Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Clark and Wheeler.

There were none.

There were none.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2026.

The minutes of the meeting held on 22^nd January were approved unanimously.

There were none.

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer introduced the report as published.

There was one public speaker who spoke for the application, she made the following points:

-       The applicant stated that there was engagement with the community and there was a post card drop to 437 houses.

-       A consultation and a drop in session took place at Hesters Way community centre

-       Comments were received on line from 87 people.

-       There were concerns raised about parking and landscaping and all points have been taken into account.

-       With a view to affordable housing, this has been made possible with a grant from Homes England, affordable housing is essential. 

-       Parking has moved on from last years consultation.  There will be  approximately 60 dwellings with allocated spaces.

-        It is a  sustainable site with landscaping.

-       The application is supported by civic society and they have tried, where possible  to fit in Cheltenham SPD.

The response member questions were as follows:

-       The parking level is based on the census data in the area and a parking survey in the area, highways officers were consulted and were satisfied that the levels are satisfactory.

-       With regard to the request from county archaeology, this has been included and submitted and agreed by the county archaeologist.

-       The care home have objected to the application and have submitted a petition, the applicant engaged with the care home and they do have concerns but mostly around the noise that the construction will cause.

The matter then went to Member debate, where the following points were raised:

-       Members were really happy with the layout.

-       It was pleasing to see the amount of social housing in the borough, as there is an issue with affordability in Cheltenham.

-       There is potential for biodiversity with the gardens, although that will be up to the occupiers.

-       There is no reason not to back the application especially as there is  a need to bring down the waiting list.

-       There was appreciation for the consultation that has been done on the application.

-       The site looks beautiful, only concern is about the maintenance of the landscaping and the swales, there was a hope that there is a robust plan to protect the landscaping.  It was suggested that the details are put in the new owners handbook with regard to who to contact if there is damage to the neighbourhood.

-       It was commented that there is a sense of pride in communities these days, and it was hoped that will continue with this application.

-       It is assumed that flat dwellers don’t want outdoor private space, it is important to a lot of people, this was just a comment for future developments.

Matter went to the vote

Unanimous to grant.

Planning Application Documents

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the report as published.

Councillor Barrell addressed the committee to speak in favour of the application.  She made the following points:

-       Both herself and Cllr Chelin were in favour of the application.

-       The park is a great asset to the town.

-       During the summer due to lack of rainfall the fish were dying due to the lack of water in the lake.  Team have worked very hard to improve the situation.

-       Asked that the committee allow this application to be permitted.

Responses to Member questions were as follows:

-       The work would start as soon as possible to circumvent the birds that nest in the area, there isn’t a start date at the moment.  This is covered by the mitigation measures and recommendations set out in the Ecology report submitted with the application.    

-       The planning officer will re check the ecology report to see that there is a provision with regard to the birds.

There was no Member debate.

The matter then went to the vote:

Unanimous – for.