Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council

Stroud District Council 

SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS 

10/08/2004 

The Sites Inspection Panel met on the 20 th July and was attended by Councillors: 

G Littleton; M Williams; Mrs S Fellows; N Cooper; D Andrewartha; C Burling and Ms S Lunnon 

The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday 17 th August when members due to attend are: 

G Littleton; Mrs S Fellows; T Frankau; J Jones; Ms L Durrans; B Marsh and Mrs J Wood.

Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 

Parish Application Item Pg No 

Berkeley Town Council 

Canon Park Recreation Facility, Canon Park, Berkeley. 

S.04/1421/FUL - Extension to existing community facility to provide dedicated 

Youth Room, Community Games/Social Room and new toilets. 

19 134 

Bisley With Lypiatt Parish Land At, Windyridge, Bisley. 08 35 

Council S.04/0775/REM - Approval of reserved matters for the erection of 26 dwellings 

with associated parking and access. 

Cainscross Parish Council 


Land Adjacent, Etheldene Road, Cashes Green. 

S.04/1143/FUL - Erection of a bungalow. 

14 110 

Land Off, Frome Gardens Adjoining Stroudwater Canal, Cainscross. 

S.04/1255/FUL - Erection of 13 dwellings. 

12 99 

Cainscross Parish Council Land at The Retreat Westward Road Stroud 

S.03/1451 - Regrading of garden land. (Revised Plans received 12/9/03) 

Cam Parish Council 


Coaley Parish Council 

Cranham Parish Council 

Dursley Town Council 


02 13 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam. 

S.04/0657/LBC - Retrospective application for the retention of reconstructed 

slates to roof and stained timber windows (natural). Various internal works. 

Revised plans received 26 May 2004. 

04 20 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam. 

S.04/0659/FUL - Variation of condition 3 of permission S.98/1338 to allow for 

the retention of reconstructed slates to roof and stained timber windows 

(natural). 

03 16 

Fox House, The Street, Coaley. 

S.04/1370/FUL - Construction of new access including conversion of dining 

room to garage. (Resubmission following refusal S.03/C0304/FUL) 

28 167 

Land At, Cranham Lodge, Sanatorium Road. 

S.04/0797/COU - Conversion of redundant building to residential dwelling with 

parking to the rear. 

16 120 

6 Woodland Avenue, Dursley, Gloucestershire. 

S.04/1072/FUL - Two storey extension. 

30 174 

4 Windsor Road, Dursley, Gloucestershire. 

S.04/1106/FUL - Erection of a garage and single storey extension. 

05 24 

Frampton On Severn Parish Land At, Whitminster Lane, Frampton On Severn. 20 137 

Council S.04/1251/FUL - Application for the re-siting of the changing facility building 

(following approved application S.04/0578/COU). 

Ham And Stone Parish Court Moat, Stone, Berkeley. 38 202 

Council S.04/1294/LBC - Retrospective application for erection of conservatory and 

alteration to fireplace. 

Haresfield Parish Council 


Haresfield C Of E Primary School, Haresfield Lane, Haresfield. 

S.04/0228/FUL - Erection of extensions and alterations to replace temporary 

accommodation. 

36 191 

Haresfield C Of E Primary School, Haresfield Lane, Haresfield. 

S.04/0229/LBC - Erection of extensions and alterations to replace temporary 


37 194 

Hillesley And Tresham Woodmans Farm, Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley. 21 138 

Parish Council S.04/1220/COU - Change of use from agricultural building to stables and loose 

boxes. (Resubmission following refusal S.03/1042). 

2


Hillesley And Tresham Woodmans Farm, Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley. 22 142 

Parish Council S.04/1222/VAR - Removal of condition 2 of permission S.00/1712 to allow for 

trade and business to be operated from site. Alterations to access and 

improvements to service roadway. (Previously known as The Mears, 

Hawkesbury Road). 

Hillesley And Tresham Stable Building, Furlong Lane, Tresham. 23 146 

Parish Council S.04/1286/COU - Conversion of redundant stable building to mixed use 

residential/business use. 

Kings Stanley Parish Council 

Kingswood Parish Council 

76 Coldwell Lane, Middleyard, Kings Stanley. 

S.04/1197/FUL - Retrospective application for erection of a conservatory. 

27 160 

Land Adjoining, Charfield Road, Kingswood. 

S.04/1221/VAR - Removal of condition 7 of application S.03/C0296/FUL (for the 

erection of three industrial units) relating to the provision and construction by the 

developer of a footpath along Charfield Road frontage. 

25 153 

Leonard Stanley Parish Land At Brookside, Seven Waters, Bath Road. 17 119 

Council S.04/1023/OUT - Outline application for 2 dwellings with new access. 

Minchinhampton Parish Seynckley, Culver Hill, Amberley. 40 206 

Council S.04/0404/LBC - Extension to studio cottage in grounds of Seynckley House to 

create ancillary accommodation for applicant's parents. 

Revised drawings rec'd.13/5/04 and 3/6/04. 

Minchinhampton Parish Waldeck, Chapel Lane, Minchinhampton. 09 41 

Council S.04/0722/VAR - Removal of Condition 6 attached to permission ref.S.02/826 

for erection of dwelling (Requiring improvements to visibility at the junction of 

Chapel Lane and Tetbury Street) 

Minchinhampton Parish Minchinhampton Architectural Salvage Co, Cirencester Road, Minchinhampton. 24 150 

Council S.04/0929/FUL - Erection of an extension to existing single storey lean-to 

storage building. 

Minchinhampton Parish Seynckley, Culver Hill, Amberley. 39 202 

Council S.04/1030/LBC - Internal alterations. (Resubmission following withdrawn 

application S.04/0320/LBC). 

Minchinhampton Parish 21 Barcelona Drive, Minchinhampton, Gloucestershire. 26 161 

Council S.04/1084/VAR - Variation of condition 17 of permission S.02/610 to allow the 

relocation of car parking space from back garden to drive. 

Nailsworth Town Council 



Painswick Parish Council 

The Lawn, Nympsfield Road, Nailsworth. 

S.04/0082/OUT - Outline application for residential development of former 

Forest Green Rovers Football Stadium. (Proposed number of dwellings up to 66 

units). 

11 84 

Land At Nympsfield Road And Land Adjacent To King George V Playing Field, 

Wood Lane, Nailsworth, Gloucestershire. 

S.04/0096/FUL - Construction of new football stadium and associated facilities 

with new access onto Nympsfield Road. Also construction of new playing field 

on land adjacent to existing King George V Playing Field, Wood Lane, 

Nailsworth. 

10 50 

Former Hazlewood Factory, Newmarket Road, Nailsworth. 

S.04/1240/REM - Approval of reserved matters application S.01/624 granted on 

appeal for the erection of 5 houses and 28 apartments. (Addtional Plans 

received 25th June 2004). (Revised Plans received 9th July 2004) 

13 103 

Whispering Trees, Lower Washwell Lane, Painswick. 

S.04/0970/FUL - Erection of extensions. 

29 170 

Painswick Parish Council Castle Lodge, Cheltenham Road, Painswick. 31 177 

3

Rodborough Parish Council 


Slimbridge Parish Council 

Stinchcombe Parish Council 

Stonehouse Town Council 


Stroud Town Council 


S.04/1384/FUL - Erection of a single storey greenhouse/store. (Existing 

outbuilding to be demolished). 

Land Adjacent Hawkswood, Frome Hall Lane, Stroud. 

S.04/0936/FUL - Retrospective application for use of building as auxiliary 

accommodation to hawkeswood (resubmission following refusal S.03/479/FUL). 

07 32 

Land Adjacent Hawkswood, Frome Hall Lane, Stroud. 

S.04/0952/FUL - Erection of dwelling to provide ancillary accommodation to 

Hawkeswood. 

06 28 

Robina, Churchend, Slimbridge. 

S.04/1362/FUL - Enlarge rear dormer windows. 

35 191 

Land At, Stinchcombe Manor, Clingre Lane. 

S.04/1067/FUL - Erection of a dwelling. 

15 115 

Oxford Swindon And Gloucester Co Op , 26 High Street, Stonehouse. 

S.04/1111/ADV - Erection of new signage. (Resubmission following refusal 

S.03/C0184/ADV). 

34 189 

33 Upper Queens Road, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire. 

S.04/1244/FUL - Erection of extensions. 

33 184 

21 - 23 Russell Street, Stroud, Gloucestershire. 

S.04/0890/COU - Change of use of offices to restaurant and take-away 

(resubmission following refusal S.03/1849). 

18 130 

Stroud Town Council Former Builders Yard Churchfield Road Stroud 

S.01/436 - Erection of four 2-bedroom appartments. (Revised Plans received 

01 05 

Wotton Under Edge Town Greenhay Farm, Coombe , Wotton-Under-Edge. 32 174 

Council S.04/1180/FUL - Proposed alterations and additions to existing farmhouse and 

refurbishment of existing outbuildings including swimming pool, gymnasium and 

stabling of livestock. (Re-submission following refusal S.03/1781). 

4

ITEM No: 01 

Application: S.01/436 


Site Address: Former Builders Yard Churchfield Road Stroud 

Site Number: 6359 

Parish: Stroud 

Grid Reference: SO 85950 04790 

Application Type: Full Planning Permission 

Development: Erection of four 2-bedroom apartments. (Revised Plans received 

22nd July 2004) 

Applicant Details: D J Melsome Ltd 

Holbrook Bisley Stroud 

Agent Details: Mr D Scott 

Dudbridge House Selsley Hill Stroud GL5 5JS 

Case Officer: Darryl J.Rogers 

Date Received: 20/03/2001 

Recommendation: Permission 

Subject to the following conditions: 

1) 101 Standard - Planning Permission. 

2) 202 Materials to be agreed 

3) 301 Landscaping scheme to be submitted 

4) 302 Landscaping to be implemented 

5) The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until full details of 

all boundary walls and fences have been submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. The approved scheme shall then be 

implemented in full prior to the first occupation of any residential unit. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 

6) The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the car parking 

provision has been provided in accordance with the approved plan 

S03/569/001D received on the 22nd July 2004 and maintained available for 

parking thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that sufficient parking spaces are made available. 

7) Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, the access 

driveways shall be surfaced in bituminous macadam or other approved material 

5


for at least the first 5.0m from the carriageway edge and maintained as such 

thereafter. 

Reason: 

To prevent loose material being carried onto the highway in the interests of 

highway safety. 

8) Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, a scheme of surface 

water disposal from the driveways shall be submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. The approved scheme shall then be 

implemented in full prior to the first occupation of the development. 

Reason: 

To ensure that surface water does not discharge onto the highway in the 

interests of highway safety. 

9) Notwithstanding the submitted plans, the development hereby permitted shall 

not be commenced until details of a 1.5m wide footway along the site frontage 

parallel to the dwellings, which is suitable for adoption as a public highway 

have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of Development 

Services. The approved scheme shall then be implemented in full prior to the 

first occupation of any residential unit and maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety. 

10) Notwithstanding the submitted drawing, the development hereby permitted 

shall not be commenced until details of a scheme to reduce the boundary 

walling / fencing to a height no greater than 1.0m above the adjacent 

carriageway level within the control of the applicant adjacent to Churchfield 

Road, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of 

Development Services. The approved scheme shall then be implemented in full 

prior to the first occupation of the development and maintained as such 

thereafter. 

Informatives: 

Reason: 


1) For the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (General Development 

Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order 2003, the following reasons for the 

Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the 

Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are 

relevant to this decision: The proposal represents an acceptable form of infill 

residential development located within the defined settlement boundary. The 

design and scale of the proposed units are in keeping with the character and 

appearance of the surrounding built form with the units having suitable levels of 

amenity space. In light of the authorised use of the site as a builders yard, the 

overall impact on highway safety and the surrounding road network is 

acceptable with conditions imposed regarding further highway improvements. 

In this manner the scheme accords with Policies H14 and G5 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

2) 1 Vehicular crossing over highway land 

6

Materials: 

Roof Conc int tiles 

Walls Brick 


Constraints: Environment Agency consulted 

Severn Trent Water consulted 

Consultations/Representations: 

Parish Response: 

Stroud Town Council objects to the application. 

Highway - They are very concerned at Highway implications for 4 new houses on what is an unmade 

road, very narrow onto another very narrow road (Spider Lane). Concerns therefore on pedestrian 

safety, visibility for vehicles, lack of parking and turning space. Also loss of garage/parking space for 

existing premises. Where will these existing cars be parked in the future? 

Design - Very poor, cheap design. Totally out of keeping with surrounding area, Horns Road, 

Churchfield Road, Lower Churchfield Road and adjoining Hope Cottages. Although they are small 

buildings, they are well designed using traditional features and materials. If SDC officers are 

recommending consent, Stroud Town Council will call for a sites panel. 

Amenity Space - Proposal will remove all of rear garden for Rockfield and 3 buildings off Churchfield 

Road have minuscule gardens. Probably do not meet SDC garden space criteria. 

Revised plans do not alter situation Town Council reiterate previous objections. 

Revised Consultation: 

Stroud Town Council still object for the above reasons and also state: 

Blocking off vehicular access from Bowbridge Lane will cause unacceptable congestion, hardship and 

danger. The flow of traffic will be completely aggravated by these proposals. Access on the approach 

from Bowbridge Lane must be retained for safety reasons i.e. emergency services. Question legality of 

this application, are there any civil law problems e.g. right of way for pedestrians and vehicles. 

Further revisions - reiterate previous objections. 

09.06.04 - Stroud Town Council object see above reasons. 

Highways Authority: 

Raise no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of conditions regarding the provision of a 

turning area, pedestrian service strip and car parking. 

Other Consultations: 

Seven Trent Water Authority: 

Raise no objection to the proposal. 

7

Letter of objection 


P & D Davis. 2 Rockfield Cottages, Lower Churchfield Road, Stroud. GL5 1EW 

C Mills. 70, Horns Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EG 

Mr & Mrs R Fluck. 66 Horns Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EG 

Mr O Cottle & S.Brooks. Marsh Villa, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EQ 

S.& R.Kempner. 68, Horns Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EG 

D.R.King. Hazeldene, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EQ 

D.& P.Stevens. Fort View, 31, Bowbridge Lane, Stroud, Glos. GL5 2JP 

S.Allan. Gordan Villa, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. GL5 1EQ 

S. Brooks, 2 Hope Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos 

Jill Walker, 3 Churchfield Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1EL. 

Marta Cock, 8 Churchfield Road, Stroud, GL5 1EQ. 

Mr & Mrs Hill, Minona, 7 Churchfield Road, Bowbridge, Stroud, Glos. 

S Cottle, 4 Rosebank Villas, Churchfield Road, Stroud, GL5 1EH 

J & M Norman, 1 Rockfield Cottages, Lower Churchfield Road, Stroud, GL5 1EW 

S Milner, Applewood, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1EQ. 

Mr & Mrs Jones, 1 Churchfield Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. 

Mr & Mrs Habgood, Rosebank, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1EQ. 

Mr & Mrs Gleed, 56 Horns Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1ED. 

F Christie, 1 Hope Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. 

M Panayotti, 2 Hope Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud. 

A Sparks, 4 Hope Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, GL5 1EJ 

E & K Holbrow, Milford House, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1EQ. 

M Moore, 1 Rosebank Villa, Churchfield Road, Stroud, GL5 1EH 

D Boulton, Milford House, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. 

C Baglin, 72 Horns Road, Stroud, GL5 1EG. 

P Screen, 74 Horns Road, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1EG. 

R Giles & M Webb, 4 Churchfield Cottages, Churchfield Road, Stroud, Glos. 

Lisa Lewis, 23 Bowbridge Lane, Stroud, Glos, GL5 2JP. 

Residents of Churchfield Road and Horns Road. 

Mr & Mrs Redstone. 66 Horns Road, Stroud, Glos 

Reasons 

• Garages currently exists on this site, replacement with new dwellings will result in a reduction of 

privacy and security to adjoining properties. 

• No site notice has ever been posted. 

• The loss of the garages which currently house six cars plus forecourt parking will inevitably lead to 

on-street parking increasing risks to children and inconvenience to highway users. 

• There are six windows which will overlook properties in Horns Road. 

• The houses will be built on land higher than No.2 and there will be no intervening screen to block the 

view. 

• The development will add to the density of what is already a crowded space. 

• This has further implications for the infrastructure of roads and essential services. 

• Churchfield Road is narrow, extra traffic will lead to congestion. 

• Severe doubts as to whether emergency services would be able to gain access to this area if 

required. 

• Construction traffic would obstruct access, cause nuisance and be a hazard to young children living 

in the immediate area. 

• The erection of four houses built in modern materials to a modern design is completely 

unsympathetic with the immediate surroundings. 

• The block of three dwellings are to butt up against a red brick terrace while other properties are 

constructed in Cotswold stone, the development would be an eyesore. 

8


• The address of the site is misleading as the land concerned originally belonged to properties in 

Horns Road. 

• Planning permission has been previously refused due to access onto a narrow lane in an already 

over developed area. Nothing has changed. 

• Residents require details as to what boundary walls and fences will be built. 

• Overload existing inadequate sewerage and water pipes. 

• If the proposals are accepted access to the garage at No.31 Bowbridge Lane would be denied due 

to changes in the line of the fence, current access is barely adequate. 

• The road surface is already deteriorating, the condition will only worsen. 

• Clarification as to who is responsible for any repairs is requested. 

• One writer considers Plots 1,2 & 3 acceptable, however Plot 4 is totally unacceptable situated 

immediately in front of existing houses and not even within the boundaries of the builders yard. 

• Alterations of design to Plots 1-3 will make the houses taller with more windows overlooking, 

causing loss of view. 

• Even if the developer takes down the fence to allow emergency vehicles through, where will the 

neighbouring people, who will lose their garages, park. 

• The water supply or drains for Churchfield Road aren’t big enough to accommodate more houses. 

• The closure of part of Churchfield Road would make this a cul-de-sac. This is already a single width 

road and to force traffic into using this would: cause a great increase in activity, force all traffic to exit 

the Spider Lane end of Churchfield, which is already dangerous. 

• The increased activity would cause additional noise and fumes. Particularly impacting on the 4 

houses opposite the proposed turning area. 

• Churchfield road is already highly populated and the already narrow access would be increased 

further by additional houses. 

• Building these houses will do away with existing parking spaces, forcing people to park further away 

and on yellow lines. 

• Closing the road would double the amount of traffic along Churchfield Road, exacerbating traffic 

problems at the junction of Churchfield Road and Spider Lane. 

• It is on everyone’s deeds as a road and therefore the road should not be closed. 

• Three extra houses congest an already congested road further. 

• Site plan incorrect. 

• Loss of amenities. Nearby houses will be overlooked and privacy in gardens lost. 

• The houses that are to be erected are completely out of character to the area which is primarily 

made up of Victorian Houses, Cottages or Post War Constructions. The houses to be erected are 

very modern and will look completely out of character within the area. 

• The area is already densely populated with housing and building three more houses on such a small 

site is not going to alleviate this problem. 

• Loss of thoroughfare- it is totally unacceptable that the residents should have to suffer a loss of 

access and added inconvenience. 

• Overdevelopment- the increase of houses will worsen traffic problems. 

• The proposed turning circle will only be used as a parking bay therefore leaving no room to turn 

around. 

• The access for neighbouring properties will be adversely affected. 

• Access for delivery vans will be restricted. 

• Building on the site will cause the loss of a valuable facility- the garages. In a place where parking is 

already an issue, the increase in cars and the reduction of parking facilities will only serve to 

increase this problem. 

• On the land registry it states clearly that all rights of way will be available at all times. 

• The proposed turning area will cause an unacceptable level of noise and flashing headlights, which 

will shine into the rooms of the numbers 1-3 Churchfield Road. 

• Ice and snow in winter can make Spider Lane impassable and adverse camber makes vehicles slide 

into the wall. 

• Nothing has changed regarding the access since June 1989 when planning was refused. 

• The blocking off of the corner cannot be allowed and would be against the law of the land. 

9


• Would be extremely inconvenient to current residents if they had to take their vehicles round to 

Spider Lane to access their garages. 

• If the owners of the cottages are no longer able to park in Churchfield Road they will use Bowbridge 

Lane which is already congested with parked cars in the evenings and weekends. 

• Access to the garages is already severely restricted due to the narrow width of Churchfield Road. 

With the front garden boundaries for the new houses, concerns that if they reach to the edge of the 

road turning a vehicle may prove to be difficult. 

• People may park in the turning bay and effectively block people from getting into their garages. 

• The legal documents provided to people when they bought their houses states that they have the 

right to pass over the land currently being planned as the parking area for one of the houses. This 

area therefore should not be fenced off and must still be able to be used as a right of way when is 

necessary. 

• A deeded right of way exists from a cottage in Lower Churchfield Road up and into Churchfield road 

via a gated stepped exit. 

• Demolition of existing garages and loss of parking would need eight vehicles needing new parking. 

• Road width is shown incorrectly near Marsh Villas to be 4metres when it is 3metres. 

• Site plans show gardens where kitchen utility areas are on the five houses opposite site. 

• Light detriment. 

• Adopted for Highways as a through road. 

• Gardens will be lower than the adjoining properties light and view from the kitchen will not be 

satisfactory. Poor access onto Spider Lane 

• Set a precedent 

• Revised plans are no better previous points remain valid. 

• Suggests: 

− 2 houses only with garages and hard standing. 

− Widen the road from Bowbridge Land to the corner of Churchfield Road to allow easy access. 

− A car parking area behind the existing wooden fence for residents whose garages and spaces 

would be lost. 

Site Report: 

Application Background 

This is a long standing application submitted in 2001. Unfortunately during the consideration of the 

proposal the original agent passed away resulting in an unusual delay in its determination. 

The Site and the Proposal 

This is an application for the erection of four, two bedroom apartments on land off Churchfield Road in 

Stroud. The former builders yard is situated within a large group of Victorian dwellings with garages to 

either side and the local road to the front. The garages are currently used by the surrounding property 

but are controlled by the applicant. The application site also includes a section of garden on the opposite 

side of Churchfield Road but within the applicant’s control. As is typical of the area the surrounding road 

network is somewhat cramped with restricted access onto both Spider Lane and Lower Churchfield 

Road. 

The proposal seeks the erection of a terrace of four, two bed apartments arranged in a two up two down 

approach. The buildings would replace the builders yard and three of the existing garages and would 

also involve the provision of a turning head on the land opposite the site. The building itself would be of 

brick and tile construction with the exact materials being the subject of future discussions. 

The plans have been the subject of significant revision since their original submission and did originally 

include the closure of a section of Churchfield Road. This element has now been deleted from the 

scheme. 

10

Relevant Planning History 


S.ED/5574/F Building materials store & Permission 13/9/78 

access alterations 

S.6359/A Erection of four flats & one bungalow Permission 9/12/80 

This proposal was for the erection of four flats on the builders yard site with a bungalow on land 

opposite. 

S.6359/B Erection of five houses Refusal 10/3/87 

This proposal was for the erection of three houses on the builders yard with two further dwellings on the 

land opposite. The application was refused due to the design of the proposed units together with 

insufficient amenity space provision and the exacerbation of the existing car parking and access 

situation. 

S.6359/C Erection of two houses and a bungalow Refusal 10/10/89 

This proposal was for the erection of two dwellings on the builders yard and one bungalow on the 

opposite side. The application was refused due to the fact that the erection of a dwelling on land 

opposite the site would exacerbate the existing parking and access situation. 

S.6359/D Erection of a pair of semi-detached houses. Permission 10/4/90 

This proposal was for the erection of two dwellings on the builders yard. 

Planning Considerations 

The relevant policy advice for applications of this type is contained within Policies H14 and G5 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) which seek to permit 

residential development within settlement boundaries provided that schemes are of a suitable layout, 

form and design and do not give rise to adverse highway safety implications. 

It is immediately apparent in considering this application that two of the key issues relate to the principle 

of residential development and its resultant built form together with the impact of any scheme on 


With regard to the design and appearance of the development, the character and form of the apartment 

building is in keeping with the surrounding Victorian buildings and will not unduly detract from the area. 

The proposals include a suitable level of amenity provision for apartment accommodation and will not 

cause the loss of any important open space. Whilst concerns have been raised over the number of units 

proposed, the scheme does not constitute over-development of the site and reflects the form and level of 

development previously permitted on the site. Neither does the scheme cause unacceptable levels of 

overlooking or loss of privacy given its separation from the adjacent properties. Conditions are however 

suggested regarding the proposed materials and boundary treatments. 

In terms of the highway implications arising from the site it is important to note that the site has an extant 

planning approval for unrestricted use as a builders yard. Although the site has not been in active use for 

a number of years and has been used for informal parking by local residents, the site could, in planning 

terms, be used as a working yard without the need for any formal approvals. This would give rise to a 

number of outcomes not least of which is the loss of the informal parking areas and the potential for 

large scale vehicle movements involving all manner of vehicles. Given this authorised background, it is 

considered that the current proposal would enable an element of planning gain not only in highway terms 

but also regard to local amenity via the removal of a bad neighbour use. 

11


The nature and number of vehicle movements associated with four apartments is less than associated 

with a working yard, with the type of vehicles being far more appropriate for a residential area than a 

number of commercial vehicles. The reduction is vehicle numbers and size would also have less impact 

on the surrounding road network. In acknowledgement of the sub-standard nature of the surrounding 

roads, the scheme includes the provision of a turning area which, subject to suitable parking controls, 

would provide a distinct benefit to all of the local residents. The provision of such a facility would not 

prejudice the ability of emergency vehicles to access the site. 

