DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL COMMITTEE
Meeting Papers
Tuesday, 11 November 2014
at
18:00
Page 1 of 72
Members of Development Control Committee
Dorcas Binns - Member, Nigel Cooper - Member, Haydn Jones - Member, Dave Mossman - Member, Emma Sims - Member, Elizabeth Ashton - Member, Stephen Moore - Member, Stephen Robinson - Member, Roger Sanders - Member, Paul Hemming - Member, Ken Stephens - Chairman, John Marjoram - Member
FIRE EVACUATION PROCEDURES FOR VISITORS AT EBLEY MILL
• Upon hearing the fire alarm, visitors should immediately evacuate the building by the nearest fire exit. These are located at the rear of the chamber, and the side door leading to the roof garden, marked as Fire Exits.
• Proceed to the main staff car park, and assemble at the NB sign.
• DO NOT stay, or return, to collect personal belongings.
• DO NOT use the lifts when the alarm is sounding
• Visitors must remain at the assembly points until permission is given to leave.
• Visitors must not leave the site until instructed to do so.
For details of future meetings please see the website – www.stroud.gov.uk
ALL MOBILE PHONES/PAGERS SHOULD BE SWITCHED OFF OR SET TO SILENT MODE BEFORE THE START OF THE MEETING.
Page 2 of 72
04 NOVEMBER 2014
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
A meeting of the Development Control Committee will be held on TUESDAY, 11 NOVEMBER 2014 in the Council Chamber, Ebley Mill, Ebley Wharf, Stroud at 18:00 .
David Hagg Chief Executive
A G E N D A
Please Note: This meeting will be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site ( www.stroud.gov.uk ). The whole of the meeting will be filmed except where there are confidential or exempt items, which ma y need to be considered in the absence of the press and public. The images and sound recording may be used for training purposes within the Council. Whilst the public seating areas are not directly filmed, particular camera shots around the Chamber may capture persons seated in the public areas. If you ask a question in accordance with the procedures in the Council’s Constitution and use a microphone for this purpose, then you will be deemed to have consented to being filmed. By entering the Council Ch amber and using the public seating areas, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you have any queries regarding the above, please contact Democratic Servic es.
Public Speaking at Development Control Committee
The Council have agreed to introduce public speaking at meetings of the Development Control Committee. The procedure to be followed is set out on the page immediately before the Planning Schedule.
Page 3 of 72
Development Control Committee Agenda Published: 04 November 2014
1 APOLOGIES To receive apologies of absence.
2 DECLARATIONS OF INTE REST To receive declarations of interest.
3.i MINUTES To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the Special Development Control Committee meeting held on 23 September 2014.
3.ii MINUTES To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the Development Control Committee held on 13 October 2014.
4 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL - PLANNING SCHEDULE
Page 4 of 72
Development Control Committee Agenda Published: 04 November 2014
2014/15
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
23 September 2014
6.00 pm – 8:40 pm Council Chamber, Ebley Mill, Stroud 3
Minutes
Membership:
Councillor Ken Stephens (Chair) P Councillor Haydn Jones P Councillor John Marjoram (Vice Chair) P Councillor Stephen Moore P Councillor Liz Ashton P Councillor Dave Mossman P Councillor Dorcas Binns P Councillor Steve Robinson P Councillor Nigel Cooper P Councillor Roger Sanders P Councillor Paul Hemming P Councillor Emma Sims P A = Absent P = Present
Other Members in attendance
Councillor Chris Brine Councillor Simon Pickering Councillor Paul Carter Councillor Mark Rees Councillor Karon Cross Councillor Geoff Wheeler Councillor David Drew Councillor Martin Whiteside Councillor Jonathan Edmunds Councillor Rhiannon Wigzell Councillor Stephen Lydon Councillor Tom Williams Councillor Keith Pearson
Officers in attendance
Philip Skill - Head of Planning Martin Evans - Solicitor John Longmuir - Development Control Team Manager Darryl Rogers - Principal Planning Officer Matt Morris – GVA Grimley, Sean McIntyre – Key Transport Michael Glaze – Gloucestershire County Highways
Before the business of the formal meeting began the Chair made announcement
Page 5 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 1 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting He congratulated Councillor John Marjoram on his recent marriage and up-coming honeymoon.
