Agenda item

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) & 4 (landscaping) from S.19/1722/VAR to provide additional landscaping in lieu of parking.

The Majors & Environment Team Manager introduced the report and explained that it was a variation to application S.19/1722/VAR. The variation proposed to remove the single bank of parking (12 spaces) and replace it with a wildflower and grass meadow mixture. The proposal also included a hedge to be planted along the pavement edge to provide screening for nearby residents. The Majors & Environment Team Manager explained that it would reduce the overall number of spaces provided by the scheme however they felt it was still a positive community benefit which outweighed the harm. He informed the Committee that they had received one additional objection since the publication of the Officer support.

Councillors Braun and Tucker spoke as Ward Members and asked the committee to defer the application for the following reasons:

·       The site was within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and outside of the settlement boundary. The principal of the development related to the car park provision; that was the main reason that development had been allowed on the site.

·       The original plans had been reduced to 80 spaces from 96 in order to preserve the protected oak tree. These car parking spaces were in high demand in Wotton Town Centre and the original promise of car parking spaces was being reduced again.

·       The spaces that were proposed to be removed were located on the flattest land making them perfect for road users with disabilities.

·       There was no reason given for the removal of the 12 spaces.

·       The Town Council had raised concerns whether the steep bank would accommodate the spaces.

·       If the spaces were not viable in that location had alternative locations, to retain the number of spaces, been considered.

·       The Committee required further information in order to make a fully informed decision therefore a deferral was reasonable.

The Wotton Town Council Clerk, Ms Durn, asked Councillors to defer the application for the reasons listed above given by the Ward Councillor and for further reasons listed below:

·       The original application was only approved due to the offer of 80 car parking spaces for the Town. However due to the topography of the land there would only be around 64 useable spaces.

·       The recent Doctors Surgery development in the area removed a number of spaces that were due to be brought back with this provision.

·       The parking shortage in Wotton Town was exacerbated by the closure of the Renishaw car park for public use.

·       The following information was currently being sought; details on the viability of the parking spaces on the steep bank, inspection report from Building Control, detailed report from Gloucestershire County Council (GCC) Highways, Health and Safety report regarding a vehicle impact barrier and a specialist report had been commissioned to address the concerns raised regarding the car park.

Mr Thomas, a local resident, asked the committee to refuse the proposal. He echoed the comments above regarding the diminished number of car parking spaces which began at 96 and were now proposed to be 68. He stated that the car parking spaces were a far greater asset to the community than the new proposed wildflower meadow and further planting could be introduced elsewhere. Finally, he questioned the scale of protection surrounding the oak tree and whether more spaces could be provided there.  

After public speaking, Members were given the opportunity to ask technical questions to the Planning Officers, these were the responses given:

·       The houses on the site all had sufficient parking provision.

·       No extra spaces could be accommodated on the site or around the tree, the protection area was there to prevent damage to the roots.

·       There was a condition within the original application for the provision of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging spaces.

·       There was a long-standing shortage of parking spaces available in Wotton Town which this scheme would greatly benefit.

·       The reports that the Town Council were awaiting related to the technical details of the car park and were not a material planning consideration.

·       The 12 car parking spaces proposed to be removed would be approximately 20m away from the nearest residential dwelling.

·       The safety and stability of a development on the steep bank would be the responsibility of the developer and therefore not a material planning consideration.

·       The applicant had not provided a reason for the variation.

·       The figure for off-street parking provisions within the Town was unknown.

Councillor Ryder proposed to defer the application and Councillor Schoemaker seconded.

Councillor Ryder clarified the reason for deferral was to wait for the information being sought from Wotton Town Council.

The Majors & Environment Team Manager explained that the health and safety report and the inspection from Building Control would not amount to material planning considerations. The reports that would have an effect were already covered in the condition of the original application.

The Chair asked Councillors to consider whether the reduction of parking spaces eroded the additional benefit of the application. 

Councillor Brown debated whether it would be safe to build the spaces on the bank.

Officers reminded Members that it would be the developer’s responsibility, by law, to construct the site in a safe manner and that if it was not viable then there was nothing to stop them returning with a further application which detailed the issues. 

Councillor Ryder formally withdrew his proposal to defer and instead proposed to refuse the application. Councillor Schoemaker confirmed he was happy for the deferral to be withdrawn and seconded the new motion to refuse.

Councillor Schoemaker stated that developers should not remove parts of an application after planning permission has been approved. 

The Chair clarified that the refusal reason was that the removal of these space would erode the original public benefit, of granting permission on the exception site, to an unacceptable level. Councillor Ryder agreed.

Councillors debated the possible reasons for the variation and suggested that it could be due to additional cost implications.

Councillor Ryder stated that he was pleased to see the full allocation of affordable houses unaffected, however concluded that the full allocation of parking spaces was a key residential amenity and on balance the removal of the spaces undermined the original planning weight.

Councillor Miles echoed that the balance did not outweigh the public benefit for the full allocation of spaces.

Councillor Ryder agreed there was no alternative proposal for the allowance of the 12 spaces elsewhere and that was the best spot for the provision.

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

RESOLVED To refuse permission.