Whilst the scheme would result in the loss of parking for the existing residents, this parking is of an 

informal nature only and is not protected. Again this loss would occur if the authorised use of the yard 

recommenced. 

Recommendation 

The scheme represents an acceptable form of residential development which in light of the authorised 

use of the site will not give rise to adverse concerns of highway safety. The proposal therefore accords 

with Policies H14 and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 

2001) and conditional permission is recommended. 

Sites Inspection Panel 

The Panel walked along Churchfield Road noting the grain of the street, as well as the vernacular style. 

The current dilapidated condition of the application site was also evident and the position of the adjacent 

dwellings. The siting of the new dwellings and the proposed parking/turning areas were indicated. 

The Ward Member, Cllr. Majoram highlighted the character of the existing streetscene and the existing 

houses, and felt that the scheme was poorly designed and overdevelopment. He also suggested that 

there are current problems of parking and narrow access roads, and disputed the use as a builders yard. 

The Town council was not represented . 

The Panel generally supported the principle of the scheme, but felt that the design was too bland and 

failed to respond adequately to the context. Furthermore, there seemed to be scope to increase car 

parking by the turning head. 

Application Update 

Following the Sites Inspection Panel revised plans have been submitted indicating a revised design for 

the four apartments which better reflects the local vernacular. In addition the proposed turning head has 

been deleted and replaced with additional parking spaces and increased carriageway width. In this 

manner an element of replacement parking is proposed to off-set the informal areas lost due to the 

development together with an enhancement of the existing road network. These amendments would 

result in an acceptable form of development which accords not only with the aforementioned policies but 

also with the comments of the Sites Inspection Panel. 

Condtional permission is recommended. 

In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the Human Rights 

Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring or affected properties. In 

particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to Respect for private and family life) and 

the requirement to ensure that any interference with the right in this Article is both permissible and 

proportionate. On analysing the issues raised by the application no particular matters, other than those 

referred to in this report, warranted any different action to that recommended. 

12

ITEM No: 02 

Application: S.03/1451 


Site Address: Land at The Retreat Westward Road Stroud 

Site Number: 22330 

Parish: Cainscross 

Grid Reference: SO 83370 04830 


Development: Regrading of garden land. (Revised Plans received 12/9/03) 

Applicant Details: Chelbury Homes Ltd 

Chelbury Vaults 32 Queens Road Cheltenham GL50 2LT 

Agent Details: Mr P. H. Tufnell 

Tufnell Town + Country Planning, Waverley Studio Gloucester Road Hartpury 

GL19 3BG 

Case Officer: Darryl J.Rogers 

Date Received: 28/07/2003 

Recommendation: Permission 


1) 101 Standard - Planning Permission. 

2) A strip of land 8m wide adjacent to the top of the northern bank along the line of 

the restored Stroudwater Canal shall be kept clear of all new buildings and 

structures (including gates, walls and fences) unless otherwise agreed in 

writing by the Head of Development Services. Ground levels must not be raised 

within this area. 

Informatives: 

Reason: 

In order to ensure adequate access is provided to the watercourse for the 

purposes of maintenance. 

1) For the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (General Development 

Procedure) (England) (Amendent) Order 2003, the following reasons for the 

Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the 

Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are 

relevant to this decision: The proposal will not have a detrimental impact on 

either the residential amenity of the area or the character and appearance of 

the designated Stroud Industrial Heritage Conservation Area. The raised 

ground levels will not harm the overall visual amenity of the area and suitable 

conditions are imposed to safeguard maintenance of the adjacent watercourse. 

13


The proposal therefore accords with Policies H23 and B4 of the Stroud District 

Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

Constraints: Conservation Area Cainscross 


Parish Response: 

Cainscross Parish Council object to the application. It is unclear what reason for the re-grading of this 

land is, it currently forms gardens of four cottages at The Retreat which lead down to the canal. 

Presumably the land is either to build new houses or provide access to adjoining land further along 

canal. 

Once again the applicant is proposing to extend this unsightly development along the canal in piecemeal 

fashion without disclosing the full extent of his intentions. 

A Section 106 agreement was negotiated on the basis of the original approval, which has now extended 

in a series of separate applications, thereby avoiding any further community benefits. 

This site was not allocated as a development site in Local Plan and currently standing at 35, will end up 

at 50 if extended to Bridgeside. 

Not content with utilising all open space in the parish, developers are now resorting to buying up existing 

back gardens. 

High density multi storey housing will detract from the appearance of the canal and diminish tourist 

attraction. 

Do not support this or any other applications on this site until developer reveals his long term intentions. 

Revised plans - has reduced the amount of land in question but the principle remains the same, previous 

objections are reiterated with possible exception of Section 106 comment relating to S.02/961 which has 

been adjusted . 

Unclear as to exactly what permissions have been issued so far in relation to building that has already 

taken place. 

Set a dangerous precedent for other canal side sites. 

Existing gardens should not be considered as brown field sites. 

Object to creeping nature of this development. 

Letter of comment 

F.C.Tillett. Retreat Lodge, Westward Road, Cainscross, Stroud, Glos. 

Reasons 

• This proposal causes considerable concerns over the applicants future intentions to either run an 

access across the gardens to access a further plot of land for addition housing development or for 

development of even more inappropriate housing crammed in adjacent to the canal. 

• There has already been a considerable increase in traffic from the new housing off Frome Gardens 

causing obstruction to main road. 

Site Report: 


This is an application for the regrading of garden land to the rear of The Retreat off Westward Road, 

Ebley. 

14


The application site consists of an area of shared garden land located to the rear of Numbers 85, 87 and 

89 immediately adjacent to the Frome Gardens development. The site is currently used for garden land 

in connection with the three residential properties and due to the local land levels is set at a lower level 

than the rear of the main dwellings. The site borders the Stroudwater Canal to the south with the new 

residential development to the west and additional garden land to the east. The land forms part of the 

designated Stroud Industrial Heritage Conservation Area. 

The proposal seeks the regrading of land to the rear of the properties to create a level area of garden 

land approximately 10m wide to the immediate rear of the properties with a graded slope to meet the 

existing land levels to the south and east. The scheme would involve the raising of land levels 1.5m at 

the highest point and would reflect land levels on the adjacent development site. 

The application has been amended since its original submission and no longer includes any garden land 

relating to numbers 81 or 83. 


No previous applications have been submitted in respect of this parcel of land however the site is closely 

related to the Frome Gardens development site. The land does however form part of the proposed 

access for current application S.04/1255/FUL for the erection of 13 dwellings on land to the east of this 

site. 

Planning Considerations and Recommendation. 

Given the location and form of this development two of the key considerations relate to the impact of the 

proposal on the residential amenity of the surrounding properties together with its impact on the 

character and appearance of the designated conservation area. As such the relevant policy advice is 

contained with Policies H23 and B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001). 

With regard to the impact of the scheme on the residential amenity of the area, it is not considered that 

the proposal will cause a significant change in the current situation. The use of the land for amenity 

purposes is well established and the increased height of the proposal will not give rise to any adverse 

overlooking or loss of privacy. In addition the works will not prejudice the use of any of the surrounding 

gardens with the proposal relating well to the adjacent development site. Conditions are however 

proposed controlling the level of regrading and its proximity to the canal. Representations received 

regarding the current site appearance relate to the temporary storage of soil in connection with the 

adjacent development rather than the finished profile of this application. 

Although the comments of the Parish Council are noted with regard to the piecemeal development of this 

area, each application should be considered on its own individual merits. The proposal relates solely to 

the regrading of a section of garden land and should be considered as such. Any subsequent proposals 

or developments would be the subject of future applications and it is at that stage that issues such as the 

impact of additional houses on the conservation area, are most appropriately considered. This is the 

situation with regard to current application S.04/1255/FUL referred to above. 

In terms of the affect of the development on the character and appearance of the conservation area, it is 

again considered that the proposal will preserve the general open nature of this part of The Retreat. The 

land will be graded to match the existing contours to the south and east of the site and will not therefore 

cause harm to the area. 

The proposal accords with Policies B4 and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001), in so far as they relate to this application and conditional permission is 

recommended. 

15


In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the Human Rights 

Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring or affected properties. In 

particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to Respect for private and family life) and 

the requirement to ensure that any interference with the right in this Article is both permissible and 

proportionate. On analysing the issues raised by the application no particular matters, other than those 

referred to in this report, warranted any different action to that recommended. 

ITEM No: 03 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0659/FUL 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam, Dursley 

21594 


Grid Reference: 375627,199579 

Application Type: 

Development: 

Applicant Details: 

Agent Details: 

Case Officer: 

Date Received: 

Full Planning Permission 

Variation of condition 3 of permission S.98/1338 to allow for the 

retention of reconstructed slates to roof and stained timber windows 

(natural). 

Professor & Mrs Harris 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 5PB 

None 

Mark Newcombe 

30.03.2004 

Recommendation Refusal 


Parish / Town 

Support: 

For the following reasons: 

1. The use of reconstituted roofing slates and stained windows, has 

introduced modern materials and an appearance of the converted 

building unsympathetic to the buildings historic construction thus harming 

the character and appearance of the listed building contrary to Policy B9 

of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended 

June 2001). 

16


Applicant believed that he was following the conditions of the previous application - SDC 

guidlelines unclear. Materials used are in keeping with original building and greatly improve the 

appearance of the development. 

Neighbour Contributions 

Letters of Support 

D & M Ford, 16A Hopton Road, Cam 

G H Beetham, 22 Hopton Road, Cam, Dursley 

Mr & Mrs Smith, 30 Hopton Road, Cam Dursley 

Mr & Mrs Harris, The Haven, 20 Hopton Road 

R J Littleford, 18A Hopton Road, Cam Dursley 

Mr & Mrs Priddle, 26 Beyon Drive, Cam 

Ms J Newton, 2 The Nook, Cam Green 

Mr & Mrs Smart, 4 Holywell Road, Cam 

P Ford, 29 Nasse Court, Cam 

• Potential hazard to the workers re-slating. 

• Improvement. 

• Reconstructed slates pleasant to the eye. 

• Should have specified materials at the start of construction. 

Letters of Comment 

D & M Story, 24 Hopton Road, Cam Dursley 

R H Price, Worsley, 16B Hopton Road 

• Delighted with the transformation. 

• Will mean more scaffolding etc. 

17

Site Location: 

Site Report: 


This application is brought to Committee at the request of Cllr. Mrs. Clifton, a Ward Councillor. 

The proposal is a retrospective application to retain reconstructed slates and stained timber 

windows contrary to a condition attached to the original permission for the buildings conversion 

requiring that any replacement materials matched the existing. The original permission was for 

the conversion of these farm buildings into two dwellings and was granted permission in June 

1999 under reference 98/1338. 

This is a group of former farm buildings at Church Farm Hopton Road Cam. The building is within 

the curtilage of Church Farm which is a Grade II Listed Building. A separate Listed Building 

application has been made which will deal with the Listed Building issues in more detail. 

The main issue with this application is whether the condition on the original permission is 

justified. 

The application is considered under Policy B9 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001), which states: 

18

POLICY B9 


Development involving proposals to extend or alter a Listed Building, or any feature of special 

architectural or historic interest that contribute to the reasons for its listing, will not be permitted 

unless it would preserve the building, its setting, and any features of special architectural or 

historic interest the building possesses. 

It is considered that the works carried out are contrary to Policy B9 as the use of reconstituted 

roofing slates and stained windows, has introduced modern materials and an appearance of the 

converted building unsympathetic to the buildings historic construction thus harming the 

character and appearance of the listed building. Members will see other issues raised in the 

Listed Building application. These matters do not require planning permission. 

It is therefore recommended that the application be refused. 

In the event that this recommendation is accepted authority is sought for enforcement action to 

be taken. 

SITES INSPECTION PANEL 

The Panel inspected the site both externally and internally and noted the alterations that had 

taken place. The Heritage Architect explained the main differences between the approved 

scheme and the works now being sought permission in retrospect. This included alterations to 

the internal arrangements, the fenestration, the type of lintels used, the steel flue and the use of 

reconstructed slate on the roof. 

The Parish Council representative confirmed the Parish Council were in favour of the proposed 

changes and that the applicant was not aware that the changes required permission. The 

Parish's concerns relate to the external effect of the building and how the community perceived 

the building, rather than the internal effect. They would have preferred the original welsh slate on 

the building but their understanding was modern slate, an example of which is being used to the 

extension to the Weavers House in Dursley could also be used. The Parish Council does not 

object to the roof as it stands. 

The Ward Councillor, Councillor Hudson, confirmed he was only made aware of the application at 

a late stage but had the following views. He agreed with the Parish Council's comments as the 

man in the street is more concerned with the outside view of property. The development is a big 

improvement on what there was originally. The original permission was not very clear about the 

type of materials to be used. He supported the application. 

After discussion the Panel were of the opinion the proposals were not acceptable and adversely 

affected the character of the buildings. However, the majority of Members were of the view the 

roof was acceptable but the other alterations detracted too much from the approved scheme. 

In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the Human 

Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring or affected 

properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to Respect for 

private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with the right in this 

Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised by the application 

no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted any different action to 

that recommended. 

19

ITEM No: 04 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/0657/LBC 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam, Dursley 

21594 




Development: 



Case Officer: 


Listed Building Consent 

Retrospective application for the retention of reconstructed slates to 

roof and stained timber windows (natural). Various internal works. 

Revised plans received 26 May 2004. 

Professor & Mrs Harris 

Church Farm, Hopton Road, Cam, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 5PB 

None 

Della Gould 




1. The re-roofing in reconstituted slates has introduced a modern material 

which has a manufactured mechanical appearance failing to exhibit the 

subtle irregularities in shape, colour, texture and thickness of the original 

natural slate. The reconstructed slates are therefore unsympathetic to 

the historic construction thus harming the character and appearance of 

the Listed Building. 

2. The relocation of the staircase and the subdivision of the front of the barn 

has unacceptably divided the single volume of the barn thereby causing 

harm to the character of the Listed Building. 

3. The external joinery items by virtue of their finish in a modern stain cause 

harm to the character of the Listed Building. 

4. The stainless steel flue installed on the barn roof has introduced a feature 

alien to the agricultural nature of the building to the detriment of its 

character. 

20


Parish / Town 


Support: 

Applicant believed he was following the conditions of the previous application - SDC guidelines 

unclear. Materials used are in keeping with original buildings and greatly improve the 

appearance of the development. 



Site Report: 

This application has been brought to the committee at the request of Councillor Miranda Clifton, a 

Ward Councillor. 

THE BUILDING 

21


This is a good contemporary group of farm buildings dated 1865, possibly a small Model Farm 

group. The buildings consist of a former barn with attached cattle byres and stores/dairy units. 

They are constructed mainly of red brick with some elevations in local marlstone. The buildings 

have recently been converted into two residential units. The group are contained within the 

curtilage of Church Farmhouse, Listed Grade II. 

THE APPLICATION 

This is a retrospective application for the retention of reconstructed slates to the roofs, stained 

timber windows and doors and various internal alterations. 

POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 

These are taken from PPG 15 "Planning and the Historic Environment." 

Paragraph 3.3 says that 'There should be a general presumption in favour of the preservation of 

Listed Buildings'. 

Paragraph 3.3 of PPG 15 requires that local planning authorities should "...have special regard to 

the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or 

historic interest which it possesses." 

Paragraph 3.4 of PPG 15 says that "Applicants for Listed Building consent must be able to justify 

their proposals. They will need to show why works which would affect the character of a Listed 

Building are desirable or necessary." 

Paragraph C.27 says "The roof is nearly always the dominant feature of a building, and the 

retention of its original structure, shape, pitch, cladding and ornament is important." 

Paragraph C.47 says "Paint is usually the correct finish for timber windows; staining is not a 

traditional finish and should not normally be used." 

Paragraph C.58 says; "the plan of a building is one of its most important characteristics. Interior 

plans and individual features of interest should be respected and left unaltered as far as possible. 

Internal spaces, staircases, panelling, window shutters, doors and doorcases, mouldings, 

decorated ceilings, stucco-work, and wall decorations are part of the special interest of a building 

and may be its most valuable feature." 

Paragraph C.68 says " There are some standard external features that require Listed Building 

consent when they affect the character of a Listed Building. These include satellite dishes, meter 

boxes, burglar alarms, security and other floodlighting, video cameras, and central heating and 

other flues, both standard and balanced. Only undamaging and visually unobtrusive positions for 

such fixtures should be agreed. 

History 

Listed Building Consent (S.98/1351) and Planning Permission (S.98.1338) for the conversion of 

these buildings were granted in 1999. Both of these consents were subject to a number of 

conditions which have not been discharged. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The Consents given in 1999 for the conversion of these buildings included a condition that the 

roofing materials were to match those used in the existing building. In February 2004 it was 

brought to the attention of the District Council that the new roofing materials did not match and 

22


that no agreement had been sought for this change. The works therefore constituted 

unauthorised alterations. 

When the matter was investigated further it became apparent that there had also been extensive 

and unauthorised alterations to the windows and doors and that they had been finished in a 

modern stain, likewise unauthorised. The owner of the buildings was invited to make 

retrospective applications for these works. 

Upon receipt of the applications a further site visit was carried out and it was discovered that a 

number of other works, also unauthorised had been carried out. These works include the 

repositioning of a staircase, the insertion of a floor at first floor level, the insertion of two 

additional rooflights, the relocation of a window, the removal of several dove holes and the 

addition of a stainless steel flue terminal. Revised plans have been received which show all of 

the unauthorised works which have now been considered against the original consents. 

At the time when the Listed Building Consent and Planning Permission were granted the 

buildings were predominantly roofed in natural Welsh slate with two of the inner courtyard 

elevations being clad in a modern asbestos slate. Some of these roofs were in a reasonable state 

of repair. The buildings have now all been re-roofed in modern reconstituted slates. 

PPG 15, paragraph C.27 above, is very clear in its guidance about alterations to roofs. While 

there is no concern about the replacement of the asbestos slates, the loss of the natural slates is 

considered to be very harmful to the character of the Listed Building. The natural Welsh slates 

were characterised by the subtle differences in colour, shape, texture and thickness which, 

together with their weathering properties, gave rise to an interesting and attractive appearance to 

the roofs. The roofs of these buildings are a very significant and dominant feature and as such it 

is essential to their character that the interest in the roof is retained. 

The new, reconstituted roofs, are a stark contrast to the Welsh slate. The new slates are of a 

uniform shape, size, thickness and texture and as a result the roof appears flat, uniform and very 

dull. This dramatic change in character has severely harmed the character of the Listed 

Buildings. 

With respect to the windows and doors, the unauthorised alterations are considered, as a whole, 

to be less of a concern. The original openings in the Listed Buildings have generally been 

respected, the unauthorised works largely being contained within the infilled cattle byres. While 

they have been finished in a modern stain, this could easily be overcome by the application of a 

paint finish. However, there is an original opening over the rear barn doors that has been moved. 

No justification has been given for this alteration and it has resulted in an unbalanced 

appearance to the elevation to the detriment of the building. This elevation has also been subject 

to the insertion of two unauthorised rooflights, again, no satisfactory justification has been given 

for these works. The additional rooflights inappropriately exacerbate the domestic character that 

this barn now subject to. They are therefore considered inappropriate. 

The other unauthorised works to the buildings all relate specifically to the barn itself and include 

the relocation of the staircase, the insertion of a floor, the insertion of a stainless steel flue, the 

removal of a row of dove holes and the alteration of the plinth on the front elevation. All of these 

works are considered to be inappropriate and cumulatively harm the character of the building. 

The relocation of the staircase is of particular concern. It was originally to be located in the front, 

former cart opening, allowing this area to remain open plan from the floor to the roof. This would 

have allowed the original open volume of the building to be appreciated. The new staircase is 

now boxed in against one of the walls and a first floor has been added in the cartway, thus totally 

denying the building any areas of open space and volume. This essential character of the 

building has therefore been destroyed. 

23


The other works, i.e. the flue, the plinth and the dove holes all affect the external appearance of 

the barn. The flue is a wholly alien feature in such a building and is therefore inappropriate. The 

impact of the other alterations are more minor, however each originally added an element of 

character to this building that has now been denied. 

All of the unauthorised works have cumulatively caused considerable harm to the character and 

special interest of the buildings and for the above reasons this application is recommended for 

refusal. 

If this application is refused in accordance with this recommendation, then authority is sought to 

take enforcement action to secure the reversal of the works. 


Please refer to report on application S.04/0659/ful for details. 



properties. In particular, regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to Respect for 


Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised by the application no 

particular matters, other than those referred in this report, warranted any different action to that 

recommended. 

ITEM No: 05 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1106/FUL 

4 Windsor Road, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 4BU 

21916 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of a garage and single storey extension. 

Mr & Mrs Hearn 

4 Windsor Road, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 4BU 

Mr David Barnes 

Wistaria House, May Lane, Dursley, Glos, GL11 4JH 

Will Bridges 


24


Recommendation Permission 


1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration 

of five years from the date of this permission. 

Reason: 

To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country 

Planning Act 1990. 

2. No window or door openings (other than those shown on the approved 

plans) shall be formed in the eastern elevation of the extension hereby 

permitted. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining residential 

property in accordance with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

Informatives: 


Parish / Town 

1. For the purposes of Article 22 of the Town and Country Planning 

(General Development Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order 2003, 

the following reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below 

together with a summary of the Policies and Proposals contained within 

the Development Plan which are relevant to this decision: 

The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and H23 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 

2001) which seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the 

amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring dwellings by 

reason of overbearing effect or loss of light. The design, scale, and size 

of the development is in keeping with the existing property and its wider 

setting. The plot size is sufficient to accommodate the proposals without 

it being cramped or overdeveloped. Sufficient space remains available 

for the parking of vehicles in accordance with the Council's adopted 

Vehicle Parking Standards and sufficient amenity space will remain for 

private use of the occupiers of the enlarged property, in accordance with 

the Council's adopted standards as outlined in its Residential Design 

Guide. 

Object - reasons as on previous application - loss of privacy and design. 

Revised Plans. Still object as before. 

25


Letters of Objection 

D J Bull, 3 Windsor Road, Dursley 

Mr P Evans, 5 Windsor Road, Dursley 

• Loss of view. 

• Loss of light. 

• Previous refusal on site. 

• Detrimental to objector's property. 

• Seen revised plans - objections still stand. 


Site Report: 


The application site is located towards the eastern edge of the town of Dursley, and just south of 

Rednock Secondary School. The site consists of a two storey semi detached property, finished in 

white rough render. Directly to the east and west of the site are the neighbouring and adjoining 

properties respectively, with Windsor Road to the south and the rear garden that falls away from 

the house, to the north. 

26


The application is made for the erection of a single garage to the side of the property and a single 

storey extension and conservatory to the rear elevation. 

Planning History 

S.03/274 Erection of a two storey extension, conservatory and garage. - Withdrawn 

S.03/1855 Erection of attached garage and single storey extension. - Refused 21/01/2004 


The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within Policies H23 and G1 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). These policies 

seek to allow extensions to residential properties subject to a number of criteria. These aim to 

retain the character of the dwelling to be extended, the amenity of the site and that of 

neighbouring properties. 

As can been seen from the planning history there have been previous applications over the last 

18 months for similar schemes with the initial application for a two storey extension being 

withdrawn and the subsequent revised application being refused due to the proposal leading to 

an unacceptable loss of privacy to a neighbouring property and the design being out of keeping 

with the host property. 

The rear extension shown within this application has been significantly reduced both in height 

and depth with the effect on the adjoining property now being minimal. The orientation has been 

changed from initially extending in a north to south manner to this application concentrating the 

built form mainly in an east to west style. The rear extension has also benefited from a revision in 

that a proposed window to the eastern elevation has been removed to prevent any potential 

increase in the level of privacy observed by the neighbouring property. This element of the 

proposal is now in accordance with both Policy G1 and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


The garage element has not changed from the previous application as it had an acceptable 

height, size and design initially with no issues or loss of privacy. With regard to the comments 

received from the neighbouring property regarding the potential loss of light to the said property, 

while the proposal will have an effect on that property the level of loss of light would not be 

considered to be significantly detrimental. 

Therefore this application is in accordance with all of the above mentioned policies and the 

application is duly recommended for conditional permission. 


The panel inspected the site and noted the relationship between the existing dwelling and the 

neighbouring properties. The position of the windows of the adjacent dwelling was noted 

together with other features such as the size of the garden, the hedge and fence lines and the 

respective levels of the site in relation to its surroundings. 

The Parish Council representative reiterated the objections to the development as it would be 

overwhelming from the point of view of the existing development and the adjoining houses. 

The Ward Councillor, Mrs Fowles, supported the views of the Town Council and the proposal will 

adversely affect the neighbouring properties. There would be a loss of privacy if not a loss of 

light. The design is not sympathetic to the character of the house. 

After discussion, the Panel were of the view the proposals were acceptable but Officers were 

also of the opinion further improvements could be made to the scheme and would negotiate 

further with the applicants agent. 

27







particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted any different action to that 

recommended. 

ITEM No: 06 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0952/FUL 

Land Adjacent Hawkswood, Frome Hall Lane, Stroud, Gloucestershire 

18053 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of dwelling to provide ancillary accommodation to Hawkswood. 