DC.043 APOLOGIES
Although the following Councillors do not sit on the Development Control Committee, apologies were received from
Councillor Nigel Prenter Councillor Nick Hurst Councillor Mattie Ross Councillor Martin Baxendale
DC.044 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None pursuant to the Code of Conduct.
DC.045 PLANNING SCHEDULE
Representations were received and taken into account by the Committee in respect of the following Applications:-
1. S.13/1498/FUL 2. S.13/1499/CAC 3. S.13/2284/FUL 4. S.14/0677/FUL
The Principal Planning Officer and Solicitor advised on how it was proposed to consider the various applications at committee:
S.13/1498/FUL and S.13/1499/CAC – Brunsdon Yard, Ryeford Road South, Ryeford, Stonehouse would be considered together as sister applications.
the 3 supermarket applications were clearly alternatives and should therefore be considered by the Committee at the same time to ensure the merits of each could be weighed carefully before the applications were determined.
The proposed ‘Market Tavern’ scheme was not currently the subject of a planning application but was still a relevant factor in the Committee’s determination.
DC.046 PUBLIC SPEAKING
The Chairman introduced the Public Speaking.
Ward Members were permitted to speak, on each application and the Market Tavern scheme. The following Ward Members spoke on behalf of their wards:
Councillor Martin Whiteside (Thrupp ward) Councillor Jonathan Edmunds (Randwick, Whiteshill and Ruscombe ward) Councillor Paul Carter (Nailsworth ward)
Page 6 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 2 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting Councillor Rhiannon Wigzell (Amberley and Woodchester ward) John Longmuir, Development Control Manager, read out a statement on behalf of Councillor Nick Hurst (Minchinhampton ward) Councillor Lydon spoke on behalf of himself and Councillor Nigel Studdert Kennedy (both of The Stanleys ward)
The following points were raised by one or more of the above:
Empty shops in Stroud, if supermarkets approved it will become less viable Jobs will be lost locally No need for further supermarkets in Nailsworth Supermarkets refuse to acknowledge how they damage the fabric of the Community Traffic congestion Effect on shops in Kings Stanley
This concluded non Ward Member public speaking.
Public Speaking on S.13/1498/FUL and S.13/1499/CAC - Brunsdons Yard, Ryeford Road South comprised the following speakers:
Councillor Chris Brine (Stonehouse ward) Representative of Stonehouse Town Council Representative of ‘Stroud Against Supermarket Saturation’ group John Clarke, Property Alliance Group as representative supporting the scheme at Brunsdons Yard.
The following points were raised by one or more of the above:
Stonehouse Town Council objected to this development Building on floodplain, likely to see more flooding Traffic congestion would arise Jobs would be lost locally The site is currently a dilapidated and contaminated brown field site and the development would bring this back into use Contribution would be made to shared space in Stonehouse as a result of the development Consultation had taken place with County Highways and it was satisfied with the development proposals.
Public Speaking on Daniels Industrial Estate application – S.13/2284/FUL comprised:
Councillor Stephen Moore (Ward Councillor for Rodborough) also spoke on behalf of Councillor Prenter (Rodborough) Representative of Rodborough Parish Council Representative of those opposing the scheme at Daniels Industrial Estate Doug Wilson, Asda as representative supporting the scheme at Daniels Industrial Estate. Page 7 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 3 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting
The following points were raised by one or more of the above:
Need full-time jobs Traffic Congestion on Dudbridge Hill Noise pollution Impact of petrol filling station on existing facilities This is the only site Asda is committed to Lots of support from local people – Asda has a number of prospective job applications This is the only site that isn’t subject to flooding.
