Issue - meetings
Joint Core Strategy main modifications
Meeting: 10/02/2017 - Council (Item 13)
13 Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy-Main Modifications report PDF 136 KB
Report of the Leader
Additional documents:
- 2017_02_10_COU_JCS_Main_Modifications_Appendix 1, item 13 PDF 1 MB
- 2017_02_10_COU_JCS_Main_Modifications_Appendix1a, item 13 PDF 8 MB
- 2017_02_10_COU_JCS_Main_Modifications_Appendix2, item 13 PDF 360 KB
- 2017_02_10_COU_JCS_Main_Modifications_Appendix 3 Risk Assessment, item 13 PDF 51 KB
Minutes:
The Leader of the Council introduced the report and explained that the proposed main modifications to the JCS formulated following the July 2016 hearings were agreed at the October 2016 Council meetings by Gloucester City and Cheltenham Borough Councils. However the proposed main modifications were not agreed by Tewkesbury Borough Council (TBC) and officers there had been requested by Members to bring back to their Council a proposal which did not include Twigworth as part of the Innsworth/Twigworth strategic allocation. He reminded Members that the Planning Inspector’s stated position was that not including Twigworth may give rise to soundness issues.
The Leader reported that TBC had received specialist flooding advice which had shown there were no planning reasons to support the exclusion of the Twigworth Strategic Allocation from the Main Modifications. At their meeting on 31 January Tewkesbury Borough Council endorsed the proposed main modifications with some changes, including the reduction of the allocation at Twigworth to 995 and the inclusion of a revised flooding policy which all councils could benefit from. He also highlighted the fact that as the MOD would not be releasing their site at Ashchurch for at least 10 years the recommendation was to entirely remove Ashchurch from the proposals. Tewkesbury would now have a housing allocation shortfall and as a result there would be a review of other alternatives. The JCS was however now back on track and there would be a full 6 week public consultation followed by an examination in public with hearings expected late spring/early summer following which the final report would be submitted to the three Councils for formal endorsement and implementation.
Finally, the Leader emphasised the importance of keeping the JCS on track in terms of providing a plan for Cheltenham in the future. He highlighted the fact that West Cheltenham would have the opportunity to input into the process during the public consultation and the examination in public. It was important to have the JCS in place before planning applications were submitted.
The Development Manager-Strategy was invited to address Council. He informed Members that two of the PMM’s (the list of proposed main modifications to the plan) would need minor changes as follows :
- PMM0134 and PPM0135 refer to appendices 2A (maps) and Appendix 3 (superseded policies) respectively. The correct references for this meeting should be: Appendix 1A (maps) and Appendix 2 (superseded policies) respectively.
- PMM084 to paragraph 5.3.2 (in the Background to Policy INF3) is changed at the start to read “The Environment Agency is working with Gloucester City Council, the Lower Severn Internal Drainage Board …”
The following questions were raised and responses given :
- Swindon Village Local Green Space - a Member sought assurance from officers that when considering planning applications in this area they would take account of what the Inspector had said regarding green space. In response the Development Manager-Strategy said that the Local Green Space in Swindon village had been included in the proposed main modifications and would constitute part of the ... view the full minutes text for item 13