Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Dobie.

Councillor Allen declared that he had attended a meeting with Swindon Parish Council discussing Elms Park in summer 2024. He did not express a position at the meeting and was not predetermined on the item.

The following Councillors attended the site during Planning View:

·         Councillor Allen

·         Councillor Bamford

·         Councillor Barnes

·         Councillor Clark

·         Councillor Foster

·         Councillor Oliver

·         Councillor Steinhardt

·         Councillor Wheeler

Councillor Andrews confirmed that he had attended the site independently.

There were none.

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer introduced the report as published. He confirmed that as a cross-boundary planning application Tewkesbury Borough Council had resolved to accept the officer’s recommendation with one amendment earlier in the day. Tewkesbury Borough Council’s Planning Committee had resolved that the word cooking should be inserted into condition 49 – Energy Supply condition, to read “No dwelling hereby permitted shall be connected to mains gas supplies for any purpose of domestic hot water or space heating or cooking.” This resolution was now recommended to Committee to ensure consistent planning conditions. He outlined the additional representations, clarifications, corrections and additional changes including to conditions 4a, and 54 provided to Committee in the update report in advance of the meeting.

There were four public speakers on the item: an objector, the applicants’ representative, a parish council representative , and a ward member.

The objector addressed the Committee and made the following points:

• They are the owners of Fairfield, which has been their family home for more than 30 years and is identified in the submission being considered as third-party land. This was not discussed with them prior to submission. They believe that they are being misrepresented and take strong exception to their property’s inclusion without their consent. They require that it be removed from the application, including under the label of third-party land.
• They received a representation from the applicants in 2009, inviting them to enter into an option agreement, as well as an agreement under which they would promote the property. They declined both and advised that whilst they had no issue with the property being developed at some future time, they had no interest in participating in such development themselves. Their position was, and remains, simply to sell the property at a time that suits them and relocate. They were told a head of terms would be drafted to reflect that. They are not property developers, and do not want to participate in any development activity. They were approached again in 2015 and communicated that their position regarding the property had not changed.
• Between the two visits, they were invited into the Tewkesbury Council offices to discuss development interest. At the meeting they informed the council that whilst they would cooperate with preparation of development plans in general, they would not support any request for development approval that included their property whilst they owned it. Today’s request for approval has caused alarmed. They have confirmed no change to their position upon email request on a number of occasions since.
• They have also been approached by several land agents over the years and have responded in the same way to all of them.
• They found out about today’s planning submission a week ago, when a neighbour phoned to alert them that their property was specifically identified in the supporting document. They obtained a copy and read through it with increasing alarm. When they spoke to the planning officer, they made him aware of their concerns. He informed them  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

There were none.