Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor McCloskey, Councillor Clark attended as a substitute.

Councillor Clark declared an interest in 5a as a trustee of Cheltenham Trust and left the Chamber for that item and was therefore not present for the debate or vote.

Councillor Baker declared an interest on items 5b and 5c as he wished to speak on those items and therefore was not present for the debate or vote.

Coucillors Seacome and Oliver visited both sites.

Councillor Payne visited Cambray Court.

Councillor Bamford also visited Cambray Court.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 17 November 2022.

The minutes of the November meeting were approved and signed.

Planning Application Documents  

The Conservation Officer introduced the case.

There were no Member questions and there was no Member debate.

The matter went to the vote on the officer recommendation to permit.

For – 10 UNANIMOUS

Petmitted.

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

The Chair ensured that all committee Members had seen the written representations that had been sent in by people unable to attend the meeting.

There were two speakers in the item the first being the Chair of the Planning Forum at the Cheltenham Civic Society.  He made the following points:

·         That the proposal would enhance the area and would be an improvement to the public realm.

·         The plan is for a new waterside mini park which will be a private park for Cambray Court residents and a park for Cheltenham residents by using a small amount of the Rodney Road car park.

·         To realise the plan the Council needs to declare public support of the site and in the long run the proposal should be cheaper for the residents.

Councillor Baker as the County Councillor for the area spoke on the application and made the following points:

·         He explained that the application is within his County division and that he had engaged with The Civic Society and the residents at an early stage in the process.

·         The River Chelt is a hidden treasure and not many residents or visitors are aware of it.

·         The proposal would enhance the area and reduce flood risk, it would also help preserve the wildlife.

·         There has already been planning permission for a different scheme approved for this area, that should be re considered and approve this current plan.

·         The benefits of the proposal are that there will be a permeable hard standing, solar panels and electric vehicle charging points.

·         There will be a small loss to the garages and public parking.

·         Approval of this scheme will make the best of the River Chelt.

The matter then went to Member questions and the responses were as follows:

·         The current dimensions of the garages are width 2.6m, depth 5.6m and height 2.6m.  The proposed new garages will be as follows: width 2.7m, depth 5.3m and a pitched roof where the maximum height will be 5.4m.

·         The green space that will be taken from Rodney Road is 3.7m.

·         The height of the wall is to meet the height that is advised to meet climate change flood river levels.

·         The previous scheme was permitted in 2021 with the condition that it be implemented in three years, which is the same as this application.

·         Any legal matters amounting from the grant of this scheme are no a planning matter for consideration, they are a civil matter.

·         There is a condition for landscaping within the scheme and that will include lighting.

·         The maintenance of the site will be the responsibility of the owner of the land, in this case Cheltenham Borough Council and the owners of the flats.

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

·         There was concern raised regarding the loss in revenue to the authority due to the loss of parking at Rodney Road car park.

·         The issue with possible flooding was raised although it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer introduced the report as published.

The Chair then ensured that the Committee had seen the representations hat had been sent in from people who were unable to attend the meeting.

There was only one speaker in the item Councillor Paul Baker.

He made the following points:

·         He stated that he was involved in the case due to the concerns of the neighbour.

·         There has been conflict between the neighbours but hopefully good relations can return.

·         This is a retrospective application as the extension that was previously approved was not built and this application does reflect the extension that was built.

·         During site view it was possible to see the extension and understand its impact.

·         The extension no longer has a first floor rear extension and as a result the application does not fail the light test.

·         The conversion of the property is significant and been completed to a high standard.

·         The extension does result in some loss of light for the neighbour and it does result is some loss of outlook which means there is conflict with the Cheltenham Local Plan Policy SL1 the amenity of adjoining land users.

·         The conflict with the neighbour has meant that the builder has not been able to do a very good job of the brickwork, which looks a little unsightly from the neighbours side.

There were no Member questions.

The matter then went to debate and the following point was made:

·         There is less loss of light to the neighbour than the previous application, therefore there is a better outcome for the neighbour.

The matter then went to the vote to permit:

For: 9

Against: 0

Abstentions: 1

PERMIT

The Chair then thanked officers for all their hard work during the year.

The next meeting is the 19^th January 2023.

Were noted for information.

There were none.