Mr & Mrs Woolls 

Hawkeswood, Frome Hall Lane, Rodborough, Stroud 

Mr Philip Hodges 

Tetbury Upton, Tetbury, Gloucestershire, GL8 8LP 

Andrew Case 




1. The proposal is tantamount to the creation of a new dwelling and the 

road serving the site is substandard and unsuitable to cater for the 

increase in traffic which would result from the proposed development 

by reason of its restricted width, poor alignment, lack of footways, lack 

of passing bays and substandard junctions with Fromehall Lane and 

Bath Road, all to the detriment of highway safety and contrary to Policy 

G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 


28


Parish / Town 

Object: 

Development not appropriate to the site. 



Site Report: 


This application was referred to committee by Councillor Blackshaw, the then Ward Councillor. It 

is a duplicate of S.04/0936 

Site and Proposal 

The site is located towards the end of Fromehall Lane, within the designated Conservation Area. 

The main house is a bungalow with dormer windows in the roof and finished in reconstituted 

stone. Approximately 30 metres to the east of the site a new building has been constructed, 

29


similar in scale and appearance to the main dwelling. There are a couple of small outbuildings to 

the south of the main house. The property sits on a flat area with the land to the south rising 

rapidly and falling to the north. The site is accessed via a very narrow, poorly surfaced road with 

a steep access and poor visibility onto the main road. 

The proposal is for the erection of "auxiliary accommodation", in accordance with the plans 

previously approved applications S.98/286 & S.99/822 which have now lapsed. 

Relevant History 

Application S.97/267 for "Outline application for the erection of one dwelling" was refused on 

16/4/97 and subsequently dismissed at appeal on 3/2/1998 on highway reasons. The inspector 

commented at this time that no objection was raised to ancillary accommodation. 

Application S.98/286 for "Outline application for the erection of ancillary accommodation to 

Hawkswood" was approved on 7/4/1999 with both conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement 

restricting the use to ancillary to the main dwelling. 

Application 99/822 for "Erection of ancillary accommodation to Hawkswood" was substantially 

reduced in scale prior to the application being approved on 28/07/1999. This was subsequently 

detached from the main property by minor amendment. This application was not implemented 

and lapsed on 7/4/2004 (as agreed in the agents letter received by fax on 8/6/2004.) 

Application S.99/1882 for "Removal of Condition (4) of Permission S.98/286- Outline application 

for the erection of ancillary accommodation to Hawkswood. (Condition (4) states "The ancillary 

accommodation hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than as an extension 

to, and in connection with the residential use of the dwelling known as Hawkswood".)" was 

refused on 2/2/2000. 

Application S.02/1791 for "Application to remove Condition 4 of Permission S.98/286 (Ancillary 

accommodation to Hawkswood) to permit the ancillary house to be occupied as a separate 

dwelling" was withdrawn prior to decision. The agent was informed that the building which has 

been constructed on site is not in accordance with any approved development. 

Application S.02/2188 for "Retrospective application for the erection of ancillary accommodation 

to Hawkswood" was refused on 22/01/2003 and subsequently dismissed on appeal on 7/10/2003. 

Application S.03/C0479/FUL for "Retrospective application for use of building as auxiliary 

accommodation to Hawkswood" was refused. 


The previous application has lapsed and this is therefore not a renewal of a previous permission, 

and has to be considered afresh against those policies and factors that are relevant at this point 

in time. Since the previous approval there have been a number of significant occurrences: 

Policy H24 was introduced to the Local Plan in November 1999, requiring annexes for a 

dependent relative to be linked by internal door or doors to the main dwelling and that the 

accommodation is readily convertible for use as an extension to the main dwelling; 

The applicant has made two separate planning applications to remove the condition requiring 

ancillary occupation (showing little intention to use the building for ancillary purposes); 

and a new independent dwelling has been constructed but permission has retrospectively been 

refused at appeal. 

The significant distance of the proposed building from the original dwelling means it cannot be 

considered as an annexe to the main property under Policy H24 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) as it is not linked by internal door or doors to 

the main house. 

30


Further, the application fee submitted is £220, the fee for a new dwelling, when the correct fee for 

an ancillary extension to an existing residence would be £110. As such this application has to be 

considered against Policies H14, B4 and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001). These seek to ensure that new housing development is of a 

scale, layout and design compatible with the surrounding settlement, would not harm the 

character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and would not have a detrimental effect on 


While there is no objection to location of the proposal on Conservation Area grounds, the only 

access to the site is along a very poor quality road. Two appeal inspectors have upheld refusals 

on highway grounds, and the situation on the surrounding road network has not changed since 

this time. While the agent may cite that ancillary accommodation would have a lower associated 

level of vehicular movements than the level associated with an ordinary dwelling, the most recent 

appeal inspector stated at paragraph 9 "Whilst of itself this (level of vehicular movements) is quite 

modest, the shortcomings of the junction are so serious that I am satisfied that any increase in 

the traffic using it should be resisted". As a result in any form the proposal would result in an 

increased level of vehicular movements and is contrary to Policy G5 in that it would result in the 

intensification of use of the access roads/junction leading to the property to the detriment of 


Refusal is recommended. 


The Panel inspected the site and considered the details of both this application and application 

S.04/0936/FUL for the retention of the building already constructed. The Panel were informed of 

the planning history of the site and the respective positions of the accommodation proposed, 

granted consent in the past and the building already constructed without planning permission. 

They were informed of previous appeal decisions for the site and that there are outstanding 

appeals to be heard in August. The Panel noted the position of the access to the site, its 

alignment and the visibility afforded when leaving the site. 

The Parish Council representative stated the Parish were not in favour of the proposals due to 

the access and once built it would be a saleable property and occupiers would be in a position to 

use the access. The house itself doesn't cause concern as it does not interfere with anyone 

else's amenity. 

The Ward Councillor, Councillor Sinfield, sent his apologises and was not able to attend. 

After discussion the Panel were of the opinion the access serving the site was not suitable to 

cater for the proposals and were not in favour of either of the developments. 








31

ITEM No: 07 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/0936/FUL 

Land Adjacent Hawkswood, Frome Hall Lane, Stroud, Gloucestershire 

18053 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Retrospective application for use of building as auxiliary 

accommodation to Hawkswood (resubmission following refusal 

S.03/479/FUL). 

Mrs Woolls-Kreamer 

C/o P Hodges, Tetbury Upton, Tetbury, Glos, GL8 8LP 



Andrew Case 




Parish / Town 


1. The proposal is tantamount to the creation of a new dwellling and the 

road serving the site is substandard and unsuitable to cater for the 

increase in traffic which would result from the proposed development by 

reason of its restricted width, poor alignment, lack of footways, lack of 

passing bays and substandard junctions with Fromehall Lane and Bath 

Road, all to the detriment of highway safety and contrary to Policy G5 of 

the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended 

June 2001). 

Object: Development is not appropriate to the area. 

32



Site Report: 


This application was referred to committee by Councillor Blackshaw, the then Ward Councillor. It 

is a duplicate of application S.04/0952 


The site is located towards the end of Fromehall Lane, within the designated Conservation Area. 

The main house is a bungalow with dormer windows in the roof and finished in reconstituted 

stone. Approximately 30 metres to the east of the site a new building has been constructed, 

similar in scale and appearance to the main dwelling. There are a couple of small outbuildings to 

the south of the main house. The property sits on a flat area with the land to the south rising 

rapidly and falling to the north. The site is accessed via a very narrow, poorly surfaced road with 

a steep access and poor visibility onto the main road. 

33


This is resubmission of a retrospective for the retention of "auxillary accommodation", following 

the previous refusal by this Council under ref. S.03/C0479/FUL and a previous appeal refusal for 

very similar development on the site (ref S.02/2188). 


Application S.97/267 for "Outline application for the erection of one dwelling" was refused on 

16/4/97 and subsequently dismissed at appeal on 3/2/1998 on highway reasons. The inspector 

commented at this time that no objection was raised to ancillary accommodation. 

Application S.98/286 for "Outline application for the erection of ancillary accommodation to 

Hawkswood" was approved on 7/4/1999 with both conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement 

restricting the use to ancillary to the main dwelling. 

Application 99/822 for "Erection of ancillary accommodation to Hawkswood" was substantially 

reduced in scale prior to the application being approved on 28/07/1999. This was subsequently 

detached from the main property by minor amendment. 

Application S.99/1882 for "Removal of Condition (4) of Permission S.98/286- Outline application 

for the erection of ancillary accommodation to Hawkswood. (Condition (4) states "The ancillary 

accommodation hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than as an extension 

to, and in connection with the residential use of the dwelling known as Hawkswood".)" was 

refused on 2/2/2000. 

Application S.02/1791 for "Application to remove Condition 4 of Permission S.98/286 (Ancillary 

accommodation to Hawkswood) to permit the ancillary house to be occupied as a separate 

dwelling" was withdrawn prior to decision. The agent was informed that the building which has 

been constructed on site is not in accordance with any approved development. 

Application S.02/2188 for "Retrospective application for the erection of ancillary accommodation 

to Hawkswood" was refused on 22/01/2003 and subsequently dismissed on appeal on 7/10/2003. 

Application S.03/C0479/FUL for "Retrospective application for use of building as auxiliary 

accommodation to Hawkswood" was refused. 


While the application is for "auxillary" accommodation, externally it is the same external size as 

that previously dismissed at appeal. The scale of the building is not reduced and the very high 

eaves level that facilitates the large amount of first floor accommodation is retained. The internal 

works proposed would not constitute development and could not therefore be controlled by the 

planning system. Further given the applicants two previous applications to remove occupancy 

conditions, there appears to be little intention to use the building for ancillary purposes. The 

significant distance of the proposed building from the original dwelling means it cannot be 

considered as an annexe to the main property under Policy H24 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) as it is not linked by internal door or doors to 

the main house. 

As such this application has to be re-considered against Policies H14, B4 and G5 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). These seek to ensure 

that new housing development is of a scale, layout and design compatible with the surrounding 

settlement, would not harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and would 

not have a detrimental effect on highway safety. 

While there is no objection to location of the proposal on Conservation Area grounds, the only 

access to the site is along a very poor quality road. Two appeal inspectors have upheld refusals 

on highway grounds, and the situation on the surrounding road network has not changed since 

this time. 

34


The proposal is a token effort to reduce the scale of the proposal, but would not reduce the 

useable scale of the building in a way that could satisfactorily be controlled. As such it would 

result in increased vehicular movements in line with the construction of a new dwellinghouse. As 

a result the application is contrary to Policy G5 in that it would result in the intensification of use 

of the access roads/junction leading to the property to the detriment of highway safety. 



Please refer to report on application S.04/0952/FUL for details. 








ITEM No: 08 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0775/REM 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Land At, Windyridge, Bisley, Stroud 

632 

Bisley With Lypiatt Parish Council 

Approval of Reserved Matters 

Approval of reserved matters for the erection of 26 dwellings with 

associated parking and access. 

Westbury Homes (Holdings) Ltd 

Central Region, Central House, Sabre Close, Quedgeley, GL2 4NZ 

None 

Andrew Case 


Recommendation Resolve Not to Refuse 


35


1. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details 

of a scheme of hard and soft landscaping for the site have been 

submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of Development 

Services. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area to accord with Policy 

H14 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001 including Housing Amendments September 2003). 

2. The hard landscaping as approved should be implemented in full prior 

completion of the development. All planting, seeding or turfing 

comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in 

the first complete planting and seeding seasons following the occupation 

of the buildings, or the completion of the development to which it relates, 

whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five 

years from the completion of the development, die, are removed, or 

become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next 

planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Head 

of Development Services gives written consent to any variation. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area, to accord with Policy 



3. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be 

used in the construction of the walling surfaces of the building works 

hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the 

Head of Development Services. Development shall then only be carried 

out in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason: 




Informatives: 






This application is considered against Policies H14, H8, H9, T1, G1, G2, 

G5 & R5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001 including Housing amendments September 2003). 

The relevant sections of Policy H14 permits development that: is of a 

scale, layout and design compatible with that part of the settlement in 

which it would be located, and would not cause harm to the character 

and appearance of that part of the settlement; is proposed at as high a 

density as is acceptable in townscape and amenity terms; includes 

dwellings of various sizes, both in respect of physical size and type; 

would not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is 

important to the character of the settlement; retains any natural or built 

36


Parish / Town 


features worthy of retention; and provides an appropriate area of private 

amenity space for the occupiers of each dwelling-house. Regarding 

provision of affordable housing Policies H8 and H9 require 30% 

affordable housing provision on this development, provided in a mix that 

reflects local housing need and is maintained in the longer term. The 

relevant section of Policy T1 seeks to provide appropriate levels of 

parking in accordance with the Council's Parking Standards. Policy R5 

requires the provision of appropriate outdoor play space or where this is 

unrealistic a financial contribution in lieu of on site provision. The 

remaining Policies seek to ensure that no detrimental effects occur on: 

the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties; highway 

safety; or, by means of pollution, on the environment. Further to this the 

roofscape of the proposed development will be visible from the edge of 

the Bisley Conservation Area and important views need to be protected, 

under Policy B4. 

The proposal would not result in any increased highway dangers, in 

accordance with Policy G5. The proposal would not have a detrimental 

effect on the environment in accordance with Policy G2. The proposed 

area of Public Open Space along with an existing equipped play area on 

site (that was provided on the previous development of ten properties) 

ensures that there is adequate provision to serve local residents in 

accordance with Policy R5. The proposal meets the requirements of the 

Residential Design Guide and will not significantly harm the amenities of 

the occupiers of neighbouring properties, such as would warrant refusal, 

in accordance with Policy G1. 

The form, layout and density of the proposal is compatible with the 

surrounding area and would not harm the character and appearance. A 

range and mix of house types all with an appropriate area of private 

amenity space and car parking are provided. The appropriate number of 

units of affordable housing are provided. All in accordance with Policies 

H14, H9, H8 and T1. 

Object - See officer’s report for detailed Parish Council objections. 



Mr & Mrs Martin, 8 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr R Hurdle & Ms L Martin, 32 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr I McGill, 33 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr T Barnfield, 35 Windyridge, Bisley 

G M Cox, 37 Windyridge, Bisley 

Ms B McAteer, 38 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Sargent, 1 Windyridge, Stroud Road 

Mr & Mrs Stevens, 2 Windyridge, Stroud Road 

37


Mr & Mrs Stevens, 4 Windyridge, Stroud Road 

Mr S Trinder, 11 Bearsfield, Bisley 

Ms E Polkinghorne & L Nash, 7 Bearsfield, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Stewart, 34 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Mayo, 36 Windyridge, Bisley 

J & P Underwood, 5 Bearsfield, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs L Hawke, 9 Bearsfield, Bisley 

K Williams & M Jones, 7 Windyridge, Bisley 

Ms M Gegg, 20 Windyridge, Bisley 

H E Ruther, 22 Windyridge, Bisley 

R & D Wiltshire, 39 Windyridge, Bisley 

Ms C Mackie, 41 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Millen, 49 Windyridge, Bisley 

D & R Berkeley, 15 Windyridge, Bisley 

N J Chapman, 16 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Banyard, 17 Windyridge, Bisley 

Ms N Kearney, 44 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr D Bashford, Eskdale, Van Der Breen Street 

Ms M Garrow, 45 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Chappell 

Mr & Mrs Klien, New House, Cheltenham Road 

Mr B Wheatley, 14 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs Lewis, Stonemead, Van Der Breen Street 

Occupier, 25 Windyridge, Bisley 

Dr P Pearson, Rectory Barn, Holloway Road 

Mr T Grieve, The Coign, Hayhedge Lane 

M, H & B Hammond, Nation House, George Street 

Mr P Stone, Grove Cottage, Back Lane 

Mr & Mrs Perry, Ballagh, Cheltenham Road 

Mr & Mrs Constant, 30 Windyridge, Bisley 

Mr & Mrs E Walker, Penworth, George Street 

Mrs M P Locke, Cadogan Grange, Calfway Farm 

B E Evans, Humbledory, 30A Windyridge 

Ms R Wade, Bisley Farm, Cheltenham Road 

Mr D Smith & Ms L King, 46 Windyridge, Bisley 

P & A Dickens, 10 The Row, Mount Pleasant 

Mr & Mrs Neighbour, 2 Stratford Cottages, Van Der Breen Street 

Mr & Mrs Barlow-Kay, Shaever House, Back Lane 

G Selway, 29 Windyridge, Bisley 

L G Banyard, Holloway House, Holloway Road 

Mr N Warner, 1 South View, Van Der Breen Street 

Miss E C Keen, 2 The Row, Mount Pleasant 

Mr & Mrs Roberts, 1 The Old Workshop, Hayhedge Lane 

Mr & Mrs Hunt, Middle Tythe, Hayhedge Lane 

Mr & Mrs Campbell, 1 Fir Tree Cottages, Cheltenham Road 

Mr & Mrs Weaving, The Reddings, Van Der Breen Street 

Ms K Ford & Mr C Ashmead, Station House, Cheltenham Road 

M & C Mackin, 2 Bearsfield, Bisley 

C & D Taper, Upper Barn Farmhouse, Vanderbreen Street 

L Caine & M Cawoll, Rectory Farm Cottage, Holloway Road 

J & P Bentley, The Old Post Office, High Street 

Mr P Blake, 2 Holloway House, Bisley 

Mrs O Burkitt, Hartwell Cottage, Wells Road 

P Shankar, Church House, Bisley 

M & D Richards, 3 Hampstead Buildings, Bisley 

L Tyrell, The Malt House, Bisley 

38


S & R Hale, Tythe Barn, Hayhedge Lane 

Mr & Mrs D Hunt, Rowan House, Back Lane 

G Moseling, The Rockery, Van Der Breen Street 

Ms Z Massie, Little Orchard, Stroud Road 

P Hobbs & P & K Langdon, Westholme, Back Lane 

A & M Smith, Bear House, Bisley 

Dr A McDowell, Bear View, Back Lane 

S Barnyard, The Barn, Holloway Road 

V Drinkwater, 7 Mount Pleasant, Bisley 

J & J Cobbe, Myra House, Bisley 

D & S Hemming, 1 Seymour Cottage, Van Der Breen Street 

Mr R Morfee, Paulmead Barn, Wells Lane 

Jilly Cooper, The Chantry, Bisley 

Mrs S Barron, Glade View, Camp 

W McCenze, Bracebridge House, Calfway Lane 

K Finch, 2 The Cottages, Stroud Road 

Mrs E A Brown, The Breezes, Bisley 

N & S Hardy, 9 Windyridge, Bisley 

Lord Reading, Jaynes Court, Bisley 

G & B Rowsell, The Old Market House, 1 George Street 

G & A Parkinson, Priest House, Calfway Lane 

Mr H Berkeley, 23 Windyridge, Bisley 

E Veale, Pinfold, Vanderbreen Street 

P & G Cooke, Little Gables, The Camp 

M & L Grimwood, Calfway House, The Camp 

D & S Vesey, Kuleana, Wells Lane 

A Reed Henderson, Reeds Cottage, Holloway Road 

Dr & Mrs M J Savidge, Campion House, The Camp 

N K Banyard, 8 The Row, Mount Pleasant 

T Lloyd, 38 Windyridge, Bisley 

M & J Batten, Traders, Vanderbreen Street 

C Spurgeon & S Prowse, Evimiz, Cheltenham Road 

C A Wright, 1 Stratford Cottage, Vanderbreen Street 

A Makin, Highlands, Back Lane 

M E Dickenson, Ladymead, Stancombe 

S & M Edwards, The Old Vicarage, Bisley 

Mrs A Gardner, Bidmead, Cheltenham Road 

Richard & Sally Jackson, The Old Police House, Cheltenham Road 

Mr & Mrs Gegg, 24 Windyridge, Bisley 

S Dickinson, Ladymead, Stancombe 

R & M Freemantle, High Meadow, Back Lane 

R & V Clouston, Lion House, Holloway Road 

J & R Land, Jos, Vanderbreen Street 

A Dewan, Hay Hedge, Wells Lane 

C & C Mobbs, Kirklands, Calfway Lane 

N R Hale, 48 Windyridge, Bisley 

E M Kearney, Kilminsters, High Street 

Mr & Mrs Wright, Old Bell Cottage, Church Hill 

Mr S Rowsell, 3 The Row, Mount Pleasant 

Mrs E Brown, Breezes, Stroud Road 

A Ruther, Hawthorns, Stroud Road 

Mr & Mrs Mackin, 2 Bearsfield, Bisley 

• Loss of access. 

• Revised car parking density has been increased and will increase the level of noise and 

activity all hours of the day and night, the car park will be screened off from the main body of 

39


the estate and will inevitably lead to a ghetto environment with associated levels in dirt and 

unsociable activities. 

• Density of houses. 

• Sewerage and drainage not suitable. 

• Too many houses. 


• Loss of privacy. 

• Not in character with the area. 

• Existing roads will not cope with the increase in traffic. 

• No provision for youngsters to play with the loss of this 'field'. 

• Electricity supply - Aquila 'H' post on writers land which is the main feed to Windyridge, 

supply route is in poor condition. 

• Cannot be Approval of Reserved Matters as the criteria has been exhausted. 

• Urbanised estate in a scenic Cotswold village. 

• Parking congestion. 

• Air pollution. 

• Noise pollution. 

• Pressure on services - flooding could occur. 

• Lack of facilities - especially for young people. 

• Design lacks originality. 

• Lack of space within the houses. 

• Out of keeping with surrounding houses. 

• Lack of landscaping, very small gardens. 

• Unattractive parking lot. 

• Intended tree planting will present a loss of light. 

• Revised plans: Numbers still too high. Scale is inappropriate in the village. No more than 12 

houses should be permitted. 

• No information on the houses that are going to be housing association. 

• Contrary to the principles laid out in the Stroud District Local Plan. 

• Revised plans: transport problems with additional dwellings and detrimental to character of 

village. 

• Deeply opposed to 'Leicester' design, height will cause loss of light and privacy 

• Revised plans: Village will lose its unique identity. 

• Given reasons for rejecting a recent environmentally friendly small business less than a mile 

away it would be hypocritical to approve this in its current form 

• Access onto Cheltenham Road is totally unsuitable. Should consider 2 cul-de-sacs off 

Stroud Road. 

• Too many houses are proposed for the site 

• Three storey houses are inappropriate. 

• POS/ Play is not large enough 

• Lack of access to public footpath which leads via Bearsfield to the village amenities. 

• Possible to remove some of these objections via deletion of plots 22, 23 & 24. 

• Loss of children’s play area. 

40


Site Report: 



The site is located within the village of Bisley, approximately 100 metres to the north west of the 

designated Conservation Area and in the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is split 

into two different areas the larger being currently a flat field that is used informally for recreational 

purposes and is surrounded on all sides by the rear gardens of two storey residential properties. 

On the north western boundary of the site is a 1.8 metre high close boarded fence. There are 

various hedges and fences on the other boundaries, varying in height depending on residents 

choice. There is a public footpath running across the eastern corner of the site and another in 

from the Stroud Road to the south west. The smaller area has low bungalows to the south, two 

storey dwellings to the north east and allotments to the north west. There is a band of low 

shrubby vegetation along the north west boundary and 1 metre chain link fencing to the south 

east. 

The proposal is for the approval of reserved matters, following outline approval S.01/355, for 26 

dwellings of which 8 are affordable units. 


Application S.01/355 for "Renewal of outline permission S.98/176 for residential development" 

was approved on 18/4/2001. 

41


Application S.01/872 for "Erection of ten dwellings with access road, parking and associated 

landscaping" was approved on a part of the previously approved site on 10/7/2001. 

Application S.04/0070/OUT for "Outline application for residential development" was approved on 

18/2/2004. 

Parish Council Report 

1. SUSTAINABILITY 

1.1. GENERAL: Westbury Housing must be obliged to remedy the damage that will be caused to 

the local and wider environment through construction, building and long term living of 26 new 

dwellings. In an area with poor public transport and no local jobs, amenities and facilities, efforts 

must be made to counteract the environmental impact within the framework of sustainability. The 

larger context of global warming and climate change created by poor construction, transport and 

energy efficiency standards must be addressed. 

1.2. TRANSPORT: 26 dwellings in Bisley will create at least 50 new car journeys per day in 

respect of residents reaching the workplace, major shopping, leisure facilities etc. Stroud District 

Council espouses sustainability in the Local Plan; this development contravenes this unless steps 

are taken to ensure that unnecessary car journeys will NOT be made and more local jobs, retail, 

amenities are encouraged and created. 

1.3. ENERGY EFFICIENCY: Westbury Homes must be obliged to ensure the highest standards 

of energy efficiency in their new buildings on Windyridge. Stroud District Council calls for 

standard standards - we request the highest possible standards which can easily be achieved at 

little additional cost through increased insulation, solar panels for water heating, maximising solar 

gain through careful alignment of glazing. 

1.4. WATER ISSUES: Flooding and drains are a real problem in Bisley already. Storm drainage 

should be dealt with on site, permeable surfaces in the car park areas and car parks could have 

soakaways under them so not dumping or adding to this local problem elsewhere. The 

affordable housing could have a joint rainwater harvesting system without huge cost implications. 

2. DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE 

1.1. OVERALL QUALITY: The overall design reflects neither the traditional village patterns or 

details, nor the local Windyridge simplicity of form and design. 

1.2. DENSITY: The site is too cramped. Major problem with number of houses and proximity to 

existing dwellings, especially for example those backing onto Bearsfield, the two backing onto 

existing Windyridge sheltered homes etc. 

1.3. PATTERNS: The layout is an urban form that does not enhance the site and its impact. 

There is too little green space, adding to its dreariness, and gardens are too tiny. 

