Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber. View directions

Media

Items
No. Item

DCC.089

Apologies

To receive apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Baxendale, Gray, Miles, Patrick, Prenter and Schoemaker.

 

As Councillor Baxendale had provided his apologies for the meeting Councillor Fenton proceeded as Vice Chair in the Chair for the meeting.

DCC.090

Declarations of Interest

To receive Declarations of Interest in relation to planning matters.

Minutes:

There were none.

 

DCC.091

Minutes pdf icon PDF 197 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 15 November 2022.

Minutes:

The Chair advised that the Development Team Manager had requested an amendment to the minutes. They requested that at Minute number DCC.088 on the second set of bullet points, the third bullet point which starts “The Fit for the Future (FFF) Team” be substituted for:

Officers are looking to integrate older cases into the new system.  Officers have already implemented a last touch date to sort dormant cases by date of last action. Officers are working with the Fit for the Future (FFF) team on new workload reporting tools to manage both new and historic cases.” The Development Team Manager advised this was because he felt the minutes had committed the Fit for the Future team to something unintentionally and wanted to provide a more accurate record.

 

On being put to the vote the amendment was agreed.

 

RESOLVED That the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 November 2022 including the amendment outlined above were approved as a correct record.

 

DCC.092

Planning Schedule and Procedure for Public Speaking pdf icon PDF 127 KB

(Note: For access to information purposes, the background papers for the applications listed in the above schedule are the application itself and subsequent papers as listed in the relevant file.)

Minutes:

Representations were received and taken into account by the Committee in respect of Applications:

 

1

S.22/1503/HHOLD

 

DCC.093

68 Thrupp Lane, Thrupp, Stroud, Gloucestershire, S.22/1503/HHOLD pdf icon PDF 353 KB

Erection of second storey extension and erection of detached garage and car port.

Minutes:

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application on behalf of the Assistant Planning Officer. The following points were highlighted:

  • The application sought permission for the erection of a 2nd storey extension and detached garage and car port.
  • The property sat within a large sloping plot and was deemed to be of no significant architectural merit.
  • There were listed buildings within 50m of the site.
  • The 2nd Storey extension would increase the ridge height by approximately 3.2m from 4.3m to 7.5m.
  • A single storey element with a height proposed of approximately 5.4m.
  • The distance between the gable end of the 2-storey element of the property at number 70 with the gable end of the 2 storey element of number 68 was approximately 8m.
  • The roof design of the proposed detached garage at the front of the plot had been amended to lessen the impact so that it would sit down below the road level and hedge.

 

Councillor Aldam, Ward Councillor, was unable to attend the meeting and asked for a statement to be read on her behalf. The statement highlighted the following:

  • There were oversights and errors within the application itself including the exclusion of the extension to the former Coach House at number 62 and the extent of the land owned by the Former Coach House from the map provided with the report.
  • That restrictions had been placed on the planning permission for the neighbouring property which aligned to objections received for No.68 however similar restrictions had not been put in place.
  • The proposal had been amended to drop the house down by 300mm however it was asked whether this small amount would make any difference on the loss of light and privacy which had been the subject of a number of objections.
  • Asked why the Coach House and Coach House extension had been omitted from the statement of "being overlooked", given that the proposed northern second floor of No.68 would look into the Coach House.
  • Loss of light would be a major issue in the winter for the Coach House.
  • An unacceptable degree of being overlooked and loss of privacy for No.75.
  • The site was overdeveloped, in accordance both with the feeling of the lane, and in its pushing yet another property out of reach for many people to afford.
  • The development was out of keeping with the current dwelling, being oversized and overambitious, and not in keeping with the lane’s topography.
  • The current plan showed the garage to be much closer to the lane than all the other houses on that side of the lane. Therefore, the parking arrangements would be out of character with the rest of the area.

 

Mr Harris, a Parish Councillor from Brimscombe and Thrupp Parish Council spoke against the application. He asked the Committee to reject the application and highlighted the following points:

  • The concerns raised by Councillor Aldam’s statement regarding the inaccuracies of the application.

DCC.094

Development Control Committee Revenue Estimates - Revised 2022/23 and Original 2023/24 pdf icon PDF 174 KB

To present to the committee the revised estimates for 2022/23 and original estimates for 2023/24.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Principal Accountant introduced the report and highlighted the significant variances which included:

  • 3.3 detailed the £115k increase to Pay Inflation.
  • Fees and Charges Growth budget had been increased by £3k, this was explained in 3.4 of the report and a full list of these could be found at appendix A.
  • The Proposed Budget Adjustments had also increased by £8k due to Service Budget re-profiling. 

 

Councillor Cornell raised a query with how the budgets were set out for the coming year given the many uncertainties around inflation, costs and income. The Head of Development Management explained that they had to amend the forecast during this financial year due to lower than expected income. The planning fees were set by Central Government and rumoured to increase in 2023/24 however income from planning applications would always be difficult to predict and therefore budgets may need to be adjusted accordingly.

 

Councillor Green proposed and Councillor Brown seconded.

 

After being put to a vote, the Motion was carried unanimously.

 

RECOMMENDED

TO STRATEGY

AND RESOURCES That the:

a) Revised Development Control Committee revenue budget for 2022/23 and original 2023/24 revenue budget were approved.

b) Fees and Charges list as shown at Appendix A was approved.

DCC.095

Budget Monitoring Report Q2 2022/23 pdf icon PDF 129 KB

To present the 2022/23 forecast outturn position against the revenue budgets that the Committee is responsible for, in order to give an expectation of possible variances against budget.

Minutes:

The Principal Accountant introduced the report and explained that the Monitoring Position for Q2 showed a projected net revenue overspend of £237k which was detailed in table 1. He provided further detail on the variances which included:

  • £193k related to a lowered revised forecast of planning application fee income as a result of the cost of living crisis.
  • £27k salary overspend due to additional resources required to support the Planning Team.
  • £17k spent on fees such as: consultant fees, Building Preservation Notice claim payment and general data protection regulation compensation (GDPR) payment.

 

In response to Councillor Green, the Development Team Manager confirmed that the overspend in relation to the Enforcement Team was a result of agency staff. This was due to a high demand for the service coupled with higher than usual staff turnover. This was expected to reduce as more staff were recruited. 

 

RESOLVEDTo note the outturn forecast for the General Fund Revenue budget for this Committee.

 

 

We use cookies to improve user experience. If you continue, we will assume you are happy to accept cookies from this website. Continue