Public Speaking on the Avocet / Dudbridge Industrial Estate application – S.14/0677/FUL
Councillors Karon Cross, Mark Rees and Tom Williams (Ward Councillors for Cainscross) -. Representative of Cainscross Parish Council Representative for those opposing the scheme at Avocet David Hutichinson (Pegasus Planning) as representative supporting the scheme at Avocet
The following points were raised by one or more of the above:
Cannot blame empty shops in Stroud Town Centre on supermarkets Not everyone can afford to shop in Farmers Market Jobs would be created Foodbank fed 4,395 customers from the Cainscross ward, the ward needs cheaper food, fuel, clothes and Asda’s presence would help Dudbridge needs re-developing and the development would offer significant benefits to the regeneration of that area. Traffic – Cainscross roundabout busy already Not designated in Local Plan Foodstore built on land completely out of flood plain, existing factory site is in the flood plain and there are no early warning systems, the application presents an opportunity to address this.
Public speaking was permitted by the Chairman of the Committee on the possibility of the development of The Market Tavern, Union Street, Stroud. The speakers comprised:
Councillor David Drew (Farmhill and Paganhill ward) Councillor Simon Pickering (Slade ward) Town Mayor for Stroud Town Council Andrew Watton as representative supporting the scheme at The Market Tavern
(No-one at the meeting wished to speak in opposition).
Page 8 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 4 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting The following points were raised by one or more of the above:
Not seen evidence yet as to whether there is a need on this site Sensitive site Flooding – repercussion for other sites Potential loss of jobs Free bus may benefit Residents have been notified Market space – more visible to London Road, further consultation will be organised. The Council would be released from its commitment to the market site of £40,000 per year Improvements to Brunel car park, income for car park, redevelopment to market Foodstore would improve footfall.
This concluded the Public Speaking.
The meeting was then adjourned for ten minutes and reconvened at 8:00 p.m.
DC.47 QUESTIONS BY DCC MEMBERS OF THE OFFICERS
The Principal Planning Officer explained the planning guidance the supermarket applications would need to be tested against with reference to the key tests outlined in Paragraphs 24, 26 and 27 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The fundamental tenet of planning retail policy was to safeguard the viability and vitality of town centres and this was a key material consideration for Members.
The Officer also clarified that comments made during public speaking regarding certain financial issues which were not material considerations for the Committee. In addition it was also advised that the historic policy requirement to demonstrate a need for edge of centre / edge of centre retail proposals had been deleted on the publication of the now replaced PPS4 and that the test in the NPPF was one of the degree of impact, not need.
The Solicitor explained that although the Market Tavern scheme was not the subject of a planning application and could not be considered on its merits at this stage, the Committee had to apply the test in Paragraph 26 of the NPPF, namely Members had to assess the impact of each of the proposals on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal. From the very recent information provided by the promoters of the scheme, Officers had reached the conclusion that the Market Tavern scheme was a planned private investment in Stroud Town centre. As such, the Committee proceeded to grant one or more of the supermarket applications without having undertaken the assessment required by Paragraph 26 of the NPPF, there was potential that such a decision could be challenged by way of a Judicial Review in the High Court by the promoters of the Market Tavern scheme.
Page 9 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 5 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting Therefore, the Solicitor advised that there was currently insufficient information available to Members to properly assess the retail impact of each of the supermarket proposals on the planned Market Tavern scheme. As such, he recommended that all the Schedule applications should be deferred to allow further information to be obtained regarding the Market Tavern scheme to enable the Paragraph 26 impact assessment to be carried out.
The Head of Planning explained that it was his recommendation to defer all three supermarket applications to allow operators of Market Tavern to progress their scheme and for the other applicants to carry out their investigations/consultations relating to this scheme.
Councillor John Marjoram commented that the Committee had heard different views from the community, that Members had to adhere to planning policy and guidance, and that the Committee has responsibility for the whole district. He proposed that all three supermarket applications, plus the application for conservation area consent be deferred as recommended by the Head of Planning.
This proposal was seconded by Councillor Sanders.
Councillor Mossman asked whether it would be possible to put a timescale on the deferral.