1.4. SOME DETAILS: No Georgian porches please, no white plastic windows please, address 

apparent confusion in variations of angles of roof slopes, tiles should be plain concrete granular 

finish which weathers sympathetically. Keep it simple. 

1.5. RECREATION: The design is so dense it does not allow for any recreation space, especially 

for older children. 

1.6. TRAFFIC: Traffic volume through Bisley very high. The density of the design brings more 

cars to Bisley and hence more dangers to pedestrians and cyclists and other drivers on already 

dangerous roads. Locals walk to the shop/PO - using the Cheltenham Road - that is already 

dangerous. No pavements. Mares Lane is very dangerous because of "Bathurst House" wall 

42


and more cars will create more potential for accidents. Traffic reduction is an issue because 

there is currently no viable bus alternative. 

1.7. ACCESS: The design is so dense it does not allow for footpath access from Windryridge 

residents who, for safety reasons, should be allowed to use traditional footpath routes from the 

site into the village to access services. In particular, dwellings on the Stroud Road should be 

allowed footpath access and the east end of the new application should be unblocked to allow 

footpath access onto the existing right of way between Windyridge and Bearsfield. 

3. RECREATION AND AMENITY: Critical lack for children between 8-15 because of safety 

issues and major dangers crossing Cheltenham Road to access existing playing fields which are 

not overlooked. No covered facilities in Bisley. Most teenagers live on Windyridge already. 

4. SPECIFIC RESIDENTS CONCERN IN ADDITIONAL TO ABOVE: 

4.1. 3 storey dwellings. 

4.2. Back access from Windyridge gardens to footpath. 

4.3. Sewerage: already have problems of seeping into people's gardens – what will be done 

to address this? 

4.4. Power: Lots of power cuts on Windyridge - will additional power be installed to cope with 

dwellings? 

4.5. No. 49 still would like to walk alongside home so need a kerb to prevent cars 

encroaching against their proposed new wall. 

4.6. Bungalows at back of 19-22 Windyridge. 

4.7. Who owns the allotment hedge, will it be maintained properly and how can we ensure it 

is not cut down? 

4.8. Pavements needed, especially on Cheltenham Road - very dangerous. 

4.9. Where will these people work? - there is no local work. 


This application is considered against Policies H14, H8, H9, T1, G1, G2, G5 & R5 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 including Housing 

amendments September 2003). The relevant sections of Policy H14 permits development that: is 

of a scale, layout and design compatible with that part of the settlement in which it would be 

located, and would not cause harm to the character and appearance of that part of the 

settlement; is proposed at as high a density as is acceptable in townscape and amenity terms; 

includes dwellings of various sizes, both in respect of physical size and type; would not cause the 

loss of, or damage to, any open space which is important to the character of the settlement; 

retains any natural or built features worthy of retention; and provides an appropriate area of 

private amenity space for the occupiers of each dwelling-house. Regarding provision of 

affordable housing Policies H8 and H9 require 30% affordable housing provision on this 

development, provided in a mix that reflects local housing need and is maintained in the longer 

term. The relevant section of Policy T1 seeks to provide appropriate levels of parking in 

accordance with the Council's Parking Standards. Policy R5 requires the provision of appropriate 

outdoor play space or where this is unrealistic a financial contribution in lieu of on site provision. 

The remaining Policies seek to ensure that no detrimental effects occur on: the amenities of the 

occupiers of neighbouring properties; highway safety; or, by means of pollution, on the 

environment. Further to this the roofscape of the proposed development will be visible from the 

edge of the Bisley Conservation Area and important views need to be protected, under Policy B4. 

Following extensive consultation with officers the layout and design of the scheme has been 

considerably revised. This is an application for the approval of reserved matters and so the 

principle of residential development has been agreed and only the specific details are under 

consideration. County Highways have no objection to the layout of the development purely 

requiring further information on the specific constructional details, this is covered by a condition 

on the outline consent which requires discharging. The proposal would not result in any 

43


increased highway dangers, in accordance with Policy G5. Condition 9 on the Outline 

permission requires submission of details of drainage, these have not yet been submitted and 

there is no obvious reason why the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the environment, 

and it is an issue for the developer to agree with Statutory undertakers to ensure that the 

development has adequate sewage facilities, all in accordance with Policy G2 

While at present there is sufficient play space provision in the local area to serve the population, 

it is relatively remote from the site and accessed by crossing the busy Cheltenham Road. As a 

result an area of Public Open Space (POS) has been provided near the entrance to the proposed 

site, to serve as a Local Area of Play (LAP). This along with an existing equipped play area 

(LEAP), that was provided on the previous development of ten properties, ensures that there is 

adequate provision to serve local residents in accordance with Policy R5. It would be 

unreasonable to require a larger area to be provided or additional contributions, however the 

applicant has advised that should Committee prefer to accept a commuted sum in lieu of the 

POS that they are happy to provide this. 

The footprint and height of the two bungalows proposed at the northern end of the site have been 

reduced, and the roof has been hipped. While the proposal will affect the outlook of the 

occupiers of 19 to 21 Windyridge, given that a two metre high fenceline can be erected under 

permitted development the height, massing and proximity of these dwellings would not have such 

a detrimental dominating effect as to warrant refusal. Further it will not affect privacy or result in 

a loss of light. There is a public footpath leading to the allotments that passes along the western 

side of this part of the site and the character and appearance from this elevation has a broken 

appearance that is compatible with the surrounding area. The access to these units is partly over 

the existing parking area serving the neighbouring bungalow and the scheme involves two 

tandem parking spaces to serve each of the existing and proposed bungalows. This is in 

accordance with Policies H14, T1 and G1 

The main development: 

Policy H14 requires as high a density as possible to be provided, subject to townscape and 

amenity. While the overall density is higher than the surrounding estate and with some 

properties fronting directly onto the road from the main public thoroughfares the varying and 

broken building frontages is compatible with and will not cause harm to the character and 

appearance of the area. Concern was specifically raised by objectors to the "Leicester" type 

properties. The long vista down the development is now finished by standard two storey 

properties and in the revised positions they will be viewed at closer range and in conjunction with 

other buildings such that they will not be overly obtrusive. The proposal contains a good range 

and mix of house types and an appropriate area of private amenity space is provided to serve 

each dwelling. Again the application is for the approval of reserved matters and the loss of the 

openness of the area has already been agreed at the Outline stage. There are no natural or built 

features worthy of retention. The proposal is in accordance with Policy H14. The roof line when 

viewed up from the Conservation Area has been revised, removing the two and a half storey 

elements and it will now be viewed as varying two storey properties and will preserve views out of 

the Conservation Area in accordance with Policy B4. 

The scheme has been revised to ensure the 25 metre back-to-back separation distances 

required in the Council's Residential Design Guide have been met. In some places this has 

resulted in the properties being pushed nearer to the estate road but on balance ensuring privacy 

was more important than a large defensible space in front of the property. Also the dormer 

windows on the rear elevation of the "Leicester" properties have been replaced with roof lights, 

which should serve to reduce further any perceived overlooking. The proposal would not have a 

detrimental effect on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with 

Policy G1. 

44


On the issue of affordable housing: 26 units in total are proposed, 30% of which is 7.8 units. The 

development includes 8 affordable units of various sizes and designs, a legal agreement will be 

required to ensure that this provision is retained in the longer term. The proposal is in 

accordance with Policies H8 and H9. 

It is recommended to Resolve not to Refuse the application subject to a legal agreement to retain 

the affordable housing and provide a maintenance contribution for the public open space. 


The Panel walked along the existing housing frontages noting their design, aspect and siting. The 

existing equipped play area close to the application site was evident. The public footpath running 

south west from the application site was also highlighted. The Panel proceeded by walking onto 

both elements of the application site. 

The Parish Council representative reiterated their objection. The scheme was felt to be too 

dense, and 22 houses would be more appropriate for this context. It was suggested that a 

through footpath should be created to avoid a cul-de-sac giving better community cohesion and 

security. Concern was also expressed about the likely volume of traffic. The ward Member, Cllr. 

Le Fleming sympathised with the Parish Council comments on density especially in relation to 

plots 9-15, which appear to have been squashed in. He was also concerned about the recreation 

space, and felt that there should be better provision for youth recreation in accordance with policy 

R5. The Parish Councillor confirmed that the village playing field is 400-500 yards away. The 

County Highways Officer could not attend, but is not objecting to the application. 

One Member of the Panel questioned whether the design was highway led and the resulting 

implications for pedestrians as well as the streetscene. Another Member felt that the number of 

houses could lead to excessive traffic and questioned the play facilities. The majority of the Panel 

were generally favourable towards the scheme. 








ITEM No: 09 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0722/VAR 



Waldeck, Chapel Lane, Minchinhampton, Stroud 

21045 

Minchinhampton Parish Council 

Variation of Condition 

45

Development: 



Case Officer: 



Removal of Condition 6 attached to permission ref.S.02/826 for 

erection of dwelling (Requiring improvements to visibility at the junction 

of Chapel Lane and Tetbury Street) 

Mr. & Mrs.N.Gooch 

Waldeck, Chapel Lane, Minchinhampton, Stroud, Glos, GL6 9DL 



Eleanor Jackson 




Parish / Town 


1. Condition 6 of planning permission S.02/826 requires improvements to 

be made to the sub-standard junction of Chapel Lane and Tetbury Street. 

The applicant has not submitted sufficient information to prove that these 

junction improvements are not necessary and therefore, the removal of 

Condition 6 would be detrimental to highway safety and contrary to Policy 

G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


Support: 

The proposals arose from a Planning Inspector's decision, and councillors commented that there 

was no need to realign the pavement, already wide at this point, or introduce measures that 

would require signage and lighting. There was a proposal already to introduce parking on the 

south side of the street that would have a calming effect. The Council suggest that the junction 

be left as it is, and that the Inspector has imposed an unnecessary condition upon the appellants. 

County Surveyor (Initial) 

Recommend refusal on grounds that removal of condition would result in development that would 

increase use of sub-standard junction which, in the absence of satisfactory improvement, would 

be likely to increase dangers and hazards to other road users. 



Occupiers, Bubblewell Cottage, Chapel Lane 

Mr & Mrs Wilkins, Chapel Farm, Chapel Lane 

C Norris, Field House, Chapel Lane 

46


• Condition should not be removed. 

• Junction of Chapel Lane and Tetbury Street is dangerous, any measure to improve visibility for 

vehicles is welcomed. 

• Condition 6 should not be removed. 


Mrs V Boyce, The Old Barn, Chapel Lane 

Peter Farley, The Old Chapel, Chapel Lane 

M Hart (Eggleton), Dove Barn, Chapel Lane 

Dr R W Lamb, Chapel Lane Cottage, Chapel Lane 

Mr & Mrs Palmer, Inglestone, Chapel Lane 

Mrs A Weller, 16 Tetbury Street, Minchinhampton 

• Support; any change in present is unnecessary. 

• Volume of traffic from Chapel Lane has always been low. Junction of Chapel Lane and Tetbury 

Street should be left as it is. 

• One new dwelling will not affect / increase the existing safety risks. 

• Will not help the situation. 

• No history of accidents in that area. 

• Traffic in Chapel Lane is not unduly heavy and exit to Tetbury Street not particularly hazardous 

although probably does not conform to current standards. 

• The site is considered ideal for this purpose 

• This condition is considered nonsense when this area is riddled with quirky hazards that are well 

known and regarded. 

47


Site Report: 

Introduction and Site 


An outline application for the erection of one dwelling on a paddock fronting Chapel Lane was 

refused by Committee on 13th August 2002. The reason for refusal was as follows: - 

The proposed development would be likely to result in an intensification in vehicular use of the 

sub-standard site access together with the sub-standard road serving the site which is unsuitable 

to cater for the proposed development by reason of its restricted width/poor alignment/ lack of 

footways/lack of passing bays and sub-standard junction with Tetbury Street to the detriment of 

highway safety and contrary to Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001). 

An appeal was lodged against this refusal and allowed on 10th September 2003. In granting 

permission, the Inspector imposed a number of conditions, one of which states:- 

Development shall not begin until details of improvements to visibility at the junction of Chapel 

Lane and Tetbury Street have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning 

Authority. The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the scheme has been 

implemented in accordance with the approved details. 

48


The current application seeks the removal of this condition from the outline planning permission. 

Chapel Lane is a single track road with passing places and is a no through road which terminates 

in an access into Gatcombe Park. 


Outline permission ref. S.02/0826 for the erection of one dwelling granted on appeal 10/09/2003. 

All matters are reserved for future consideration. 


The principle of a dwelling on the paddock to the front of Waldeck House has already been 

established by the outline permission. The issue for consideration here is whether the dwelling 

should be built without the improvements required by the Appeal Inspector being carried out at 

the junction of Chapel Lane and Tetbury Street. Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) relating to highway safety is therefore 

relevant. 

In support of their case, the applicants state that this is the last development plot in Chapel Lane 

and therefore no further dwellings will use the junction; an increase in traffic using the junction 

does not materially increase the risk of conflict; there is no record of any traffic accident at this 

junction; recorded traffic speeds on both these roads is very low (24mph); newly published advice 

from ODPM states that sub-standard junctions result in increased safety as people take greater 

care; this ODPM advise is a material consideration to Planning Inspectors and GCC are 

proposing alterations to parking restrictions in Tetbury Street which will have the effect of calming 

traffic and improving visibility from Chapel Lane. 

The Highway Authority maintain that the appeal Inspector imposed Condition 6 for good reasons 

based on information submitted to the Appeal Hearing and the development would result in 

additional traffic movements on the existing sub-standard junction, contrary to Policy G5. The 

removal of the condition would be likely to increase dangers and hazards for other road users. 

Objections to the removal of the condition have been received from three neighbours who feel 

that this is a dangerous junction and any improvement would be welcomed. Letters supporting its 

removal have been received from six neighbours. 

Minchinhampton Parish Council supports the application. Their full comments are set out at the 

start of this report. 

In summary, the Appeal Inspector concluded, based on information submitted at a hearing, that 

the development was acceptable subject to the applicant carrying out improvements to a substandard 

junction. If that work is not carried out the application remains contrary to Policy G5 of 

the Local Plan. The application is therefore recommended for refusal. 


The Panel walked along Tetbury Street and Chapel Lane noting the visibility at the junction and 

the road widths. They then went on to inspect the actual development site. Officers explained that 

the condition was imposed by the Planning Inspector allowing an appeal for a new house in 

Chapel Lane, and was intended to improve visibility. 

The Ward Member, Cllr. Mrs Bird, felt that the condition was unnecessary as the roads were 

typical of the town which results in slow, careful driving. Moreover, visibility improvements could 

look unsightly, impacting on the Conservation Area. The Parish Council were not represented but 

support the application. The County Highways Officer stated that the visibility was substandard 

and the junction should be redesigned. 

49


With one exception, the Panel questioned the appropriateness of the condition and would be in 

favour of permitting the application. 

Human Rights 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 10 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0096/FUL 

Land At Nympsfield Road & Land Adjacent To King George V Playing 

Field, Wood Lane, Nailsworth, Gloucestershire 

25065 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Construction of new football stadium and associated facilities with new 

access onto Nympsfield Road. Also construction of new playing field 

on land adjacent to existing King George V Playing Field, Wood Lane, 

Nailsworth. 

Forest Green Rovers Football Club 

The Lawn, Nympsfield Road, Nailsworth, Glos. GL6 0ET 

J Mason Associates 

4 Phoenix House, Hyssop Close, Cannock, Staffs, WS11 2F 

John Balfe 






Reason: 

50





used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building works 




Reason: 





Services. 

Reason: 


4. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of 

landscaping shall be carried out in the first complete planting and seeding 

seasons following the occupation of the buildings, or the completion of 

the development to which it relates, whichever is the sooner. Any trees 

or plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of the 

development, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or 

diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of 

similar size and species, unless the Head of Development Services gives 

written consent to any variation. 

Reason: 


5. All existing trees shall be retained unless shown on the approved 

drawings as being removed. Prior to any equipment, machinery, 

materials or vehicles being brought onto the site for the purposes of 

commencing development, and until all such equipment, machinery, 

vehicles and surplus materials have been removed from the site after 

completion of development, all trees on, and immediately adjoining the 

site, must be securely protected to the satisfaction of the Head of 

Development Services. Each of the trees retained must be fenced to 

protect the area within the crown spread, or at a radius equal to half the 

height of the tree, whichever is greater. 

a) The protective fencing must be sited in accordance with the approved 

tree and landscape survey, and it must not be removed at any time 

during development without the written consent of the Head of 

Development Services. 

b) Within the protected area ground levels must remain as existing and 

no excavations must take place. 

c) No vehicles, materials, spoil, equipment, containers or chemicals must 

be placed or stored within the protected area. 

d) No fires must be lit within 25 metres of the canopy edge of any trees. 

e) Before any work commences on the site, details of all proposed 

arboriculture works to existing trees on or adjoining the site shall be 

submitted to and be approved in writing by the Head of Development 

Services. No works to existing trees on or adjoining the site shall be 

51


carried out without the prior written consent of the Head of Development 

Services. 

f) Any existing trees not shown as being removed on the approved 

drawings which die, are removed or become so damaged or diseased 

within a period of 5 years from the completion of development that they 

have to be removed, must be replaced as soon as reasonably 

practicable. In practice, this will be during the next available planting 

season. The size, species and location of the replacement tree(s) must 

be agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To ensure the health and safety of the trees on the site and to ensure 

continuity of the visual amenity that they provide. 

6. No development shall take place on the land adjacent to the King George 

V playing field until details for the protection and long term retention of 

the tree situated on the boundary and located between levels 87.12 and 

87.72 have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of 

Development Services. Such details shall include measures so that the 

root system is not disturbed. The development shall then be carried out 

in accordance with the details so agreed. 

Reason: 

To ensure the tree concerned is not damaged and is retained for the long 

term. In the interests of amenity. 

7. The development hereby authorised must not be commenced until details 

regarding the location and practicalities of temporary parking, temporary 

entrances, temporary accommodation and delivery/materials storage 

areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of 


Reason: 

To ensure the trees and other natural features of the site which are 

shown as retained are not damaged, destroyed or otherwise 

compromised by the need to ensure implementation of the above to 

secure the approved development. 

8. No siteworks shall commence until such time as a temporary car parking 

area for site operatives and construction traffic has been laid out and 

constructed within the site in accordance with details to be submitted to 

and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services and that area 

shall be retained available for that purpose for the duration of building 

operations. 

Reason: 

To ensure the access roads in the vicinity of the site are kept free from 

construction traffic, in the interests of highway safety. 

9. Surface water drainage shall be discharged via soakaways so long as it 

is clean and any other surface water shall be disposed of via discharge to 

a deep trap interceptor gully prior to discharge to any soakaway. The car 

parking bays at the Stadium part of the site shall be finished in gravel to 

allow direct drainage to the subsoil. 

Reason: 

52


To comply with Policy G2 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 

Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). To prevent pollution of the 

water environment. To provide a drainage system in accordance with 

SUD's principles. 

10. Prior to the commencement of building operations details shall be 

submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services 

which demonstrate surface water run-off is not exceeded beyond current 

site conditions. The development shall then be carried out in accordance 

with the details so agreed. 

Reason: 

To prevent adverse surface water run-off conditions, to comply with 

Policy G2 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


11. Prior to the commencement of any development, a scheme for the 

provision and implementation of surface water limitation shall be 

submitted to and agreed in writing with the Head of Development 

Services. The works/scheme shall be constructed and completed in 

accordance with the plans and timetable approved by the Head of 


Reason: 

To prevent the increased risk of flooding in accordance with Planning 

Policy Guidance Note 25 Development & Flood Risk (PPG25) and Policy 

G4 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


12. Before the stadium part of the development is brought into use provision 

shall be made within the site for the disposal of surface water from the 

stadium site/access roads in accordance with details to be submitted to 

and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services and the 

works as approved shall thereafter be similarly maintained. 

Reason: 

To ensure that surface water does not discharge onto the highway, in the 


13. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until 

works for the disposal of sewage have been provided on site to serve the 

development, in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in 

writing by the Head of Development Services, prior to the 

commencement of development. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate provision is made for the disposal of sewage. 

14. The Development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the 

new access leading from the Stadium to Nympsfield Road has been 

completed to at least base course level. 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to ensure a suitable access is 

constructed to the site for its construction. To comply with Policy G5 of 

the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended 

53


June 2001). 

15. No other works shall commence on the stadium development hereby 

approved until the first 30.0 m. of the construction access road from the 

proposed Nortonwood roundabout on the existing county highway has 

been laid out in accordance with the submitted plans and prior to the 

occupation of the new stadium constructed to at least base course level. 

Suitable measures shall be taken to prevent loose materials travelling 

from the site onto the highway. 

Reason 


16. Before the development hereby authorised is brought into use the car 

parking and manoeuvring facilities shall be completed in all respects in 

accordance with the submitted details and shall be similarly maintained 

thereafter for that purpose. 

Reason: 

To enable vehicles to enter and leave the highway in forward gear in the 


17. Prior to the commencement of any site construction works vehicle wheel 

cleaning facilities and details of road cleaning arrangements shall be 

provided in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by 

the Head of Development Services, and thereafter be maintained for the 

duration of the siteworks. 

Reason: 

To ensure that mud and earth deposits are not brought onto the public 

highway in the interests of highway safety. 

18. No development on the stadium shall commence until such time as a 

phasing programme for highway works has been submitted to and 

approved by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate access is provided in the interests of highway safety. 

19. Prior to the bringing into use of the stadium and ancillary facilities hereby 

authorised, all highway works, including pedestrian routes and traffic 

calming measures, shall be completed. Such works shall be maintained 

as such thereafter, unless agreed in writing to the contrary by the Head of 


Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to comply with the provisions of 



20. No part of the stadium development shall be brought into use until space 

has been laid out within the site in accordance with details to be 

submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services 

for the secure parking of bicycles. 

Reason: 

54


In the interests of sustainable aims of central and Local Government 

Planning Policies and to comply with Policy T1 of the Stroud District 


21. No beneficial use of the stadium hereby authorised shall commence until 

provision has been made within the site for parking, turning and loading 

and unloading of coaches /goods vehicles in accordance with the 

submitted details and thereafter maintained for the duration of the use. 

Reason: 


22. No works shall commence on the stadium site until details of a Travel 

Plan have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of 

Development Services in consultation with the Highway Authority. The 

travel plan details so approved shall be implemented in full prior to 

beneficial use of the development hereby authorised commencing. 

Reason: 

To ensure that the development is served by an adequate travel plan in 

line with the sustainable aims of central and local Government. 

23. No works shall commence on the stadium site until such time a Traffic 

Calming scheme for Nympsfield Road generally in accordance with the 

submitted drawings has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the 

Head of Development Services, in consultation with the Highway 

Authority and the scheme so approved implemented in full prior to 

beneficial use of the development hereby authorised commencing. 

Reason: 

In the interests of Highway safety. 

24. No works shall commence on site until either (a) full engineering details 

for the roundabout located at the junction between Nympsfield Road and 

the upper Nortonwood Road, have been submitted to and agreed in 

writing by the Head of Development Services, in consultation with the 

Highway Authority or, (b) a construction traffic management plan, 

including temporary construction access proposals has been submitted to 

and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services. The 

scheme (a) so approved shall be implemented in full prior to the bringing 

into use of the Stadium in full in accordance with the agreed details to be 

submitted under (a) above. 

Reason: 

In the interests of Highway Safety. 

25. No site development shall commence on the stadium until details of a 

pedestrian link has been provided between the site and the existing 

footway to the south of Nympsfield Road (school side, and within the 

capabilities of the applicant to provide) with full details submitted to and 

approved by the Head of Development Services following consultation 

with the Local Highway Authority and no beneficial use of the 

development hereby authorised shall commence until the scheme as 

approved is fully operational. 

Reason: 

55


To ensure that adequate pedestrian facilities are provided in line with the 

Governments declared aims towards sustainable development and 


26. No development shall commence on the stadium until details for the new 

bus shelter and Flag Pole Stop at the proposed dropping point within the 

site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of 

Development Services and no part of the development shall be brought 

into use until the bus stop improvements have been provided in 

accordance with the approved plans. 

Reason: 


27. The stadium shall not be brought into use until any loudspeaker or tannoy 

system has been installed to the satisfaction of the Head of Development 

Services. If within 12 months of the date of its commissioning the system 

is deemed to be too loud it shall be adjusted to a lower dBA again to the 

satisfaction of the Head of Development Services and maintained at such 

an agreed level thereafter, unless directed to the contrary by the Head of 

Development Services. The details shall include reference to the playing 

of music or announcements before, during and at the end of the use of 

the stadium for matches. 

Reason: 

To comply with the provisions of Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local 

Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and reduce the 

incidence of noise emanating from the site to an operational minimum. 

28. The lighting hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until it has 

been directed and hooded to confine lighting to the immediate ground 

area, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. The lighting shall 

then only be used if it continues to be so directed and hooded. 

Reason: 

To prevent light pollution. 

29. Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted, details of 

containers for the deposit of litter on the frontage of the premises shall be 

submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services, 

and those agreed containers provided. Those containers shall then be 

retained thereafter. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of the area. 

30. Prior to any beneficial use of the new King George V playing field 

extension, the bollards shown on the applicant's submitted plan, located 

at the end of the parking area, shall be erected and maintained for the 

duration of the use, unless agreed to the contrary in writing by the Head 

of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To prevent vehicles not associated with the maintenance of the site from 

driving across the existing playing field. In the interests of safety to the 

users of the field. 

