Agenda item
24/01730/FUL - 1 Coltham Fields, GL52 6SP
Minutes:
The principal planning officer introduced the report as published.
The applicant submitted a later representation which was accepted by the Chair and read to the Committee by the Legal officer. The applicant's letter explained they had been priced out of Cheltenham and saw this as an opportunity to return. Their new design would provide better living space than the existing unviable permission. They noted neighbour support and plans to make the home eco-friendly
There were two public speakers on the item: the applicant’s representative and a Ward Member.
The applicant’s representative addressed the committee and made the following points:
· Refusal was partially recommended on the basis that the previous permission granted in 2022 may still be taken forward. The sheme approved has proved to not be viable financially for the purposes of speculative development. Attempts to market the site on the basis of this permission have received no interest and this permission will expire in 2025. Other permissions granted at Coltham Fields 4 years ago have also not been built due to similar financial pressures.
· The new scheme proposed is only viable due to this being self-builders who are intending to build a home for their own use. They are investing in the land and building rather than developing for profit. The Council has a duty to meet self-build demand on a 3 year rolling basis.
· Whilst concern has been raised that the design fills the plot, this is also true of both historic and more recent dwellings on Coltham Fields.
· The newly submitted application is very different in scale, mass, height and design that the one rejected by the previous inspector. It provides double the parking and more than double the amenity space than the previously permitted design.
· No objections have been received from statutory consultees.
· Seven letters of support have been received from those local to the area who have praised the design, the use of a brownfield site and the positive benefits it will bring to the area.
· The two objections received relate to highways and the loss of privacy but the officer’s report has concluded the proposal does not cause harm in these respects.
Councillor Day as Ward Member addressed the committee and made the following points:
· The revised National Planning Policy Framework 125 states that: “Planning policies and decisions should… c) give substantial weight to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements for homes and other identified needs, proposals for which should be approved unless substantial harm would be caused.”
· The lack of mitigation of impact on the Cotswold Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC) should be dealt with as a condition of approval rather than a reason for refusal.
· Additional reasons for refusal are subjective judgements.
· The proposal would represent a substantial improvement on the current site which includes a high wall topped with wire and abandoned cars.
· Coltham Field residents who have responded to the consultation have been overwhelmingly positive, with 15 letters of support and only 2 in objection. Responses have praised the design, use of space, improvements to the local aesthetic and positive contribution to the community by making better use of existing land.
· The main objection raised concerns a property being overlooked but the officer’s report has concluded that the separation distances largely accord with the recommended distances.
· Rejecting approval on brownfield sites increases the pressure to build on greenfield sites, even within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Brownfield site development should only be refused when they are clearly in breach of planning regulations, which is not the case with the current application.
In response to Members’ questions, officers confirmed that:
· The two objections came from Hales Road and Rosehill Street.
· It could be a condition that a contribution to the Cotswold Beechwoods SAC be agreed with the applicant via a Section 106 agreement.
The matter then went to Member debate where the following points were made:
· It is positive that the scheme takes up the whole plot to make the best use of a small site. The design is attractive with good facilities that overcome a lot of the issues identified by the previous inspector.
· It is remarkable to see so many letters of support from local residents who will be the most impacted by the design.
·
Due to the size of the plot creating any more meaningful design
will be difficult.
The matter then went to the vote on the officer recommendation to refuse:
For: 0
Against: 11
Abstentions: 0
Voted against recommendation UNANIMOUSLY.
Councillor Baker proposed a motion that permission be granted contrary to the recommendation as the Committee believe the design to be acceptable and in compliance with policies D1, SD4 and relevant SPD guidance, and that the building won’t be incongruous to the street scene. This permission be subject to an agreed S106 contribution to the Beechwoods SAC and delegation of conditions to be imposed by the Officer in agreement with the Chair and Vice Chair. This motion was seconded by Councillor Wheeler.
The matter then went to the vote on Councillor Baker’s motion to permit subject to stated conditions:
For: 11
Against: 0
Abstentions: 0
Voted UNANIMOUSLY for permit subject to conditions.
Supporting documents:
-
1_Coltham_Fields_24_01730_FUL_Report, item 7.
PDF 308 KB
-
1_Coltham_Fields_24_01730_FUL_Representations, item 7.
PDF 39 KB
-
Addendum Report 6a, item 7.
PDF 477 KB
-
Coltham Fields - letter to members 2024 12, item 7.
PDF 1 MB
-
1_Coltham_Fields_24_01730_FUL_Presentation, item 7.
PDF 1 MB
-
Letter from Applicant to Members (read out during meeting), item 7.
PDF 858 KB