The Head of Planning explained that whilst it was difficult to put a timescale on this, he hoped the information would be available to the Council within 3 months. Officers could then look to formulate an updated report to the Committee in March 2015.
The Chair asked for an update for information at the December Committee. The Head of Planning agreed that he would update Committee before March 2015 should it be necessary, possibly in December 2014 or in any event in January 2015
On the taking of the vote it was unanimously
RESOLVED To defer all four applications.
The Chair thanked everyone who spoke at the meeting. The meeting closed at 8.40 p.m.
Chair
Page 10 of 72
Special Development Control Committee 6 23 September 2014 Subject to approval at next meeting 2014/15
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
13 October 2014
6.30 pm – 11.20 pm Council Chamber, Ebley Mill, Stroud 3
Minutes
Membership:
Ken Stephens** A Haydn Jones P John Marjoram* P Stephen Moore P Liz Ashton P Dave Mossman P Dorcas Binns A Steve Robinson P Nigel Cooper P Roger Sanders P Paul Hemming P Emma Sims P
** = Chair * = Vice-Chair A = Absent P = Present
Other Members in attendance
Councillor Martin Baxendale Councillor Mattie Ross Councillor Paul Carter Councillor Nigel Studdert-Kennedy Councillor David Drew Councillor Tom Williams Councillor Lesley Reeves Councillor Penny Wride Councillor Mark Rees
Officers in attendance
Head of Planning Senior Planning Officers Development Control Team Manager Democratic Services & Elections Officer Legal Services and Monitoring Officer
DC.048 APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Dorcas Binns and Ken Stephens.
DC.049 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None under the Members’ Code of Conduct.
Page 11 of 72
Development Control Committee 1 Subject to approval at next meeting 13 October 2014 Appendix A DC.050 MINUTES
RESOLVED That the Minutes of the Development Control Committee meeting held on 9 September 2014 are accepted as a correct record.
DC.051 PLANNING SCHEDULE
Representations were received and taken into account by the Committee in respect of the following Applications:-
1. S.14/0724/FUL 2. S.14/1576/FUL 3. S.14/1336/FUL 4. S.14/1450/FUL 5. S.13/2377/FUL 6. S.13/1267/FUL 7. S.14/0351/FUL 8. S.14/1566/COU
Late Pages had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting and were available at the meeting in respect of Scheduled Items 3, 4, 6 and 7.
DC.052 ITEM 1 – DEMOLISH AN EXISTING BUNGALOW AND REPLACE IT WITH 4 DWELLINGS AT 20 CASTLE MEAD, KINGS STANLEY, SONEHOUSE, GLOS (S.14/0724/FUL)
The Development Control Manager outlined the above Application that had been deferred at last month’s meeting to allow the Parish Council to comment on the revised Application.
Councillors Nigel Studdert-Kennedy and Steve Lydon, Ward Members for The Stanleys and Mr Simon Parsley on behalf of Kings Stanley Parish Council spoke against the Application.
The Agent, Ms Rachel Stainer-Hutchins spoke on behalf of her Client’s Application.
A Motion to REFUSE the Application was proposed by Councillor Stephen Moore and seconded by Councillor Liz Ashton. The proposer stated that the development would be overbearing and the site over developed.
On being put to the vote, there were 6 votes for the Motion, 2 votes against and 1 abstention; it was declared CARRIED.
RESOLVED To REFUSE Application S.14/0724/FUL, for the reasons set out in these Minutes.
DC.053 ITEM 2 – REPLACEMENT DWELLING AT WINTERSPRING COTTAGE, WINTERSPRING LANE, ALDERLEY, WOTTON-UNDER- EDGE, GLOS (S.14/1576/FUL)
The Development Control Manager confirmed that English Heritage had been approached to consider listing the above dwelling but their response stated that the building was not worthy of listing.
A representative from Alderley Parish Meeting and Mr Nicolas Read a local resident outlined their many concerns requesting Committee to refuse the Application.