56


31. Prior to the bringing into use of the development hereby permitted all 

fencing shown on the applicants submitted plans shall be erected and 

maintained as such thereafter, unless alternative arrangements are 

agreed to the contrary in writing by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason 

In the interests of providing adequate security and safety measures for 

the site and surrounding land uses. 

Informatives: 

1. The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1,G2, G4, G5, 

B1,12, B13, B14, N2, N3, N4, N6, N7, N8, N9, N12, T1, R1, and R3 of 


June 2001) and Policies S.RE1 and S.5 of the Structure Plan. 

Policy G1 seeks to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the 


reason of overbearing effect, noise, smell, fumes, loss of privacy, 

general disturbance or loss of light (both daylight and sunlight). The 

development will not create smell or fumes when completed. It has been 

demonstrated the development will not result in the loss of light and that 

noise and general disturbance will be limited and within levels which are 

considered to be acceptable by the Council. Due to the distance 

between the stadium and residential properties, suitable screening 

measures and landscaping proposals it will not result in a loss of privacy 

or overbearing effect. It is accepted that there will be some noise and 

disturbance during construction but this will be limited in terms of hours 

of operation. 

The development provides a means of access to the site which is safe to 

both highway users and pedestrians. This would therefore ensure the 

development is in compliance with Policies G5 and T1 of the Local Plan 

which relates to highway safety matters and sustainability of 

development proposals. The scheme provides a means of access which 

complies with adopted standards and traffic calming will be introduced 

together with a request to reduce the speed limit to 20 m.p.h. 

The development will comply with the provisions of Policy G2 in that it 

uses sustainable drainage techniques and measures will be put in place 

to prevent pollution. The development by using these techniques also 

complies with the requirement to prevent flooding via surface water runoff. 

The applicant has undertaken an archaeological survey of the site both 

as a desk top assessment and field evaluation. This has demonstrated 

the development will not have any adverse impacts on archaeological 

matters of significance. As such the development complies with the 

terms of Policies B12 and B13 of the Local Plan. 

Due to the topography and distance between the site and the near by 

Woodchester Park, a designated historic park, the impact of the scheme 

is minimal and will not adversely affect its setting. A point confirmed by 

the Garden History Society. Policy B14 relates to the protection of such 

important areas. 

57


Policy N2 relates to the protection of special areas for conservation, 

including key wildlife sites, and which the site bounds. The measures for 

mitigation which form part of the Section 106 Agreement will result in 

non significant effects on this area of designation. Species will be 

relocated prior to construction and specialist advice confirms such 

mitigation measures are acceptable. The scheme therefore complies 

with the Policy. The same is said of Policy N3 which seeks to protect 

species that are protected. 

Policy N4 relates to the protection of features such as trees, hedgerows 

and vegetation which helps to conserve and enhance bio diversity. The 

proposals include the provision of new landscaping proposals and the 

retention of trees and hedgerows. A condition is also imposed regarding 

finite landscaping details which will enhance bio diversity. The 

development is in compliance with this policy. 

Regard has been had to the impact the proposals will have on the 

Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and which the stadium site 

abuts and which the new playing field is within. Policies N6, N7 and N8 

relate to the landscape and the effect any development will have upon 

such. Natural features will be conserved where possible and it has not 

been possible to find an alternative location within the district to provide 

the proposed facilities. The sites are on the edge of the urban boundary 

or within it and a proven need has been established. Whilst the scale of 

the stadium is large the landscape form and pattern of development has 

been examined and not considered to be unacceptable. 

Policy N9 restricts development in high quality landscape designations 

unless the benefits of the scheme outweigh the importance of the 

designation. The scheme is viewed as one which has a large community 

benefit and will provide facilities for a wide number of persons in the 

community. The public benefit of the proposal outweighs the importance 

of the landscape designation of which the site only partially lies within. 

Policy N12 relates to the provision of high quality landscaping. The 

development plans have provided a structural landscaping scheme and 

a condition is imposed regarding detailed landscaping for the site which 

will further enhance the quality of the development. 

Policies R1 and R3 relate to developments which would result in the loss 

of play space in public or private ownership. The Policy seeks to restrict 

the loss of outdoor play space unless the equivalent amount of land of 

similar quality, quantity and accessibility is provided elsewhere. The 

scheme provides for this and is therefore considered to comply with the 

requirements of these policies. 

2. In reaching the Council's decision it has taken into account the 

information supplied in the applicant's Environmental Statement, Further 

Information and representations made about the Environmental 

Statement by the Public and Consultees. 

3. The Local Highway Authority will require the developer to enter into a 

legally binding agreement to secure the proper implementation of the 

proposed highway works including an appropriate bond. 

58


Parish / Town 


Please refer to main body of report for the Town Council's comments on this application. 

English Sports Council SW 

Sport England agree with the proposals so long as: 

1.Prior to the completion of the new football stadium a new high quality playing pitch is 

constructed with drainage systems, levelled and seeded at the adjacent school site. Sport 

England recommends that this work be carried out in accordance our 'Natural Turf for Sport' 

document. In addition, the new playing pitch should be enclosed. 

2. Prior to the completion of the new football stadium a formal Community Use agreement shall 

be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for the use of the new 

school playing pitch and ancillary changing facilities. The plan shall include details of pricing 

policy, hours of use, management and maintenance. The plan shall then be implemented upon 

commencement of use of the facility to the satisfaction of those involved including Stroud District 

Council, Gloucestershire County Council and Nailsworth Town Council. 

3. Prior to the commencement of residential development at The Lawn (existing Forest Green 

Rovers Stadium) a new high quality playing pitch is constructed with drainage systems, levelled 

and seeded on land adjacent to King George V Playing Field. Sport England recommends that 

this work be carried out in accordance our 'Natural Turf for Sport' documents. Adequate changing 

facilities should be made available to serve these playing pitches. 

4. A commitment is made to make the proposed sports facilities on the adjacent King George V 

Playing Field available for use by the wider community on an agreed basis. This should be 

achieved through the completion of a formal 'Community Use Agreement' to the satisfaction of 

those involved including Stroud District Council, Gloucestershire County Council and Nailsworth 

Town Council. 

5. A financial commitment is made by the applicants (Forest Green Rovers) to establish and 

maintain the new playing pitch at King George V Playing Field to the satisfaction of the Local 

Planning Authority. 

Environment Agency 

The Environment Agency do not object to the development but have raised a number of issues 

and require conditions to be imposed regarding drainage and contaminated land matters. They 

suggest SUD's techniques be used for the car parking areas. Ecological mitigation methods as 

suggested in the applicant's report are enforced and conditioned as part of any permission. 

Fire Services HQ 

The Fire Authority has no observations to make. 

Mr Charles Parry 

The County Archaeologist requested a field eveluation take place following the submission of the 

Desk Top Assessment. The result of the work was negative in that no significant archaeological 

deposits were found. As a result it is recommended that no further archaeological investigation or 

recording should be required in connection with the scheme. 

PC Pickersgill 

59


The Police Authority have been consulted and they are concerned regarding the size of the 

roundabout proposed at the entrance to the stadium but defer matters relating to highway safety 

to the Highway Authority. 

They wish to see the development accord with the principles of 'secured by design' and have 

some concern regarding the location of parking spaces 97 - 110 as they will not be open to 

natural surveillance. Any landscaping proposals may reduce the amount of natural surveillance 

available to the site. 

They wish to see the area with lighting and would wish to comment further on the accessing 

arrangements for persons entering and leaving the stadium. They have been in consultation with 

the club. Fencing is indicated on the boundaries and this will prevent indiscriminate parking. 

They query areas where arrested people on match days can be detained and query the final 

specification for alarms on the building and the nature of any bars, gym and offices. 

In respect of the proposal to extend the ground at King George V site it is recommended some 

traffic calming be introduced to the roads serving the site. 

Severn Trent 

Severn Trent Water raises no objections subject to conditions relating to drainage works being 

undertaken to reduce the risk of flooding. 

Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust 

The Trust is in receipt of both the original application and the subsequent additional information. 

They confirm that a sufficient ecological assessment has been carried out for the site and that the 

relevant areas of concern have been identified. They are also of the view that the proposed 

mitigation measures for wildlife are appropriate and will ensure that the proposed development 

does not result in any significant adverse effects on species. 

Garden History Society 

The Garden History Society which comments on proposals which may affect a registered Park or 

Garden (Woodchester Park in this instance) has no comments to make. 

English Nature 

English Nature confirm the site is within 0.5km of Woodchester Park SSSI which is important for 

its populations of Bats. The Environmental Statement recognises this importance and has 

suggested valid mitigation measures to ensure the foraging routes of the Bats are not 

significantly affected in the wider area around Woodchester Park. 

English Heritage 

English Heritage considers this to be a case which can be determined by the District Council in 

accordance with Government Guidance, Development Plan policies and Conservation advice 

locally. They do not wish to make any representations. 

Countryside Agency 

The Countryside Agency has decided not to make any formal representations on this application. 

County Surveyor (Rich Gray) 

60


The Highway Authority raise no objections to the proposals subject to the imposition of conditions 

relating to highway improvements and safety measures which are attached to the 

recommendation. 



Mr, Mrs & A Elliott, 1 The Green, Nympsfield Road 

P Hayward, Bramble Cottage, Nympsfield Road 

Mr G Gosbell, The Old Nick, Park Road 

J B & L M Williams, Cartref, Nympsfield Road 

I Wallace, Clemlia, Nympsfield Road 

Patrick J Mulligan, North Farm, Nympsfield Road 

M J Harvey, The Longhouse, Southfields 

Miss Sharland & Mr Novoth, 6 Carters Way, Nailsworth 

Mr & Mrs Stockwell, 27 Carters Way, Nailsworth 

Mrs V Heaven, The Cottage, Nympsfield Road 

Mr N Porter, 25 Bunting Way, Nailsworth 

M Karlsen, The Wedge, Market Street 

Mr & Mrs Green, 1 Walkley Wood Cottages, Walkley Wood 

Mr & Mrs Lannon, 46 Carters Way, Nailsworth 

Mrs M Daley, 13 Benton Court, Nympsfield 

S Gaulding, 18 Bunting Way, Nailsworth 

Mr P Villars, GMA Planning, Queens House 

• Loss of view 

• Access would be through a residential area with limited parking. 

• Is limited/no parking for the existing football pitch so additional pitch would make the existing 

problem worse. 

• Relocation from Forest Green would be a step backwards as there are least good access 

facilities for traffic to the existing pitch. 

• Additional traffic could prove hazardous to children. 

• Noise and air pollution. 

• A footpath opened at the far side of the ground to serve the Barnfield area would help 

spread the volume of people leaving. 

• Concern over the lighting in the car park 7 days a week. 

• Concern over the use of the car park for a park and ride scheme. 

• Loss of jobs 

• Highways - Wood Lane is single track, additional movement or parking would cause chaos 

for residents. 

• Loss of valuable facility - unfair to remove facility from outside their door to more than a mile 

away. 

• Design/scale of the proposed stadium. 

• Detrimental to the character of the area. 

• Replacement playing field on the other side on the A46 is illogical. 

• Implications for emergency services. 

• Light pollution. 

• Opening hours - 7am to midnight 

• Anti social behaviour. 

• House prices devalued. 

61


• In the emerging Local Plan the site is labelled as 'protected playspace', as such it states that 

these areas should be safeguarded from development as they make an important 

contribution to the quality of local environments. 

• Contravenes PPG1 and PPG12. 

• AONB. 

• Does not provide a reasonable alternative for replacement playspace. 

• Key Wildlife Site. 

• Acoustic report does not take into account the construction noise and the baseline 

measurements are incomplete. 

• Report provides a measurement for only pre-match time and not prior to kick off, during or 

after the match. 

• The ES does not include a relevant assessment of national, regional and local planning 

policies that are applicable. 

• No justification provided for what was included in the EIA. 

• Applicant states 'SDC provided an informal scoping opinion only' no record of this was 

provided and it is not clear how the public consultation has therefore informed the scope of 

the EIA. 

• Sun and shadow study does not quantify the amount of shadow that will effect North Farm. 

• Why is it necessary to have a stadium capacity of 5,000 if the impact of the total and full 

capacity is not going to be considered. 

• Plans incorrectly show the context around North Farm. 


T Tiley, 32 Shepherds Leaze, Wotton-Under-Edge 

Mrs King, 38 The Bassetts, Cashes Green 

R Workman, Nailsworth Church of England Primary School, Nympsfield Road 

K A Russell & C White, 21 Park Road, Nailsworth 

Mr K Hall, 19 Hopemills Park, Brimscombe 

C M Sutton, 6 Parliament Close, Stroud 

T J Barnard, 6 Twilley Street, London 

E C Holmes, 16 West Tynings, Nailsworth 

D H Gardner, 29 Castle Mead, Kings Stanley 

S Gardner, 26 Woodcock Lane, Stonehouse 

K & S Alexander, 16 Victoria Road, Brimscombe 

A King, 31 Borough Close, Kings Stanley 

M Woodward, 20 Wickridge Close, Stroud 

S Rodway, Lodge View, Star Hill 

B Moore, 8 Dozule Close, Leonard Stanley 

Mr M Coles, 33 Carters Way, Nailsworth 

Mr R Grant, 37 Carters Way, Nailsworth 

Mr B Fream, 2 Barnfield Avenue, Nailsworth 

Mr R Kerry, 27 Churchill Road, Nailsworth 

Mrs J Affleck, Barkey Hill, Watledge Road 

Mr P Vick, 9 Worley Ridge, Nailsworth 

Mr S Ward, 2 Foxes Dell, Nortonwood 

Mr N Dodd, 15 Whitecroft, Nailsworth 

Mr L Ostle, 93 Nortonwood, Forest Green 

Mr L Stewart, Ringfield Farm, Tetbury Lane 

Mr D Smith, Bankside Cottage, Millbottom 

Mr M Byrner, 3 Barnfield Avenue, Nailsworth 

Mr M Hudd, 2 Hillside Cottage, Newmarket 

Mr P Welsh, Carraville, Moffat Road 

R Blunt, The Rest, Shortwood Green 

62


Mr N Newport, 13 Marling, Stroud 

Mr N Stratford, Hillside, Horsley Road 

Mr M Freebrey, 50 Borough Close, Kings Stanley 

Mr D Keyse, 88 Highworth Crescent, Yate 

G Chaffey, 70 Sandford Leaze, GL5 5PB 

D Hudd, Lanky Villas, Church Street 

Mr N Harmer, 134 Field Court Gardens, Quedgeley 

G J Everett, 17 Chapel Street, Stroud 

Mr M Ellis, 64 Dudbridge Meadow, Dudbridge 

Mr I Hall, 26 Oldacre Drive, Bishops Cleeve 

B Lunn, 1a Irnwell Road, Sneyd Park 

P Jennings, 1 The Delkin, Cam 

A Griffiths, The Bronx, Gloucester 

F King, Portway, Farmhill Crescent 

M Llewellyn, 59 Dudbridge Meadow, Dudbridge 

J Davies, Ardroo, Gunhouse Lane 

Mr Whiffen, 42 The Close, Coaley 

A Whiting, 2 Erin Park, Stroud 

I Wrixon, 83 Fairmead, Cam 

N Gooch, Waldeck House, Chapel Lane 

Mr A Durman, Clematis Cottage, Commercial Road 

Mr Swaine, 14 Woodpecker Walk, Forest Green 

Mr, Mrs & Miss Trueman, Windrush, Pinfarthings 

Mr P Butterworth, Quarry House, Rockness Hill 

Mr M Gardiner, Stonyridge, Moffat Road 

Mr T Swale, 24 Wasley Road, Cheltenham 

Mr P Jubb, 104 Longtree Close, Tetbury 

H J Cook, Vraiville, Middleyard 

Mr A Duncan, 15 Waterford Close, Thornbury 

Mr J Hole, 24 Besbury Park, Minchinhampton 

Mr R Thomas, 4 Combers End, Tetbury 

Mr Smith, 32 Melbourne Drive, Stonehouse 

Peter Joy Estate Agents, 14 Fountain Street, Nailsworth 

M & J Anns, Kohinia Cottage, 3 Shar Lane 

Mr P J Mizen, Mount Pleasant, Atworth 

D Allen, 3 Orchard Close, Cam 

A & J Brown, 85 Oakleaze Road, Thornbury 

Mr & Mrs King, Hillberry Lodge, Sandpits 

Mr A Feek & Ms C Doherty, 8 Slade Brook, Stroud 

C Fletcher, The Old Shop, Chestnut Hill 

Mr J Perry, Grange Cottage, Giddynap Lane 

Mr S Ingram, 5 Chestnut Close, Nailsworth 

S Hills, Melody, Dark Lane 

R Melinn, 6 Knowle Road, Bridgewater 

D Wood, 24 The Slade, Dursley 

R Oswell, Mandalay, Middleyard 

D O'Brien, Springfield, Far Westrip 

R Littleford, 18A Hopton Road, Cam 

Mr Meredith, Lyndhurst, 43 Evesham Road 

R Yates, 41 Liddington Road, Gloucester 

D Amor, 25 Snowdon Gardens, Churchdown 

Mr K Draper, 23 Shearwater Grove, Innsworth 

A & J Punshon, 18 Blake Hill Way, Abbeymead 

A C Packman, 36 Swift Road, Abbeydale 

Mr G Atkinson, 2a Hardings Drive, Dursley 

A Spratt, 42 Hatherop Road, Fairford 

63


R Brookes, 21 Chatsworth Park, Thornbury 

A Duncan, 15 Waterford Close, Thornbury 

M Hayes, 24 The Grove, Malmesbury 

P Jubb, 104 Longtree Close, Tetbury 

L Vick, 14 Northfield Road, Tetbury 

J Kerslake, 62a The Bassetts, Cashes Green 

D Phillips, Woodside, Woodside Lane 

Mr M Breeze, 9 Randalls Field, Painswick 

R Fry, Highfields, Highfield Way 

P Pearch, 20 Coldwell Lane, Middleyard 

J Duff, 2 Woodhouse Drive, Rodborough 

A Jones, 7 Thompson Road, Uplands 

P & J Hatch, 79 Langtoft Road, Stroud 

M Fourd, 33 Stringers Drive, Stroud 

Mr & Mrs Slaughler, 15 Woodpecker Walk, Forest Green 

C Watts, 1 Westward Court, 176 Westward Road 

J Kerry, Chase House, Upper Kitesnest Lane 

J, P & J Seymour, Rivendell, 52 Rosedale Avenue 

D Lewis, 69 The Bridle, Cashes Green 

N Chandler, 1 Golden Jubilee Way, Dudbridge 

D Nelmes, 17 Birch Road, Stroud 

S Griffin, 4 Southgate Gardens, Rodborough 

G Stockwell, 16 Melbourne Close, Stonehouse 

D Flagg, Jimuir, Bath Road 

D Foster, 3 Hope Mill Park, London Road 

R Applegate, Poundfield, Verney Road 

L Trott, 80 Gilbert Road, Redfield 

K Embrey, 51 Royal Sands, Weston Super Mare 

J Cross, 140 Hewlett Road, Cheltenham 

A Lewis, 9 Apple Walk, Heath Hayes 

J Warren, 7 Harrison Way, Lydney 

D Downs, 99 Long Lane, Reading 

B McAllister, 25 Castle Street, Aldbourne 

F Jeffrey, 23 East Sands, Burbage 

R Kellow, 113 Moorgreen Road, West End 

H Honey, 41 Royal Sands, Weston Super Mare 

A Bragginton, Coombe Cottage, Windsoredge 

R Telfer, Owls Lodge, Windsoredge 

M Ashford, 3 Hayesley Cottage, Windsoredge 

J Clapp, Lansdowne, Cotswold Lane 

P Ball, The Manse, Chapel Lane 

H Atkinson, 3 Burnt Oak, Dursley 

A Stanley & N McGill, Badgers Cottage, Worley 

J Saunders, Cottesloe, Star Hill 

R Kerry, 27 Churchill Road, Nailsworth 

Ms A Marshall, 6 The Terrace, Rockness Hill 

Mr P Hickerton, 37 Common Hill, Steeple Ashton 

Mr R Overthrow, Mandeville, Northfields Road 

Mr C White, 39 The Martins, Westrip 

Mr P Poliszewski & S Madden, The Forge, Taitshill Road 

Mr G Little, 57 The Bridle, Cashes Green 

Mr S Edlington, 98 Russell Road, Newbury 

Mr P Archer, Derhams House, New Road 

Mr C Coates, 3 Stockley Road, Wareham 

Mr A Jack, 23 Marlestone Road, Cam 

Mr N Wells, 115 Court View, Stonehouse 

64


Mr P Coyle, 27 Bunting Hill, Nailsworth 

Mr R Cliffe, 54 Lantern Close, Berkeley 

Mr D Martin, 9 Twinberrow Lane, Dursley 

Mr N Hathaway & S Hathaway, 3 Glen Park Crescent, Kingscourt 

Mr A Paul, 58 Nortonwood, Forest Green 

Mr I Watts, Rookery Nook, The Roller 

Mr A Whiting, 2 Erin Park, Stroud 

Mr W Hunt, 66 Oldminster Road, Sharpness 

Mr T Weller, Old School House, Atcombe Road 

Mr Pollard, 56 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

Mr J Price, 14 Rosebery Park, Dursley 

Mr Codd, Mill Cottage, Windsoredge 

M Lane, 2 Glen Court, Stonehouse 

C Chambers, 56 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

P Trinder, 8 Bunting Hill, Nailsworth 

S Long, 7 West Tynings, Nailsworth 

P Coyle, 27 Bunting Hill, Nailsworth 

Mr M Hobdell, Vine Tree Cottage, Newmarket Road 

Mr J Marsden, 20 Bridge Street, Stroud 

T Walsh, 17 Woodpecker Walk, Forest Green 

L M & G Nixon, 30 Badgers Way, Nailsworth 

S Waite, 24 Park Road, Nailsworth 

K & C Rogers, 38 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

P Ind, 20 Bunting Way, Nailsworth 

A Delahay, 8 Tynings Road, Nailsworth 

S Preece, 92 Nortonwood, Forest Green 

S Mertens, 63 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

V Lord, 3 Woodpecker Walk, Forest Green 

Occupier, 8 Stevens Way, Horsley 

R Smith, 11 Colliers Wood, Nailsworth 

K Harvey, 20 Highwood Court, Nortonwood 

C Markey, 62 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

F Kenzie, Tynings Farm House, Fewster Road 

R Derry, Briar Bank, Windsoredge 

Mr Portch, 4 Hermitage Drive, Dursley 

S King, Tied Cottage, Fewster Road 

Mrs M Powell, 7 Orchard Springs, Newmarket Road 

L Fletcher, 62 Colliers Wood, Nailsworth 

B Poulton, Bospin Lodge, Bospin Lane 

C Jayes, Wayside, Horsley Road 

R Rilay, 1 Churchill Road, Nailsworth 

R Cantle, Moorsend House, Star Hill 

D Smith, Cranleigh, Field Road 

D Tyrell, 7 Kings Road, Stonehouse 

R & A Kerry, 27 Churchill Road, Nailsworth 

G Barnard, 1 Little Fishers, Kingscourt 

I & L Cleaver, 16 Craddock Court, Nailsworth 

Y Bryant, 1 Orchard Mead, Nailsworth 

S Pitt, 5 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

J Clark, Sunningdale, Seven Acres Road 

R & I Porter, Valley View, Windsoredge 

C & S Russell, 12 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

W & D Hannis, 10 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

R Hinder, 12 West Tynings, Nailsworth 

A Chandler, 21 Colliers Wood, Nailsworth 

Occupier, Buena Vista, Nympsfield Road 

65


J Johncock, 17 Highwood Court, Nortonwood 

K Blythe, 17 Bunting Way, Nailsworth 

M Wright, 9 Nortonwood, Forest Green 

J Rees, 1 The Row, Watledge Road 

K Chappell, 9 Cossack Court, Nailsworth 

J Duff, 29 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

B Lemon, 19 Craddock Court, Nailsworth 

C Peachey, 46 Lawnside, Nailsworth 

A Halliday, 10 West Tynings, Nailsworth 

L Roberts, 19 Inchbrook Way, Inchbrook 

A Chandler, 21 Colliers Wood, Nailsworth 

Mr A Hutt, 67 Humphreys Close, Randwick 

Mr J Hannis, Taveners Football Club, Horwick 

Mr R Senior, J Senior & K Senior, 6 The Beagles, Cashes Green 

Mr & Mrs A Rice, Bybrook, Downend 

K Palmer, Station House, Station Road 

J Mounsey, 321 London Road, Charlton Kings 

P K Shone, 9 Okebourne Road, Barntny 

A Thompson, 42 Seabrook Drive, Thornton-Cleveleys 

C Gardiner, 47 Kidnams Walk, Whitminster 

A Harding, 3 Eldersfield Close, Quedgeley 

N Brown, 32 Frome Gardens, Stroud 

N East, 41A Cam Green, Cam 

Mr R Berry, 24 Erica Close, Locks Heath 

Mr, Mrs & E Whiting, Lyndbourne, Dudbridge Hill 

A Whiting, 2 Erin Park, Stroud 

C Lowsley-Williams, Lanworry Cottage, Tetbury 

Mr J Cook & Ms M Eaves, 34 Stanley Street, Aberdeen 

Mr J Dutton, Ingmire, Chestnut Hill 

B Mills, 20 Inchbrook Way, Nailsworth 

J A Dent, 29 Woodpecker Walk, Forest Green 

E Barnes, 18 Ringfield Close, Nailsworth 

E Govey, 23 Bunting Way, Nailsworth 

Mr D & Mrs S Boulton, 15 Nortonwood, Forest Green 

P Caddick, 17 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

V Andrews, 31 Hanover Gardens, Chestnut Hill 

Mrs B Powell, 24 Ringfield Close, Nailsworth 

J Trueman, Windrush, Pinfarthings 

M Roberts, 12 Hilltop View, Bussage 

Mr C Roberts & V Lane, 35 Fishers Way, Kingscourt 

R C Dunn, 15 Southgate Crescent, Rodborough 

J M Evans & Mr C G Davies, 24 Concorde Way, Saintbridge 

T Barnard, 1 Little Fishers, Kingscourt 

S J & B Roberts, 36 Kitesnest Lane, Lightpill 

A & D J Weir, Laburnum, Bowl Hill 

Mr J Nicholl, Kingshead Inn, Kingscourt 

Mr M Evans, 2 Glenpark Crescent, Kingscourt 

Mr C Noble, 9 Bowl Hill, Kingscourt 

Mr S Lock, 16 Fishers Way, Rodborough 

M Bindon, 38 Kitesnest Lane, Stroud 

D Norman, 11 Parliament Close, Stroud 

Mr A Nobes, 10 Little Fishers, Kingscourt Lane 

J Beard, 3 Ash Road, Lightpill 

Mr P Bishop, 68 Park Road, Stonehouse 

Mr M Daynes, 2 Warwick Close, Rodborough 

Mr I Weir, Kitesnest Lane, Stroud 

66


Mr S Markey, 21 Addymore, Cam 

Mr R Vick, 18 Quietways, Stonehouse 

Mr R Moss, 5 Potters Pond, Wotton-Under-Edge 

L Brockighurst, 6 Thompson Road, Uplands 

Mr D Jarman, Parkside, Park End 

Mr S Farthing, 19 Wharfdale Way, Bridgend 

Occupier, 39 Arrowsmith Drive, Stonehouse 

Mr L Chapman, Sunnycroft, Farmhill Lane 

A Slingsby, Quinton Cottage, Upper Kitesnest Road 

G M Birtwhistle, Lypiatt Hill Farm, Bisley Road 

B Millard & R, S, S, R Willey, Millend Cottages, North Nibley 

Occupier, Sharlyd, Kitesnest Lane 

A.Hustwitt, 33, Nortonwood, Forest Green 

D. Hatherall, 20 Mosley Road, Cashes Green, 

• Improved educational opportunities for children. 

