 7HZ
    Itlay, Dalingworth, Cirencester, Gloucestershire GL7 7HZ Itlay, Dalingworth, Cirencester, Gloucestershire GL7 7HZ £575,000 The P roperty Directions Itlay is a beautifully presented and characterful cottage, From our office in Cirencester turn left towards the enjoying an excellent location with elevated views across Market Place. At the traffic lights turn left. Follow along surrounding countryside, being well placed for good this road into Dollar Street. Bear right at the bottom of the access to Cirencester or Cheltenham. road into Spitalgate Lane. At the traffic lights bear left onto Abbey Way. This road continues into Gloucester Itlay is a small hamlet type location adjacent to the pretty Road. As you start to leave Cirencester take the last village of Daglingworth. turning on the left hand side signposted Daglingworth. Follow this road until you reach a right hand turn, The property has been the subject of considerable signposted Itlay, after making this turn continue up the hill refurbishment and modernisation and has also been and turn left onto an unmade road, where the property sympathetically extended to now provide an impressive can be found on your left hand side. and characterful family home. Viewings With accommodation over two floors this is approached Strictly by appointment only – appointments to view over an entrance porch into an entrance hall, there are should be made through our Cirencester Office – 01285 two reception rooms with oak floors, the kitchen/dining 655355. room is a large and spacious area overlooking the private garden, there is a utility room and bathroom, and at first Local Authority floor level three well proportioned bedrooms and Cotswold District Council bathroom.
    [Show full text]