Page 12 of 72 Development Control Committee 2 Subject to approval at next meeting 13 October 2014 Appendix A The Officer clarified that in an Advice Report received from English Heritage they had concluded that the building was not worthy of being listed and stated their reasons. The report had been published on the Council’s website and circulated to Members. He also stated that English Heritage was the only body who could list the building. The Conservation Officer had viewed at the building and did not object to the Application. A refusal of the Application could not be substantiated on Appeal.
Officers confirmed that Members had chosen not to make a local listing in May 2012 for Local Heritage listing. He outlined the process and also confirmed that the SI 2274 Statement, within the Planning Schedule was correct. The Bat Survey had not been received and delegated authority could be given to Officers to delay a Decision Notice until it had been received.
A Motion to REFUSE the Application was proposed by Councillor Paul Hemming and seconded by Councillor Liz Ashton.
The proposer’s reasons for refusal included concerns for the wildlife, the building was a contender for local listing which was what the local community wanted because parts of the building dating back to pre1700. The proposed replacement dwelling was an inappropriate vernacular in an urban area next to an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Members debated the Motion and had mixed views.
On being put to the vote, there were 5 votes for the Motion, 3 votes against and 1 abstention; it was declared CARRIED.
RESOLVED To REFUSE Application S.14/1576/FUL, as set out in these Minutes.
DC.054 ITEM 3 – CONTINUED USE OF LAND FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES AND THE INSTALLATION OF UP TO 18 MW OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS AND ANCILLARY WORKS FOR A PERIOD OF 30 YEARS AT MANOR FARM, UPPER WICK, DURSLEY, GLOS (S.14/1336/FUL)
The Senior Planning Officer referred to the Late Pages that had been circulated to Members and outlined their content, including the amended Officer recommendation to refuse the Application. Prior to the meeting she also circulated to Members further updates which included the Agent amending the Application by changing the site area, but not the red line on the plan and use 6MW and not 18MW solar photovoltaic panels.
Councillor Penny Wride, Ward Member for the Vale Ward and Councillor Lesley Reeves, a Ward Member for Wotton-under-Edge requested Committee to refuse the Application.
Councillor Jan Sayers representing Alkington Parish Council and Mr Keith Larkin representing North Nibley Parish Council, who had unanimously objected to the Application, also requested the Application to be refused.
Mr Mark Patterson also opposed of the Application. Page 13 of 72 Development Control Committee 3 Subject to approval at next meeting 13 October 2014 Appendix A
The Applicant, Mr Andrew Bower confirmed that he had listened to concerns and the original site had been reduced to a single field, would be well screened and backed onto woodlands. After 30 years the land would be returned back to agricultural use.
The Officer confirmed that the red line on the Application had not changed, the solar panels would be matt black and a condition could be added regarding decommissioning. She confirmed that with the additional update her recommendation to refuse the Application set out in the Late Pages stood. A plan showing the area was displayed for Members.
The Head of Planning clarified that the solar panels would be set into the ground no deeper than a plough and a condition could be placed on the Application for them to be removed after 30 years. The Applicant had given an undertaking to only use the west side but the red line on the plan remained the same. If Members were minded they could defer the Application to enable further consultation to take place with the statutory consultees and members of the public. But if the Application was refused then the Applicant could submit a new Application.
A Motion to ACCEPT the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the Application, as set out in the Late Pages, was proposed by Councillor Roger Sanders and seconded by Councillor Dave Mossman.
The Proposer confirmed that he had been bombarded by correspondence from residents opposing the Application, he supported renewable energy but this was an inappropriate site which should be protected. More suitable sites could be found within the District.
Members debated the Application and concluded that the Application needed to be smaller and was in an inappropriate location. They agreed to the Solicitor’s suggestion to delegate authority to the Head of Planning to elaborate on reasons for refusing this Application.
On being put to the vote, there were 7 votes for the Motion, 3 votes against and 0 abstentions; it was declared CARRIED.
RESOLVED To Refuse Application S.14/1336/FUL, as set out in these Minutes.
The meeting adjourned at 8.18 pm and reconvened at 8.26 pm.
DC.055 ITEM 4 – ERECTION OF