• Improved use of our building for school and wider community. 

• Further opportunities to widen community involvement. 

• Bringing school even further into the heart of the community. 

• Give a community use of the surplus playing field. 

• Improve highway. 

• Will improve road safety. 

• Will generate business for area. 

• Will aid success at the club. 

• Revenue will provide a springboard to achieve better things, which will benefit local 

businesses. 

• Provide a gym, creche and meeting room facilities for the area. 

• Allow football to remain in the area. 

• Provide facilities for younger people. 

• Would make the surrounding area more appealing. 

• Better parking facilities. 

• Roundabout would slow approaching the school from Nailsworth. 

• Good community use of a surplus playing field. 

• Enhance local facilities. 

• Would improve area. 

• Ground will be on existing land and not encroach on green belt area. 

• A lot of work has been done in the aim of the growth of a local club. 

• Will automatically be relegated - this should be determined by performance not financial 

factors. 

• Will help gain further sponsorship and interest. 

• Development is vital for the survival of the club. 

• Will lead to better road safety. 

• Encourage visitors. 

• Would improve the ground to Sport England requirements. 


J R Howell, Sherwood, Nympsfield Road 

S.Robinson, The Haven, Northfields Road 

• Concerned with the application. 

• Before the development is started it is considered necessary to have improvements to both 

the pavements and street lighting in Spring Hill and Nympsfield Road. 

67


• There are no facilities i.e. wheelchair ramps at any of the junctions on this stretch of road. 


Site Report: 

THE PROPOSAL 

This application relates to the erection of a new football stadium, access, car parking area and 

associated infrastructure for Forest Green Rovers Football Club. A new playing pitch is proposed 

as an extension to the King George V playing field off Park Road / Wood Lane. The proposals 

also include the provision of community facilities within the new building which would be taken 

from the existing football ground - The Lawn, also situated at Nympsfield Road, Nailsworth. 

These facilities will include a youth club, a gym, social club, function rooms, ancillary offices for 

the club's administration, crèche, IT suites and ancillary areas such as changing rooms, showers 

etc. 

The facilities will operate on the same basis as existing. In the case of the gym from 8 a.m. to 10 

p.m., the social club 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. Monday to Saturday and on Sunday 12 noon to 10:30 p.m. 

The youth club will operate until 10:30 p.m. with the licensed function room would operate from 9 

a.m. until times restricted by normal licensing regulations. The multi use area and IT suite would 

operate until 10:30 p.m. 

The main building is a functional building similar to other stadia which have been erected 

throughout the country. The building is constructed of profiled metal cladding and blockwork part 

under a profiled metal roof. The colours of such would be the subject of further submissions. 

The stadium would include new floodlighting. The areas outside the structure would be 

landscaped and car-parking areas would be gravelled to provide SUDs type drainage. 

The need to relocate stems from several requirements. The club needs to provide better lighting 

from the existing 250 lux at pitch level to 350 lux. 

The need to relocate relates to the position of the pitch in relation to the main stand, as the view 

of the pitch from this area is poor. The availability of car parking on site and to generally provide 

better facilities on site. The current ground- The Lawn has a capacity of 5141 and the new site 

will be capable of holding 5074 which meets with both the existing requirements for the Football 

Conference and the Football League. No enlargement to the capacity of the ground is required 

to meet current ground grading rules. Improvements have to be made by May 2005. 

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT 

The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) and in determining the 

application the matters referred to in the statement have been considered along with any 

mitigating measures. The ES has further been reviewed by the Institute of Environmental 

Management and Assessment on behalf of the Council and together with the 'Further Information' 

submitted following comments made by the Institute now addresses the environmental affects of 

the proposals and provides mitigating measures for harmful effects of the development. 

THE SITE AND ITS LOCATION 

The site is in two parts. The first being the existing playing field attached to the Primary School at 

Nympsfield Road and the second being an area of land adjacent to the King George V Playing 

Field situated off Park Road, Nailsworth. 

The first part of the site where it is proposed to construct the new stadium is situated on the 

western fringes of Nailsworth and adjacent to open land and the Cotswold Area of Outstanding 

68


Natural Beauty. Several dwellings are visible within the area of land fronting Nympsfield Road 

and a Bed and Breakfast establishment is also located on this frontage and backs onto the site. 

This part of the town is elevated in relation to the main core of the town where most commercial 

activities take place. The area is served by a variety of modes of transport and bus stops are 

visible in the locality. 

The site where the existing football pitch is located is relatively flat but the land falls away to the 

south of the site towards the Newmarket Valley and rises to the west in the direction of 

Nympsfield. 

The other part of the application site lies adjacent to the King George V playing field and is 

marked by a hedgerow and trees. It is proposed to construct a new football pitch to make up for 

the lost pitch at Nortonwood. The area of land will gain access via the existing entrance to the 

playing field which in turn links to Park Road. The land would be the subject of a cut and fill 

operation to construct the new football pitch but there will still be a fall from the top to the bottom 

of the new pitch. 

This area of land is within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but has been the 

subject of agricultural reclamation works in the recent past. The works have involved the 

movement of deposits to the site. The King George V playing field is a protected outdoor play 

space in terms of its allocation in the Local Plan as is the school playing field. 

CONSULTATIONS 

Most consultations and responses are detailed elsewhere in this report but due to the detailed 

response from the Town Council it has proved necessary to outline the Town Council's response 

below: 

'This sets out the response of Nailsworth Town Council to the above planning applications, the 

accompanying Environmental Assessment, Transport Assessment, and consultation 

correspondence. 

The letter first states the Town Council's general support for the applications, then makes 

comments about the appraisal, and finally sets out various items which the Town Council wishes 

to see included as conditions or in the Section 106 agreements with the applications. 

1. Support for the Applications 

For many years the Town Council has striven to improve facilities at Forest Green, and to retain 

Forest Green Rovers Football Club in the area because of the enormous community benefit that 

the club provides. The proposal to relocate the football club to a new site on the surplus playing 

fields at Nailsworth Primary School arises directly from the work of Forest Green Regeneration 

Group, which was set up in September 2002 to promote regeneration of Forest Green. 

The Regeneration Group is an informal working group taken forward by the Town Council, and 

attended by representatives from the County Council, District Council, Nailsworth Primary 

School, Forest Green Rovers Football Club, community groups and youth workers in and around 

Nailsworth. The group has met regularly in order to find a way to enable the football club to 

meet national requirements for ground upgrading whilst remaining in Forest Green, to support the 

development of facilities at Nailsworth Joint Use Centre based at the primary school, and to 

ensure the development of other community facilities that cannot be provided at either the 

football club or the school. 

The Town Council has spearheaded an extensive process of community consultation on the 

proposals, with public meetings in December 2002 and October 2003, coverage on local radio 

and frequent articles in the local press, and consultation meetings with many local organisations. 

69


These planning applications represent the first major stage in the work of the Regeneration 

Group. In refining the proposals, the football club undertook intensive consultation between July 

2003 and January 2004 when the application was submitted, and the Town Council has been 

fully involved in the scheme. The club has gone to considerable lengths to accommodate the 

wishes of various parties in the detailed design within the constraints of commercial viability, and 

is to be commended in the extent of consultation undertaken. 

The second stage in the work involves improvements to Nailsworth Primary School from receipts 

in the sale of the surplus playing field land, and the third stage involved development of a village 

hall by the Town Council on land reserved as part of the development process. 

Application S.04/0096/FUL 

The Town Council STRONGLY SUPPORTS the full application for a New Stadium and 

associated works, and the application for a replacement playing pitch at King George V Playing 

Fields. 

2. General Comments about the Application and Appraisals 

2.1 General Issues 

It has been agreed that some of the proceeds to the County Council from the sale of the surplus 

playing field site, will be used for improvements to the school. The funds should also be used to 

contribute towards the construction costs of the proposed Multi-Use Games Area. The MUGA is 

in the south west corner of the site and is marked as "open space for possible games area" on 

the plans. This area should be combined with the adjacent tennis court on the adjoining Stroud 

College site to provide the MUGA. Subject to planning approval, the adjacent tennis court on the 

Stroud College site, which is protected by a Section 106 agreement, could form part of the MUGA 

for the Joint Use Centre, football club, and adjoining housing. 

The proposal for an MUGA arises from the Regeneration Group and is strongly supported by the 

Town Council. The applicants have agreed to make land available for the MUGA, but it cannot 

be progressed as part of the current application because it involves land not under the applicant's 

control. The Town Council considers that the County Council should reserve some of the 

receipts from sale of the land to contribute to construction costs of the MUGA. Developers of the 

Stroud College site would also contribute to the MUGA. 

2.2 New Stadium Site 

Layout 

a) The overall layout is the best compromise that can be achieved on a constrained site. 

b) The footpath running along the southern boundary of the site should be secured. 

c) There should be lockable gates between the primary school and the car park south of the 

primary school, so that this can serve as overflow car parking for the school. There should also 

be lockable gates between the primary school and the proposed MUGA. 

d) There is a proposed change to the application to provide an extra run-off area around the 

primary school pitch, in order to meet the standards for County matches. This will reduce the 

landscaping strip between the New Stadium and the primary school pitch from 3m to 1m. The 

Town Council considers that the community benefit outweighs the impact on the landscaping 

proposals and supports this change. 

Light Pollution 

a) The long distance impact of the floodlighting should be minimised. From most angles the 

floodlighting is unlikely to be significantly worse than the existing stadium, but will be most visible 

from below New Inn on Amberley Common. 

70


b) The combined impact of floodlighting and car park lighting on surrounding properties should be 

assessed. 

c) The impact of floodlighting on the bank to the west of the stadium should be minimised as 

there is evidence of badger activity on this bank. 

d) There should be no lighting pole in the proposed turning head adjacent to North Farm in order 

to minimise light pollution to North Farm. 

Noise 

a) The turning head adjacent to North Farm should be angled away from the (new) property 

boundary in order to minimise noise and emissions from turning vehicles. 

Landscape Impacts 

a) The most prominent long-distance landscape impacts are shown in photo-visualisations in 

Appendix R of the Environmental Statement. The New Stadium is likely to be most prominent 

from the "W" (the road leading from Amberley Common down to Nailsworth), below the New Inn 

on Amberley Common, and Wallow Green. All are long-distance views which reduces the 

prominence of the building. From these and other distant viewpoints the New Stadium will 

appear as part of the continuum of development of Forest Green, and will have very little visual 

impact. 

b) The effect of the proposed development on the AONB was discussed at a Town Council 

meeting in the early stages of the proposals. Councillors agreed that any affect of the New 

Stadium on the AONB was minimal and would be outweighed by the very significant community 

benefit of the proposals. 

c) Local landscape impacts are considered to be acceptable given that the New Stadium 

replaces an existing stadium in the vicinity 

Habitats 

a) The existing scrub on the western bank has ecological and habitat value and should be 

protected. The extent of excavation on the bank should be minimised, and the bank should be 

protected by a temporary fence during construction. It is noted that the developers will undertake 

a reptile survey of the bank. 

Landscaping Design 

The Town Council notes draft landscaping drawings for the New Stadium submitted as an 

addition to the planning application, and has the following comments: 

a) The landscaping drawing shows trees planted within the car parking loop to the south west of 

the site. In the interests of traffic safety, there should be one-way traffic circulation round the loop 

so that the trees do not obscure visibility. 

b) The landscaping drawing shows trees planted in the middle of the MUGA. These should be 

restricted to the western side of this area, and to the southern boundary to allow the area to be 

combined with the adjacent tennis court on the Stroud College site. 

Architectural Treatment 

a) The intention to paint the upper panels of the New Stadium green is noted. However, the 

shade of green will be important in reducing the visual impact, and a grey-green will probably be 

preferable to a sharp green. 

Impact During Construction 

a) The construction impact on adjoining properties, particularly Nailsworth Primary School, North 

Farm and Bramble Cottage, should be minimised. 

Effect on Adjoining Land Uses 

The Town Council notes the extensive mitigation measures proposed for the two residential 

properties most affected by the proposal, North Farm and Bramble Cottage. North Farm has 

been offered additional land to increase the size of the garden and will be protected by a 2m high 

stone wall, and screen planting. However, the applicant informs the Local Authority that the offer 

71


was not accepted. Bramble Cottage will be protected by a landscaped noise bund and by 

closure of the adjoining car parks on all except match days. Studies indicate that there will be no 

shadowing of North Farm during the proposals. 

2.3 King George V Playing Field Extension 

General Comment 

a) The provision of an enlarged playing pitch that would accommodate a number of different 

sports is an improvement over existing facilities. 

b) Bollards should be provided at the edge of the existing car parking area to stop vehicles 

driving over the existing field. 

Management 

Town Council has agreed to take on the management of King George V Extension on the basis 

of an agreed commuted sum. Any legal costs incurred in setting up the arrangement should be 

borne by the applicant. 

Changing Room Facilities 

From its experience of managing the existing King George V Playing Field, and the fact that the 

extension will involve only a redistribution of existing activities, the Town Council considers that 

no additional changing facilities are required as a result of the King George V Extension 

Landscape Impact 

a) The proposed extension lies within the Cotswold AONB and will have some long-distance 

impact on the AONB, as it is clearly visible from the "W". The photo-visualisation in Appendix R 

of the Environmental Statement does not show any new fencing between the playing field 

extension and the remainder of the field. Post and rail fencing has been mentioned in 

discussions and would be satisfactory. The Town Council would in addition like to see a 

hedgerow of native species along the boundaries outside the post and rail fence. It must be 

remembered that for many years this land was part of a small tip, accessed from the Avening 

Road, which was unsightly, and the playing field extension is much less visually intrusive than the 

former tip. 

Habitats 

a) The Habitat Survey concluded that the wooded banks and hedgerows of the existing playing 

field and the extension are of some habitat interest. 

b) The hedge between the existing playing fields and the extension should therefore be retained 

and improved with supplementary planting. 

2.5 Highways and Transport Proposals 

Transport includes a roundabout access for the New Stadium site, a second roundabout 

for The Lawns, and improvements to bus access. The proposals include a 21m 

diameter 4-arm roundabout at the junction of Nympsfield Road and Nortonwood West to 

provide access to the New Stadium, and a 26m diameter 4-arm roundabout at the 

junction of Nympsfield Road and The Lawns. Three sets of speed pads are proposed 

between the two roundabouts, with associated signage, and extension of the 30mph 

speed limit to just west of Bramble Cottage. 

The Town Council has several comments with regards to the public transport proposals: 

a) The proposal that all Stagecoach services will enter the New Stadium site is welcomed 

because it will increase activity within the site. 

b) The parking of three buses overnight at the New Stadium site will reduce early morning 

and late evening service runs on Spring Hill. 

c) Buses will turn in the car park loop, which should therefore be for one-way traffic only. 

The Town Council is particularly concerned at two aspects of the proposals: 

72


a) The roundabout access to The Lawns is over-designed, and will involve pedestrians walking 

along the south side of Nympsfield Road in an unnecessary detour. 

b) There should be a pedestrian crossing outside the school for pedestrians approaching from 

Nortonwood East, which would enable them to avoid the new roundabout access to The Lawns, 

and the new access to the Stroud College site. 

Several items have been omitted from the TA: 

a) There is no discussion of traffic impacts on Tinkley Lane. Although these are likely to be slight 

they should be considered. 

b) There is no consideration of the potential impact of match attendances in excess of 3,000 

spectators or increases in average match attendances of around 1,000 spectators. 

c) There is no consideration of potential impacts of moving the employment use of the football 

club to a site west of the primary school. 

d) There is no consideration of the traffic generation of the social club, crèche and other nonmatch 

leisure uses at the New Stadium. 

e) The Stadium access roundabout is likely to be completed before The Lawns access. There is 

no consideration of the potential traffic problems during this interim period. 

The Town Council has the following additional comment: 

a) The use of the term "park and ride" is misleading and has led to unnecessary public concern 

about traffic impacts. The proposal is that certain organisations may use parking facilities at the 

New Stadium at specific times in agreement with the football club. These may include people 

going on coach trips to other places, members of the Chamber of Trade etc. The term "agreed 

community car parking" would be preferable. 

No transport improvements are proposed in association with the King George V Extension 

3. Items for Inclusion as Conditions or in the Section 106 Agreement 

3.1 General 

a) The new pitch and other work affecting Nailsworth Primary School should be complete before 

construction work on the New Stadium commences. 

b) The existing stadium should not be demolished until work on the New Stadium and King 

George V Extension is substantially complete. 

3.2 New Stadium Site 

a) The bank between the proposed New Stadium and western boundary of the site is of 

ecological value. The bank should be protected during construction and light pollution of this 

area should be minimised. 

b) The footpath running along the southern boundary of the site should be secured. 

c) Land in the south east of the site should be reserved for a Multi-Use Games Area. The football 

club will not be responsible for funding construction of the Multi-Use Games Area. The potential 

users of the multi-use games area are the school, the football club, the SDC Joint Use Centre, 

the youth club and at other times by the public as a kick about area. It is proposed that the multiuse 

games area will be managed by a committee comprising the Football Club, the Joint Use 

Centre and the Town Council, and we would wish to see a clear written agreement to this effect. 

There should be lockable gates between the primary school and the car parking south of the 

primary school, and between the primary school and the proposed Multi-Use Games Area. 

d) Completion of the proposed landscaping should form a condition of the permission. The 

landscaping scheme should include screening along the western and southern boundary of the 

primary school site, and screening to Bramble Cottage and North Farm. 

e) The car parking area to the south of the primary school site should be surfaced to allow for 

cycle proficiency training, when the car park is not required for parking. 

73


f) Community car parking should be permitted in agreement with Nailsworth Primary School, 

Nailsworth Chamber of Trade and Commerce, Stagecoach and other coach operators. 

3.3 King George V Extension 

A commuted sum should be agreed towards management of the playing fields. The Town 

Council should not incur any legal costs in setting up an agreement. 

b) Bollards should be provided at the edge of the existing car park to stop vehicles driving over 

the existing field. 

c) The hedge between the existing playing fields and the extension should be retained and 

improved with supplementary planting. 

3.5 Transport Proposals 

a) A pedestrian crossing should be provided to the school 

b) The football club should be required to provide "agreed community car parking", with local 

organisations including: local coach tour operators, Nailsworth Primary School, Nailsworth 

Chamber of Trade, and Stagecoach. 

The District Council is asked to note that timing is critical to make this proposal happen. The 

football club has to cease playing at its existing stadium by May 2005, and if there is any delay in 

making a decision the scheme may fail. An expedient decision is vital to its success. 

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 

The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement and Further Information in 

connection with such. It is a requirement of the Council when determining the application to 

consider the Environmental Effects of the development proposed and any mitigating measures 

proposed to remediate against any adverse impacts. 

There are no specific policies contained within the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001) which relate directly to the erection of football stadiums and the 

same is true regarding the policies contained within the Structure Plan. 

The application is therefore considered against material considerations and other policies which 

relate to general matters such as amenity, highway safety and the water environment. Polices 

also relate to landscape implications, built form (including environment), natural environment, 

recreation and community facilities. 

To this end the application is considered against General Policies G1, G2, G3, G4 and G5. 

Policies B1(Urban design), B12 and B13(Archaeology), B14(Historic Park), N1 (designated area - 

wildlife) N2 (Key wildlife site), N6 (Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty), N7, N8 and 

N9(landscape), N12 (Landscaping of proposal) are also considered, along with T1 Transport, R1 

(Retention of facilities or replacement of such), R3 (Development of recreational area in 

educational ownership). 

The following Structure Plan Policies have been considered: 

Structure Plan Policies RE1 (deals with the retention of recreational facilities), T1 (sustainable 

transport), RE1 and S.5 (recreation and need for community facilities) are also relevant when 

dealing with this proposal. These Policies are similar to those adopted by the District Council in 

its Local Plan but are listed below for reference purposes. 

Policy T1 

New Development and the Transport System. 

74


New development should be located so as to minimise the length and number of motorized 

journeys, and encourage the use of public transport, cycling and walking. New development 

should be genuinely accessible by these modes of transport as alternatives to the car. 

Policy RE.1 

The retention and provision of a wide range of recreational facilities in urban areas and all 

principal settlements, to meet local and sub-regional needs, will be supported. Local Plans will 

give special consideration to: 

(a) Areas which are deficient in recreational facilities; 

(b) Facilities which provide for as wide a range of the population; as possible; 

(c) Increased accessibility for all potential users particularly by public transport, cycling and 

walking; and 

(d) Local scale of provision of a non-specialist nature, for example local halls capable of some 

recreational uses, will be encouraged provided they are well related to the communities they 

serve. 

Policy S.5 

In providing for development, local authorities will have regard to the need for community facilities 

and services, including education, health, and cultural facilities, local shopping facilities, sport and 

leisure facilities, transport services and infrastructure, housing including affordable housing and 

public utilities. In determining the type, scale and location of development, the adequacy 

infrastructure and community services will be taken into account. 

Provision for development will be made where related infrastructure and community services are 

in place or will be provided in appropriate phases in an environmentally acceptable way. 

PPG's 

PPG 1, PPG 13, PPG 16, PPG 17, PPG 24 and RPG 10, are relevant in terms of considering this 

proposal. PPG 17 relates to sport and recreation and PPG24 to noise. 

PPG 1 deals with general policies and principles and includes reference to development 

proposals which are in the public interest and to restrict those which are not. The expressions of 

support and objection to the development are material considerations. The advice given states: 

Private interests 

64. The planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the 

activities of another, although private interests may coincide with the public interest in some 

cases. In fact "the public interest ... may require that the interests of individual occupiers should 

be considered. The protection of individual interests is one aspect, and an important one, of the 

public interest as a whole" (Stringer v MHLG 1971). It can be difficult to distinguish between 

public and private interests, but this may be necessary on occasion. The basic question is not 

whether owners and occupiers of neighbouring properties would experience financial or other 

loss from a particular development, but whether the proposal would unacceptably affect 

amenities and the existing use of land and buildings which ought to be protected in the public 

interest. Good neighbourliness and fairness are among the yardsticks against which development 

proposals can be measured; for example, it might be material to consider the question of 

overlooking or loss of privacy experienced by a particular resident. 

The Governments objectives for sport and recreation are set out below and are taken from PPG 

17: 

Planning Objectives 

Open spaces, sport and recreation all underpin people's quality of life. Well designed and 

implemented planning policies for open space, sport and recreation are therefore fundamental to 

delivering broader Government objectives. These include: 

* Supporting an urban renaissance - local networks of high quality and well managed and 

maintained open spaces, sports and recreational facilities help create urban environments that 

75


are attractive, clean and safe. Green spaces in urban areas perform vital functions as areas for 

nature conservation and biodiversity and by acting as 'green lungs' can assist in meeting 

objectives to improve air quality. 

* Supporting a rural renewal - the countryside can provide opportunities for recreation and visitors 

can play an important role in the regeneration of the economies of rural areas. Open spaces 

within rural settlements and accessibility to local sports and recreational facilities contribute to the 

quality of life and well being of people who live in rural areas. 

* Promotion of social inclusion and community cohesion - well planned and maintained open 

spaces and good quality sports and recreational facilities can play a major part in improving 

people's sense of well being in the place they live. As a focal point for community activities, they 

can bring together members of deprived communities and provide opportunities for people for 

social interaction. 

* Health and well being - open spaces, sports and recreational facilities have a vital role to play in 

promoting healthy living and preventing illness, and in the social development of children of all 

ages through play, sporting activities and interaction with others. 

Other points of note from this guidance are as follows: 

Planning For New Open Space And Sports And Recreational Facilities 

General principles 

20. In identifying where to locate new areas of open space, sports and recreational facilities, local 

authorities should: 

i. Promote accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport, and ensure that facilities are 

accessible for people with disabilities; 

ii. Locate more intensive recreational uses in sites where they can contribute to town centre 

vitality and viability; 

iii. Avoid any significant loss of amenity to residents, neighbouring uses or biodiversity; 

iv. Improve the quality of the public realm through good design; 

v. Look to provide areas of open space in commercial and industrial areas; 

vi. Add to and enhance the range and quality of existing facilities; 

vii. Carefully consider security and personal safety, especially for children; 

viii. Meet the regeneration needs of areas, using brownfield in preference to greenfield sites; 

ix. Consider the scope for using any surplus land for open space, sport or recreational use, 

weighing this against alternative uses; 

x. Assess the impact of new facilities on social inclusion; and 

xi. Consider the recreational needs of visitors and tourists. 

In addition to these general principles, paragraphs 21 - 32 below apply in respect of specific 

types of facilities or areas. 

Stadia and Major Developments 

22. Planning permission for stadia and major sports developments which will accommodate large 

numbers of spectators, or which will also function as a facility for community based sports and 

recreation, should only be granted when they are to be located in areas with good access to 

public transport. Planning permission for additional facilities (such as retail and leisure uses) 

should not be granted for any out-of-centre developments unless they comply with the policy set 

out in PPG6 

25. The countryside around towns provides a valuable resource for the provision of sport and 

recreation, particularly in situations where there is an absence of land in urban areas to meet 

provision. Subject to paragraphs 27-30 below, local authorities should encourage the creation of 

sports and recreational facilities in such areas and the development of areas of managed 

countryside, such as country parks, community forests, and agricultural showgrounds. Where 

planning permission is to be granted for such land uses, local planning authorities should ensure 

76


that facilities are accessible by walking, cycling and public transport as alternatives to the use of 

the car. 

Sports and Recreation Provision in Designated Areas. 

27. Designation of areas as National Parks or Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty does not 

preclude the use of land for sporting and recreational activities, but noisy or other intrusive 

activities should be restricted to locations where they will have minimal or no impact on residents 

or other recreational users. National Park Authorities should work with other local authorities and 

with sports and recreational bodies with a view to securing new sports and recreational facilities 

in appropriate locations within National Parks. 

28. In Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty local planning authorities should look to meet the 

demands for sporting and recreational activities where the proposals are consistent with the 

primary objective of conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape, and the needs of 

agriculture, forestry and other uses. 

29. Planning permission for development in or near a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) for 

temporary or permanent sporting and recreational activities, should be granted only if the 

permission is subject to conditions that will prevent damaging impacts on the SSSI, or if other 

material factors are sufficient to override nature conservation considerations. 

30. This relates to Green Belts and is not applicable in determining this application. 

PPG 13 relates to transport and the need to provide developments which are both sustainable 

and safe. Similar approaches have been adopted via the Council's own Local Plan and Policies 

T1 and G5 relate to these aspects. Further such matters form part of the Council's consultations 

with Gloucestershire County Council, as Highway Authority, when considering proposals. 

PPG 16 relates to Archaeology, as do Policies B12 and B13 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). In determining the proposals due regard has 

been taken regarding any archaeological implications. The applicant has produced both a desk 

top assessment and field evaluation. These have been submitted to the County Archaeologist for 

consideration and his response is listed under the consultation section of this report. It has been 

found that the proposals do not adversely affect any archaeological remains. As such the 

development is not at variance with these policies. 

Noise 

With regard to Planning and Noise PPG24 outlines the fact that noise is a material planning 

consideration and the general principles to be adopted when determining planning applications 

which generate noise. 

To this end the following extracts are relevant when considering the proposal the subject of this 

application. 

General principles 

2. The impact of noise can be a material consideration in the determination of planning 

applications. The planning system has the task of guiding development to the most appropriate 

locations. It will be hard to reconcile some land uses, such as housing, hospitals or schools, with 

other activities which generate high levels of noise, but the planning system should ensure that, 

wherever practicable, noise-sensitive developments are separated from major sources of noise 

(such as road, rail and air transport and certain types of industrial development). It is equally 

important that new development involving noisy activities should, if possible, be sited away from 

noise-sensitive land uses. Development plans provide the policy framework within which these 

issues can be weighed but careful assessment of all these factors will also be required when 

individual applications for development are considered. Where it is not possible to achieve such a 

separation of land uses, local planning authorities should consider whether it is practicable to 

control or reduce noise levels, or to mitigate the impact of noise, through the use of conditions or 

planning obligations. 

77


In considering this element, the views of the Environmental Health Officer have been sought as 

well as consideration of the applicant's own noise consultants report. The development will 

generate noise when the stadium is in use and it is accepted at the nearest properties this will 

involve a change from that which exists at present. However, the noise from match days will be 

limited as the stadium will not be used every weekend for matches and there were few evening 

matches during the last season. Such matches would be expected to finish by about 10:00 p.m. 

Whilst a small number of properties will be affected a larger number of dwellings would be 

located further away from the stadium than that which exists at present. Overall, therefore, from 

a public perspective there will be some gain in locating the stadium to the new location where 

other factors such as new lighting can be provided which will be less obtrusive than the existing. 

Car parking can also be provided in the new location and this would result in less noise and 

disturbance being created in the proximity of 'The Lawn' again reducing any incidence of noise to 

a wider range of residents. 

RPG 10 sets out the strategy and planning policy guidance for the South West. Section 6 deals 

with Tourism, Culture, Leisure and Sport. It recognizes the wide and diverse range of leisure 

activities and these help to maintain a quality of life. Many people partake and watch sporting 

events and this is important for quality of life. The philosophy 'sport for all' recognizes sports 

contribution to the health and well being of the population. Local Authorities in their plans, 

proposals and policies should maximize the use of high quality managed areas of sports facilities. 

They should maximize the positive benefits of sport, leisure, recreation, and cultural development 

for the environment, local communities, local economics and visitors. Management strategies 

should be prepared taking into account recreational demands and the need for environmental 

protection. 

Surface Water 

The Environment Agency has expressed concerns regarding surface water run off and the 

possibility of contamination. The applicant has undertaken studies which confirm there is no 

presence of methane on the site and that samples of soil taken do not contain contaminants from 

the adjacent land which was formerly used as a tip. 

Surface water will be dealt with via soakaways and deep trap gullies will also be used on the 

access roads. These will enable clean water to be discharged into the groundwater system. The 

car parking areas will be gravelled to enable SUD's techniques to be incorporated into the 

scheme. 

Archaeology 

The County Archaeologist has requested that a site survey be undertaken to enable an appraisal 

to be made in respect of its archaeology. This has been undertaken by trenching the site and no 

significant finds or archaeology were found. Therefore the issue of archaeology is not one which 

would have any significant effect on restricting the development. 

Landscape 

The site (stadium) is situated on the edge of the settlement of Nailsworth and within the defined 

urban boundary as defined in the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001). The site is bounded by the School, a scattering of residential properties 

(including a guest house) and a former tip. An area of woodland lies below the site and this area 

has been designated as a key wildlife site. The site itself is designated as protected outdoor play 

space. The land generally is flat but rises to the west and falls away to the south. The boundary 

of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty lies to the west of the site and in the 

immediate vicinity this area of land within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

comprises a former tip. The land has tree screening on this boundary and an overgrown 

78


hedgerow. The development will extend built form in a westerly direction but as the land rises in 

this direction there will be a degree of planting which would act as a backcloth to the new 

building. The levels of the land in this particular area would result in the buildings not appearing 

overly obtrusive in the landscape. In terms of long distant views the site would be visible from the 

south from the Shortwood area and above but due to the existing large scale buildings on the 

school site, the college site and The Lawn site would not detract from the character of the built 

form when viewed from this direction. Naturally, there will be a change in the landscape 

character of the area but this will be managed and further planting will be introduced to help 

minimize the impact of features such as parked vehicles. The new stadium will incorporate new 

lighting which will enable light to be directed to specific points of the site and as such will reduce 

the amount of light intrusion from floodlights from the present situation experienced at The Lawn. 

The newly proposed extension to the King George V playing field will enable land to be utilized 

for recreational use and the landscape has already been significantly altered in this location due 

to the previous activities of the site. The area will not have any lighting and therefore the issue of 

light pollution is not relevant. The scheme involves cut and fill operations to provide a level site 

and existing landscape features are to be retained where possible. It is proposed to place 

conditions on any permission which require further landscaping and works which will protect the 

existing features of value on this area of land. 

In view of the above it is considered the development is not at variance with Policies N6 and N8 

of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

Affect on residential amenity 

In respect of Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended 

June 2001) it is a requirement to consider the effect any development will have on the residential 

amenities of occupiers of near by properties. The proposal involves both an access and new 

buildings which will be visible from North Farm and Bramble Cottage on the Nympsfield Road in 

particular. In order to assess the effect the development will have on the occupiers of these 

properties the applicant has been requested to provide information in respect of noise, day 

lighting (including a shadow study), and light intrusion from the stadium. The effect the 

development will have is summarized as having an effect in terms of noise but this will be for 

limited periods of time and not normally late into the night / early hours of the morning. Noise 

would also occur in respect of traffic leaving and entering the site. Match day reports suggest 

that this would approach a statutory noise situation (albeit for short periods) but it is difficult to 

consider the situation solely in these terms. Rather it is suggested the noise aspect be 

considered in the context of the loss and some gain in amenity terms when all aspects are 

considered. In terms of public interest there is likely to be a gain in amenity terms rather than a 

loss. Other legislation exists to deal with noise issues, should they arise, and a balance has to 

be struck between the affects of the development against its positive benefits overall in amenity 

terms. 

The lighting report and plans show the nearest properties will be little affected by the 

development and this is not therefore considered to be an issue which would warrant refusal of 

permission. 

In relation to shadowing the applicant has provided evidence which supports the view the 

development will not adversely affect light to the residential dwellings and at times one is in 

shadow already due to its proximity to the land to the west of the site which is on a higher level. 

In these respects the development accords with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


Car Parking 

79


The development provides for car (162 spaces), motorcycle (12 spaces) and coach (3 spaces) 

parking on site. In addition the site is currently served by a bus company but the service curtails 

at 7:30pm. The club is negotiating with the bus company to provide an extended service beyond 

this time. The proposals allow people to walk to the site with improvements being made to the 

pedestrian network including a crossing point near the proposed new junction with Tinkley Lane. 

Secure cycle parking will also be available on site. Motor cycle parking will be provided. In these 

terms the site will be accessible by a variety of modes of transport and will not be solely reliant on 

the car. 

Access 

It is proposed to use the present access arrangement for the King George V Playing Field site 

and its extension which is via Wood Lane and Park Road, Nailsworth. 

In terms of the new stadium it is proposed to provide a new roundabout, designed to a standard 

required by the County Council. The new access will spur from the roundabout which will also 

take traffic from Nympsfield Road and Norton Wood. The roundabout will provide visibility sight 

lines of some 70m and other arrangements will allow the provision of a crossing point and 

pedestrian routes to and from the site. The introduction of traffic calming measures and the 

application to reduce the speed limit of this part of Nympsfield Road to 20 mph will also enhance 

highway safety measures over those that exist at present. 

Wildlife 

The site has been assessed from a wildlife perspective by the applicants agent. The application 

details have been forwarded to both English Nature and the Gloucestershire Trust for Nature 

Conservation. as noted in the consultation section of this report English Nature have commented 

on the proposals but not adversely but Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust has not responded within 

the allocated time frame. It is assumed therefore, the Trust has no comments to make on the 

application. 

The applicant has employed a specialist who advises the site has reptiles on it and these will 

need to be considered. The report recommends that the reptiles are relocated and a barrier 

erected to prevent harm being caused to them if they tried to enter the site. It is not proposed to 

move the reptiles any significant distance form their present location. 

Lighting 

The stadium will be lit by new floodlights which will have a higher lux than the lighting presently 

used at The Lawn but will have less light spillage due to the better direction of the lighting. It will 

also be possible to screen the lighting further if necessary and a condition is attached to the 

recommendation which allows the Local Authority to further assess the stadium floodlighting 

within 12 months and require alterations to be made to it, if required. 

The car parking areas will be lit by a mixture of column lighting and bollard lighting and these will 

be manually switched on and off to coincide with activities taking place at the site. The number of 

fittings has now been reduced from the original 75 to 47. The submitted light contour plans show 

there will not be any significant effect of the lighting on nearby residential properties. 

Recreation / Community facility / regeneration implications 

This project constitutes a significant regeneration scheme for the town in which the District 

Council, Town Council, County Council (Education and Corporate Property) and Nailsworth 

School have been fully involved. The process of consultation has included the formation of a 

Regeneration Group for the Town, a series of public meetings as well as those which have taken 

place separately with key agencies. There is confidence that the residents of Nailsworth have 

80


had the opportunity to comment and become involved in the planning application and project in 

general. 

In overall terms, the Council is satisfied from a sport and leisure perspective with the level of 

outdoor playing space which is being provided. The additional pitch at King George V site (KGV), 

the upgraded pitch at Nailsworth School/Recreation Centre and the proposed Multi Use Games 

Area/Astro Turf which will be subject to a separate application, all considerably improve the 

quantity and quality of community facilities for the town. Attention is drawn to several items which 

should form part of the planning conditions attached to any permission. 

1.The order of the work should include the construction of the school playing pitch prior to the 

new stadium being built in line with the recommendations of Sport England. 

2.A new 'community use agreement' should be entered into which formalises the partnership 

between the FGR, the District and Town Councils and Nailsworth School. This agreement will 

guide the operational management of the facilities at the school site in particular but will also 

encourage partnership working across the community use and development of other sites like 

FGR and KGV. 

3.A financial commitment is made by the FGR to the establish a new playing pitch at KGV and 

future arrangements are agreed for its maintenance. This work should be undertaken prior to the 

commencement of the residential development at the Lawn site which conforms to Sport 

England's recommendation. 

CONCLUSIONS 

As with most planning applications a balance has to be struck between the benefits of the 

proposals and any disbenefits. Whilst it is accepted that the development will impact on several 

households its benefits are considered to outweigh such impacts which are not in themselves of 

a magnitude which would warrant the refusal of planning permission for the reasons outlined in 

the main body of this report. 

Therefore, in the public interest, the development is deemed to represent a proposal which would 

have a wide community benefit and enhance both the living conditions for the majority, the 

enjoyment of sporting facilities, provide valuable housing provision on the existing club site after 

the relocation of the facilities and retain and enhance facilities currently provided in this locality by 

the Football Club. The site will have a greater degree of accessibility in many forms and will 

provide a significant amount of on site car parking thereby relieving the local road network of 

parked cars during match times. An informal arrangement for parking cars at the site when it is 

not in use will allow car parking in the town centre to be utilized and bring economic benefits for 

the town centre. 

The traffic generation will not be significantly different from the existing situation and after 

confirmation there are no technical issues outstanding this is not an issue in terms of the stadium 

proposals. 

The interests of wildlife have been considered and it has been confirmed the methods of 

mitigation are suitable. 

The impact of the development has been considered in landscape terms and whilst short distant 

views will be altered long distance views will be such that the affect on the Cotswold Area of 

Outstanding Natural Beauty will of a scale which is not detrimental. The application is a matter 

the Countryside Agency has not objected to in terms of impact on the near by designated area. 

RECOMMENDATION 

81


It is recommended the Committee Resolve not to Refuse the application subject to the 

satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement. The heads of the Agreement to include: 

1. The applicant to undertake the works and mitigation methods comprised in the applicant's 

submitted Environmental Statement and Further Information. 

2. That the development is phased so that work occurs in the following sequence: 

(a) The new playing field at the King George V playing field is constructed before the new 

stadium is brought into beneficial use and all community facilities are made available for use prior 

to the bringing into use of the new stadium and work commences on the demolition of the 

existing stadium site (The Lawn). That works be allowed to proceed on the existing site where 

materials are to be recycled in the construction of the new stadium and do not prevent the pitch 

at The Lawn for being used. 

(b) A management plan for the extended King George V playing field is produced and agreed. 

The plan to include booking arrangements and long-term maintenance of the facility. The 

commuted sum for maintenance to be £12,000.00 unless agreed to the contrary with the Head of 

Development Services in conjunction with Nailsworth Town Council. 

(c) That during the course of construction works on the new stadium site 'The Lawn' be made 

available for use by the existing users of the playing field at Nortonwood and the School, until 

such time as the new facilities are available for use. 

(d) A Bond or similar financial arrangement to be provided by the developer / applicant to provide 

for sufficient funds for the restoration of the New Stadium Site to its existing condition should the 

development permitted not be completed within twelve months of the cessation of any 

construction works. 

(e) An area of land of sufficient size to provide a MUGA be set aside from development within the 

site, generally in accordance with the details submitted by the applicant, and upon notification in 

writing by the Local Authority such land is made available for public use. 


The Panel were joined by Councillor Mrs Wood and Councillor Jones. They inspected the site 

and were made aware of the respective positions of existing residential and commercial property. 

They were able to view the proposed highway works and suggested traffic calming measures. 

The position of the new footway linking the area outside the school to the new stadium was 

noted. The size and position of the new roundabout was viewed. The Panel took the opportunity 

of walking the playing field site and considering the relationship of the works to the existing 

properties and the landscape. The details of the topography were visible and the effect of the 

shadowing study was considered. The location of the embankment where most of the wildlife 

issues related to was pointed out. The repositioning of the playing field for the school was made 

known as well as the area which does not form part of this application but will not be developed 

to enable a possible MUGA to be created in the future was pointed out. The Panel viewed the 

KGV site and could see the area of land it is proposed to extend for a playing field. The position 

of the hedgerow was considered and the cut and fill operation required was shown on the plans. 

Members were able to consider the nature of the highway network leading to this part of the site. 

The Highway Authority representative confirmed there were no highway objections to the 

proposals and that the scheme met technical requirements and had been considered in terms of 

a safety audit. Questions were raised regarding the size and nature of the roundabout and 

whether it would be possible for it to be planted. 

82


The Environmental Health Officer attended and confirmed his views were already outlined in the 

report submitted to Members. 

The Town Council representative spoke in favour of the development and confirmed the Town 

Council had been interested in the area as a whole for a long time. When the secondary school 

was closed it was realised more and more residential development was taking place without any 

further community facilities. The area developed by JJH Homes was a playing field and that area 

has been lost to residential development. There was a mandate from the community when a 

petition of over 1400 people was signed to try to prevent the college site being developed for 

residential purposes. A priority was to see the football club remain in Nailsworth. They are the 

only social facility providers, not just for sport but also for social amenities, they provide bingo for 

the old people and as there is no public house in this area social contact takes place within the 

clubs buildings. The idea to move the football club was somewhat pushed upon the Town 

Council but the main aim was to keep it in the town and to try to persuade the college that 

something could be done but that all fell through. After this the football club began negotiations 

with the County Council and the Town Council retained an interest to ensure there would still be 

sufficient community facilities. This has been undertaken for the last few years. They feel there 

will be sufficient community facilities with the development and the use of the school and KGV 

site. The Town Council have also remained abreast of the environmental statement and have 

employed a consultant to review these on their behalf. As a result some of the subsequent 

measures of mitigation such as the reduction in lighting has been as a result of this advice. It is 

hoped the scheme will be approved as there is benefit to Nailsworth. People are working hard to 

bring in funding to the area and the scheme. In relation to that part of the scheme for the 

extension of the KGV site measures have been discussed with the County Council for traffic 

calming but the main area of concern does not come from the use of the playing fields but the 

use of this road (Park Road) as a rat run to the commercial units. The extension of the KGV site 

is not a matter the Town Council required but was as a result of Sport England's' requirement to 

make up for the potential loss of any playing pitches generally. It is not proposed to extend any 

of the other facilities such as the changing rooms in this area. 

The invited Ward Councillor, Councillor Jeffreys, wished to defer any comments until the time of 

the Development Control meeting. 

After discussion Members were of the view the proposals were acceptable but some expressed 

concern regarding the nature of the highway engineering works proposed at Norton Wood. 








83

ITEM No: 11 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/0082/OUT 

The Lawn, Nympsfield Road, Nailsworth, Stroud 

443 




Development: 



Case Officer: 


Outline Planning Permission 

Outline application for residential development of former Forest Green 

Rovers Football Stadium. (Proposed number of dwellings up to 66 

units). 

Forest Green Rovers Football Club 

The Lawn, Nympsfield Road, Nailsworth, Stroud, Glos, GL6 0ET 

J Mason Associates 

4 Phoenix House, Hyssop Close, Cannock, Staffs, WS11 2F 

John Balfe 




1. Before any development is commenced, approval shall be obtained from 

the Local Planning Authority in writing of the details of the design, 

external appearance, siting and landscaping (hereinafter called "the 

reserved matters"). 

Reason: 



2. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the 

Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the 

date of this permission. 

Reason: 



3. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the 

expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or before the 

expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the 

reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. 

84


Reason: 












Reason: 


5. Where new or replacement surfacing, walls or fences are proposed within 

the zone of the protective fencing for trees shown as being retained, 

details of the materials for surfacing, walls and fencing and method of 

constructing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of 


Reason: 




provision is made for the parking of vehicles on a properly made-up 

surface, within the curtilage of the site, in accordance with the Local 

Planning Authority's adopted vehicle parking standards. This provision 

shall be maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that sufficient parking spaces are made available. 

7. No other development shall be commenced until the service road 

carriageway serving that part of the development has been completed in 

all respects to at least top of base course level, to the satisfaction of the 

Local Planning Authority. 

Reason: 







operations. 

Reason: 


construction traffic, in the interests of highway safety. 

9. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until detailed 

85


plans have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of 

Development Services, of the method of disposal of surface water within 

the curtilage of the site. The development shall not be brought into use 

until that agreed method has been provided and is available for use. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate surface water drainage is provided. 

10. The development hereby permitted shall be designed and laid out to 

provide recreational provision in accordance with the Local Planning 

Authority's standards as detailed in supplementary planning guidance 

'Residential Development Outdoor Play Space Provision dated 

November 2000'. Such provision shall be maintained for this purpose for 

the duration of the development and shall include details of a 

management plan for such provision, details of which shall be submitted 

to and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To comply with the District Council's recreational policies including Policy 

R5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001) and to ensure the development is adequately 

served with recreational facilities. 

11. The development hereby permitted shall include a variety of house types 

and shall include the provision of 30% 'affordable units' in accordance 

with the Council's interim policy statement and Policy H8 of the Stroud 


Details of such provision shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by 

the Head of Development Services and shall include details of how the 

'affordable units' are to be maintained for this purpose in the longer term. 

Reason: 

To ensure the development accords with Policies H8 and H14 of the 


2001) and to provide a variety of house types available to the wider 

community and character of the area. 

12. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until: 

a) A desktop study has been carried out which shall include the 

identification of previous site uses, potential contaminants that might 

reasonably be expected given those uses and other relevant information. 

And using this information a diagrammatical representation (Conceptual 

Model) for the site of all potential contaminant sources, pathways and 

receptors has been produced. 

b) A site investigation has been designed for the site using the 

information obtained from the desktop study and any diagrammatical 

representations (Conceptual Model). This should be submitted to, and 

approved in writing by the Head of Development Services prior to that 

investigation being carried out on the site. The investigation must be 

comprehensive enough to enable a risk assessment to be undertaken 

relating to groundwater and surface waters associated on and off the site 

that may be affected, and refinement of the Conceptual Model, and the 

development of a Method Statement detailing the remediation 

requirements. 

c) The site investigation has been undertaken in accordance with details 

approved by the Head of Development Services and a risk assessment 

86


has been undertaken. 

d) A Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements, including 

measures to minimise the impact on ground and surface waters, using 

the information obtained from the Site Investigation has been submitted 

to the Head of Development Services. This should be approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services prior to that remediation being 

carried out on the site. 

Reason: 

To ensure that the proposed site investigations and remediation will not 

cause pollution of Controlled Waters. To comply with the provisions of 

Policies G2 and G4 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 


13. Prior to the commencement of any development, a scheme for the 

provision and implementation of surface water limitation shall be 

submitted to and agreed in writing with the Head of Development 

Services. The works/scheme shall be constructed and completed in 

accordance with the plans and timetable approved by the Head of 


Reason: 


Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and to ensure 

the development does not cause adverse conditions resulting from 

surface water run off. 

14. The development hereby permitted shall include methods of dealing with 

surface water in accordance with established principles of SUDs 

drainage. Details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. The details so approved shall 

then be implemented in full prior to the completion of the development. 

Reason: 


Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and to prevent 

adverse conditions arising from surface water disposal. 

15. No works shall commence on site until details of vehicular parking and 

manoeuvring facilities within the curtilage of the site have been submitted 

to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The parking and 

manoeuvring facilities shall then be completed in all respects in 

accordance with those details before the development is brought into use 

and shall be maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy G5 of the 


2001). 

16. The proposed development shall be served by an estate road (or roads) 

laid out and constructed in accordance with details, including means of 

surface water disposal, to be submitted to and approved by the Local 

Planning Authority. 

Reason: 

87


To ensure that road works are completed to a satisfactory and safe 

standard suitable for adoption as a public highway in the interests of 


17. No dwelling shall be occupied until the access road between that dwelling 

and the existing county highway, including footways and turning heads 

(where applicable), has been laid out in accordance with the submitted 

plans and constructed to at least base course level. 

Reason: 

To ensure that the access road is completed to a standard suitable for 

occupants of the dwelling, in the interests of highway and public safety. 

18. No part of the development shall be brought into use until space has 

been laid out within the site in accordance with details to be submitted to 

and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority for one secure 

cycle space per dwelling. 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the development is 

capable of being reached by a variety of modes of transport. 

19. No development shall commence until details for the upgrading of the 

existing 'bus flag pole stops in Nympsfield Road in the vicinity of the site 

to provide new shelter facilities have been submitted to and approved by 

the Local Planning Authority and no part of the development shall be 

brought into use until the bus stop has been provided in accordance with 

the approved plans. 

Reason: 


20. No works shall commence on site until such time as a Traffic Calming 

Scheme for Nympsfield Road has been submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Local 

Highway Authority and the scheme so approved shall be implemented in 

full prior to the occupation of any of the dwellings. 

Reason: 

In the Interests of Highway Safety and to comply with Policy G5 of the 


2001). 

21. No works shall commence on site until either (a) full engineering details 

for accessing the site via a roundabout located at the junction between 

Nympsfield Road and Nortonwood Road, have been submitted to and 

agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services, in consultation 

with the Highway Authority or, (b) a construction traffic management plan, 

including temporary construction access proposals has been submitted to 

and agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services. The 

scheme (a) so approved shall be implemented to at leased base course 

level prior to the commencement of house or estate road 

building/construction operations. The wearing course shall be completed 

upon occupation of the 40th unit and the road works completed in full 

prior to the completion of the development. The developer shall notify 

the Head of Development Services of the practical completion of the last 

88


unit on the site and that dwelling shall not be occupied until the 

permanent access scheme has been completed in full in accordance with 

the agreed details above. 

Reason: 

In the interests of Highway Safety. 

22. No development shall commence until such time as a phasing 

programme for highway works has been submitted to and approved by 

the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate access is provided in the interests of highway safety. 

23. Prior to the commencement of any site construction works vehicle wheel 

cleaning facilities shall be provided on site in accordance with details to 

be submitted to and approved by the Head of Development Services, and 

thereafter be maintained for the duration of the siteworks. 

Reason: 

To ensure that mud and earth deposits are not brought onto the public 

highway in the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy G5 


June 2001). 

24. The existing vehicular access to the site shall be stopped up at a point 

beyond the access to the property known as Westcroft, its use 

permanently abandoned beyond this point and the verge/footway 

crossing reinstated in accordance with details which shall have been 

submitted to and approved by the Head of Development Services so as 

provide only an access suitable to serve a single dwelling. Such works 

shall be completed within 1 month of the new vehicular access hereby 

authorised being first brought into use. 

Reason: 


Informatives: 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1,G2, G4, G5, 

H8, H14, R1, R5, of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001) and Policies S.RE1 and S.5 of the 

Structure Plan which seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect 

the amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring dwellings 

by reason of overbearing effect or loss of light. The development 

provides a means of access to the site which is safe to both highway 

users and pedestrians. The proposals incorporate a level of affordable 

housing and would thereby make a proportion of the development 

available to the wider community. The illustrative layout provides the 

89


units with an appropriate level of car parking and the site is capable of 

being reached by a variety of modes of transport, thus making it 

sustainable in transport terms. The design, scale, and size of the 

development is capable of being in keeping with the existing 

surrounding property and its wider setting. There are no areas of land 

which contain any significant features to be incorporated into the scheme 

and the development is capable of providing a variety of house types. 

Space is available for the parking of vehicles in accordance with the 

Council's adopted Vehicle Parking Standards and sufficient amenity 

space can be provided for private use of the occupiers of the property, in 

accordance with the Council's adopted standards as outlined in its 

Residential Design Guide. 

Policies R1 and R5 relate to matters relating to recreational provision 

and this can be provided within the development and secured outside 

the site via a Legal Agreement and a condition. The development can 

be seen to accord with the provisions of these policies. The same can 

be said with regard to Structure Plan policies RE1 and S.5 which again 

seek to ensure adequate provision is maintained for recreational 

facilities in the locality and in some instances enhanced. 

2. The Local Highway Authority will require the developer to enter into a 

legally binding agreement to secure the proper implementation of the 

proposed highway works including an appropriate bond. 

3. The proposed development shall be laid out and constructed strictly in 

accordance with the Gloucestershire County Council's 'Local Guidance 

and Standards' as contained in their document entitled 'Highway 

Requirements for Development' Issue No. 2. Copies of this document 

may be purchased from Gloucestershire County Council (Tel. 01452- 

425559). 

4. The proposed development will involve works on the highway and the 

developer is required to obtain the permission of Gloucestershire County 

Council's Divisional Surveyor for the Southern Area 01453-822193 

before commencing those works. 

5. The Highway Authority have a preliminary design for a Traffic Calming 

Scheme for the length of Nympsfield Road between Nortonwood and 

Barn Field Road, including a School Safety Zone and an amended 

Traffic Regulatory Order and the developer is advised to contact the 

Highway Authority before details are submitted to discharge the above 

recommended Traffic Calming condition. 

6. The engineering details for the proposed roundabout shall include 

horizontal and vertical alignments, drainage, improvements to street 

lighting, signing and linning etc. 

7. For the purposes of this permission the applicants submitted layout plan 

shall be disregarded, save for the matter not reserved for subsequent 

approval. 

90


Parish / Town 


Support: Please see main body of report for details. 


The Environment Agency has commented on the application in respect of remediation of any 

contaminated land, the submission of schemes for surface water disposal and foul drainage 

disposal, the use of SUD's techniques and adequate pollution prevention measures being put into 

place. 


The County Archaeologist has requested a desk based assessment of the site and following the 

submission of this has no further requirements for investigation or recording. 


The Highway Authority raises no objections subject to conditions which are attached to the 

recommendation. 



Mrs Ind, Westcroft, Nympsfield Road 

• Right of way writer has from the road to the back of Westcroft was not noted in the plan. 

91


Site Report: 

THE PROPOSAL 


This application is made in outline form and relates to the demolition of the existing football 

stadium and the development of the grounds with up to 66 dwellings. All matters are reserved for 

future approval except for the means of access to the site. An illustrative plan has been 

submitted which shows a suggested layout of the development but this is to be disregarded so far 

as the precise future layout is concerned. However, the plan does allow an impression to be 

formed regarding the number of units it is possible to achieve on this site. The density of the 

development would equate to 56 units gross per hectare but it would be anticipated a large 

number of the units would take the form of flats. 

THE SITE AND ITS LOCATION 

The site is situated adjacent to the Nympsfield Road, at Forest Green, Nailsworth. The site is 

currently used for a mixture of purposes including a football stadium, sports facilities, fitness club 

and social club. The site is situated between the residential development in Barnfield Road and 

the existing Stroud College site which has planning permission to be redeveloped for residential 

purposes. The site is situated within the defined urban boundary of the town of Nailsworth. The 

site is not within any designated area such as a Conservation Area or Area of Outstanding 

92


Natural Beauty but is visible from long distance views of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding 

Natural Beauty. With the exception of the School, College and Football Ground the area is 

residential in its character. 

The land is predominantly flat in character but at a higher level than the properties in Bunting 

Way. 

CONSULTATIONS 

All statutory consultations have taken place including neighbours notifications. The development 

has also been advertised on site and in the Local Press as 'Major Development'. 

Responses to consultations are listed elsewhere in this report except that of the Town Council 

which due to the size of the representation is listed below: 

Application S.04/0082/OUT 

The Town Council supports in principle the outline application for housing on the existing stadium 

site at The Lawns, although has reservations about the illustrative layout, the size and type of 

access junction proposed, and the unclear status of land for a Village Hall. 

Town Councils General Comments about the Application and Appraisals 

General Issues 

It has been agreed that some of the proceeds to the County Council from the sale of the surplus 

playing field site, will be used for improvements to the school. The funds should also be used to 

contribute towards the construction costs of the proposed Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA). The 

MUGA is in the south west corner of the site and is marked as "open space for possible games 

area" on the plans. This area should be combined with the adjacent tennis court on the adjoining 

Stroud College site to provide the MUGA. Subject to planning approval, the adjacent tennis court 

on the Stroud College site, which is protected by a Section 106 agreement, could form part of the 

MUGA for the Joint Use Centre, football club, and adjoining housing. 

The proposal for a MUGA arises from the Regeneration Group and is strongly supported by the 

Town Council. The applicants have agreed to make land available for the MUGA, but it cannot 

be progressed as part of the current application because it involves land not under the applicant's 

control. The Town Council considers that the County Council should reserve some of the 

receipts from sale of the land to contribute to construction costs of the MUGA. Developers of the 

Stroud College site would also contribute to the MUGA. 

The Lawns 

General Comments 

The Section 106 agreement should ensure that construction on The Lawns site does not 

commence until after the New Stadium, and King George V Extension are complete. 

Layout 

Where possible The Lawns development should be integrated with surrounding housing, for 

example by diverting the footpath to the south of the site through the new development. Ideally 

this development should be integrated with development on the Stroud College site to provide: 

a) A shared road access, and 

b) A direct footpath from The Lawns through the Stroud College site to the primary school 

Village Hall 

93


The Town Council welcomes the allocation of open space for a Village Hall, but is concerned that 

the manner in which is it presented in the planning application does not secure the allocation. 

An allocation of 500 sq m should be included in the Section 106 agreement. 

Affordable Housing should form 30% of total units. 

Construction Impacts 

The impact of the proposed concrete crusher on surrounding residents should be minimised. 

Highways and Transport Proposals 

Transport includes a roundabout access for the New Stadium site, a second roundabout for The 

Lawns, and improvements to bus access. The proposals include a 21m diameter 4-arm 

roundabout at the junction of Nympsfield Road and Nortonwood West to provide access to the 

New Stadium, and a 26m diameter 4-arm roundabout at the junction of Nympsfield Road and The 

Lawns. Three sets of speed pads are proposed between the two roundabouts, with associated 

signage, and extension of the 30 mph speed limit to just west of Bramble Cottage. 

The Town Council has several comments with regards to the public transport proposals: 

a) The proposal that all Stagecoach services will enter the New Stadium site is welcomed 

because it will increase activity within the site. 

b) The parking of three buses overnight at the New Stadium site will reduce early morning 

and late evening service runs on Spring Hill. 

c) Buses will turn in the car park loop, which should therefore be for one-way traffic only. 

The Town Council is particularly concerned at two aspects of the proposals: 

a) The roundabout access to The Lawns is over-designed, and will involve pedestrians walking 

along the south side of Nympsfield Road in an unnecessary detour. 

b) There should be a pedestrian crossing outside the school for pedestrians approaching from 

Nortonwood East, which would enable them to avoid the new roundabout access to The Lawns, 

and the new access to the Stroud College site. 

Several items have been omitted from the TA: 

a) There is no discussion of traffic impacts on Tinkley Lane. Although these are likely to be slight 

they should be considered. 

b) There is no consideration of the potential impact of match attendances in excess of 3,000 

spectators or increases in average match attendances of around 1,000 spectators. 

c) There is no consideration of potential impacts of moving the employment use of the football 

club to a site west of the primary school. 

d) There is no consideration of the traffic generation of the social club, crèche and other nonmatch 

leisure uses at the New Stadium. 

e) The Stadium access roundabout is likely to be completed before The Lawns access. There is 

no consideration of the potential traffic problems during this interim period. 

The Town Council has the following additional comment: 

a) The use of the term "park and ride" is misleading and has led to unnecessary public concern 

about traffic impacts. The proposal is that certain organisations may use parking facilities at the 

New Stadium at specific times in agreement with the football club. These may include people 

going on coach trips to other places, members of the Chamber of Trade etc. The term "agreed 

community car parking" would be preferable. 

No transport improvements are proposed in association with the King George V Extension 

Items for Inclusion as Conditions or in the Section 106 Agreement 

94


General 

a) The new pitch and other work affecting Nailsworth Primary School should be complete before 

construction work on the New Stadium commences. 

b) The existing stadium should not be demolished until work on the New Stadium and King 

George V Extension is substantially complete. 

The Lawn 

a) The proportion of affordable housing at The Lawns should be 30% of the total. 

b) A site of 500 sq m for a village hall/general amenity/play area should be retained and included 

as provision in the Section 106 agreement, to be owned by Nailsworth Town Council. (See 

Addendum) 

c) Off-site education and adult play space provision should be agreed. 

Transport Proposals 

a) A pedestrian crossing should be provided to the school 

b) The football club should be required to provide "agreed community car parking", with local 

organisations including: local coach tour operators, Nailsworth Primary School, Nailsworth 

Chamber of Trade, and Stagecoach. 

The District Council is asked to note that timing is critical to make this proposal happen. The 

football club has to cease playing at its existing stadium by May 2005, and if there is any delay in 

making a decision the scheme may fail. An expedient decision is vital to its success. 


The planning history of this site predominantly relates to a commercial football club and 

premises. The development of this site is one that can draw comparisons with the proposals to 

develop the adjacent Stroud College site for residential purposes. That site has permission 

which was eventually both granted at appeal and by the District Council directly. 

Policy H 14 of the Local Plan is applicable in respect of housing issues and has to be weighed 

against the other material matters, which include the Inspectors findings on the adjacent site. 

The use of the site would comply with the terms of Policy H14 and PPG3. However, 

considerations regarding the re-establishment of the existing community facilities from the site 

are also relevant. It can therefore be reasonably deduced the site is now suitable for housing 

purposes, subject to the re-establishment of the community facilities. 

The site is situated within the urban area of the town of Nailsworth and was originally allocated 

for residential purposes in the Stroud District Local Plan (Draft for Deposit) 1999 (Hg 16 refers). 

This together with the adjoining Stroud College land had an indicative capacity for 50 houses. 

Due to the uncertainty of the football club moving premises at that time the Council took the 

decision to remove this allocation from the Local Plan. 

The application therefore now falls to be considered under Policies H14, R1, R3 of the Local Plan 

and Policy RE1 and S5 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review. Other material 

considerations contained within Planning Policy Guidance Notes 3 and 17 are also applicable. 

Policy H14 of the Local Plan suggests development should be considered against the following 

criteria. 

POLICY H14 

Within settlements boundaries, permission will be granted for residential development or 

redevelopment, provided all the following criteria are met where relevant:- 

95


1. The proposed housing is of a scale, layout and design compatible with that part of the 

settlement in which it would be located, and would not cause harm to the character and 

appearance of that part of the settlement; 

2. The density proposed is at as high a level as is acceptable in townscape and amenity terms; 

3. The development includes dwellings of various sizes, both in respect of physical size and type; 

4. It would not result in development between the settlement boundary and the existing built form 

of the settlement, where this would appear as an intrusion into the countryside; 

5. It would not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is important to the 

character of the settlement; 

6. Any natural or built features on the site and worthy of retention have been incorporated into the 

scheme; and 

7. Where dwelling-houses are proposed, an appropriate area of private amenity space is 

provided for the occupiers of each dwelling-house. Where other types of residential 

accommodation are proposed, an appropriate level of amenity space to serve the scheme as a 

whole is provided. 

In isolation a scheme for residential development is considered to comply with this policy but 

needs to be balanced against the other material considerations of the case which are outlined in 

this report relating to community and recreational facilities. 

Policies R1 and R3 are considered to be of high relevance to this application on the basis that the 

recreational facilities are retained in the locality via agreement with the applicants and the 

imposition of a Section 106 Agreement relating to the phasing of the development. These 

Policies state: 

Policy R1 

Development proposals that involve the loss of existing outdoor playing space in public or private 

ownership, including those sites listed in Appendix 7 as Outdoor Play Space, will only be 

permitted if: 

1. Alternative outdoor playing space of at least the equivalent quantity, quality and accessibility of 

that lost is provided within the locality; or 

2. It can be demonstrated that no shortfall in accessible outdoor playing space exists in the area, 

or would result from the development; or 

3. The loss of part of a site leads to enhanced provision of outdoor playing space on the 

remainder of the site. 

4. The loss of part of a site in private ownership, and not currently available for public use, leads 

to public usage on the remainder of the site. 

Policy R3 

Permission will not be granted for the development of playing fields in educational ownership 

where: 

1. The loss will result in a future shortage of land for educational recreation; or 

2. The land could make a valuable contribution in reducing an identified deficiency in outdoor 

playing space provision within the community. 

Permission will be granted to proposals which involve the joint use of school playing fields with 

local communities to help meet the demand for formal sports provision. 

Structure Plan Policies RE1 and S5 further state: 

RE.1 

96


The retention and provision of a wide range of recreational facilities in urban areas and all 

principal settlements, to meet local and sub-regional needs, will be supported. Local Plans will 

give special consideration to: 

1. Areas which are deficient in recreational facilities; 

2. Facilities which provide for as wide a range of the population as possible; 

3. Increased accessibility for all potential users particularly by public transport, cycling and 

walking; and 

Local scale of provision of a non-specialist nature, for example local halls capable of some 

recreational uses, will be encouraged provided they are well related to the communities they 

serve. 

Policy S.5 states: 

In providing for development, local authorities will have regard to the need for community facilities 

and services, including education, health, and cultural facilities, local shopping facilities, sport and 

leisure facilities, transport services and infrastructure, housing including affordable housing and 

public utilities. In determining the type, scale and location of development, the adequacy of 

infrastructure and community services will be taken into account. Provision for development will 

be made where related infrastructure and community services are in place or will be provided in 

appropriate phases in an environmentally acceptable way. 

Policies T1 and G5 of the Local Plan deal with issues relating to highway safety and sustainable 

development. The site is located within the main urban fabric of Nailsworth and is accessible to a 

wide range of services and facilities by a number of modes of transport. The development is 

therefore sustainable. 

The development has been designed to be served by a new roundabout (22m) which is the only 

measure acceptable to the Highway Authority as the juxtaposition of the new access with the 

existing roads would create a cross roads. Traffic calming measures are also required by the 

Highway Authority. The applicant, in consultation with the Highway Authority, is proposing three 

sets of 'cushions' outside the school and applying for a speed limit of 20 mph to be adopted. A 

new footway will be provided to the existing westerly gates of the school. The function and 

capacity of the new roundabout has been considered by the County Council and its highway 

consultants. The nature and capacity of the roundabout is sufficient to deal with the new housing 

development. In terms of traffic generation from the site and its effect on the local highway 

network, this has been computer modelled by the applicant and the traffic generated from the 

scheme is not significant when compared with the scenario which existed when the secondary 

school was operation pre 1991. Traffic generated at that time would have equated to 100 peak 

hour trips. 

The new development will generate 53 two-way movements at morning and evening peak 

according to modelling. In terms of direction of movements this is likely to result in most traffic 

moving in an easterly direction towards the town with approximately 6 additional movements in a 

westerly direction towards Nympsfield. Bearing in mind the network capacity and movements in 

the past when the secondary school was operational, coupled with the amount of traffic which is 

currently generated by the existing club site, this is not of a scale which causes concern to the 

Highway Authority. 

The proposed residential development will act as a windfall site within the established urban 

boundaries of the town, as defined in the Stroud District Local Plan Draft for Deposit (as 


At the time of the appeal on the adjacent site it was generally agreed that particular site is a 

brownfield site and subject to the retention of the tennis court is suitable for residential use. With 

the relocation of the recreational and community facilities on the stadium site similar 

97


considerations would apply to this proposal. On the basis of the facilities being retained the 

development would not be contrary to the provisions of Policies R1 and R3 of the Local Plan and 

other guidance given via PPG17 - Sport and Recreation. That guidance recognises the 

importance of providing space for recreation especially in urban areas. 

It suggests that dual uses could be made of existing facilities to provide better and readily 

available sporting facilities for the community. The long term needs of the community for 

recreational uses of land should be taken into account. In urban areas Local Planning Authorities 

need to balance the need for making land available for development whilst retaining sufficient 

land for recreational purposes. It is important that people have close and reasonable access to 

open areas and community facilities. 

The scale of the development would require the provision of 'affordable housing' and negotiations 

have taken place with the applicants to this effect. The development would attract the need to 

provide 30% of the units for this purpose and it is proposed to secure this provision via a Section 

106 Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Policy H8 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

and the Council's interim Policy Statement on this matter. 

The scale of the development will require the provision on site of play spaces for children and 

depending on the number of units eventually developed and the number of bed spaces provided 

the provision of LEAPs or LAPs will be required. These will have to be located within the 

development in secure areas and will also act as areas of open amenity land. Such provision will 

be secured via Condition 10. It is not proposed to require either a commuted sum or provision for 

adult recreation subject to the replacement facilities being put into place for this purpose prior to 

the site being developed for housing. 

RECOMMENDATION 

In the circumstances it is recommended the Committee Resolve not to Refuse the application 

and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement relating to phasing, affordable housing 

provision (30%) and the transfer of 500m2 of land to Nailsworth Town Council for recreational 

provision or the construction of a new village hall at a future date. The phasing shall be such that 

no residential development takes place on this site until both the new playing pitch at the King 

George V site is completed and the new facilities at the new stadium site are provided in full. 

EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS 








98

ITEM No: 12 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/1255/FUL 

Land Off, Frome Gardens Adjoining Stroudwater Canal, Cainscross, 

Stroud 

22330 


Grid Reference: 383408,204840 


Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of 13 dwellings. 

Mr & Mrs Tang 

5 Frome Gardens, Stroud, Glos, GL5 4LE 

Tuffnell Town And Country Planning 

Waverley Studio, Gloucester Road, Hartpury, Gloucestershire 

Andrew Case 

10.06.2004 



Parish / Town 


1. The proposal by virtue of its design, massing, and siting would harm the 

character and appearance of this part of the settlement and the wider 

canal corridor, contrary to criteria 1, 5 and 6 of Policy H14 and criteria 1, 

2 and 3 of Policy B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001 including housing amendments 

September 2003). 

2. The site is within an area at 'high risk of flooding', and as the application 

is not supported by a Flood Risk Assessment it may increase the risk that 

future residents will be cut off from dry land, place extra strain on 

emergency services and put lives at risk, contrary to Policy G4 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 

2001). 

Object: 

Over-densification of the overall Chelbury Homes site and the subsequent effect on the Frome 

Gardens feeder road. There are already considerable problems on this road of overspill parking, 

including vehicles travelling to Frome Gardens having to be on the wrong side of the road near 

99


the bend. This has been caused by the existing new development because insufficient parking 

has been allocated - appreciate that new development complies with government guidelines on 

reduced parking standards but in effect they are unrealistic and lead to indiscriminate parking on 

other existing congested roads in the vicinity. We understand from an Environment Agency 

officer that the existing new development is undesirable so close to the canal side because of 

flooding problems - this part of the canal sometimes floods because of its bottle neck effect as it 

feeds into the river just further along in Frome Gardens. Further development will exacerbate this 

situation. Should the development be allowed, we would like to request significant contribution 

towards the cost of the provision of a ramp for disabled and other users of the right of way over 

the nearby canal footbridge (Rights of Way have commissioned drawings and are currently 

consulting with the EA who have no objection in principle). We note this area has already been 

cleared, in fact SDC Environmental Health Officer was obliged to attend the site last week 

because of nuisance caused by the way the developer was disposing of the debris and we hope 

that this time he will wait for permission to be completed before commencing building. 


The Environment Agency objects to the application as it is within an area at high risk of flooding 

and is not supported by a flood risk assessment that demonstrates the proposed residential 

development will not cut off future residents from dry land, place extra strain on emergency 

services and put lives at risk. 

Cotswold Canal Trust 

Object: 

The proposed dwellings, numbers 33 to 39 on the plan, are situated very close to the canals and 

will overshadow and crowd it. 

The canal and its surroundings are designated by your Council as an Industrial Heritage 

Conservation Area in order to preserve its historical structures and setting. Extending the recent 

modern, "out of keeping" development along this line would be totally contrary to the purpose of 

the IHCA. 

Should such an application be permitted it would be expected that a substantial Section 106 

agreement should be sought to contribute to the restoration of the canal in agreement with the 

Canal Company, Canals Trust and British Waterways. 



Mr S Emery, 49 Westward Road, Stroud 

• Loss of privacy - any permission will breach writers rights that are protected by Article 8 of 

the European Convention on Human Rights. 

• Intensity of development too great for the site. 

• Will cause noise and nuisance. 

• Overbearing. 

• A haven for wildlife. 

• Will remove one of the last areas of undeveloped land on this stretch of the Stroudwater 

Canal. 

100


Site Report: 



The site is located in Cainscross, within the designated Industrial Heritage Conservation Area 

and fronting directly onto the passing canal. It is a relatively flat area covered in scrubby 

vegetation, with several large trees adjacent to the canal. It includes a raised "causeway" that 

links onto the estate road serving the neighbouring residential development to the west. The land 

rises rapidly at its northern end to the rear of residential properties. To both the east and the 

west of the site are narrow wedges of open land, beyond both of which is residential development 

tight onto the edge of the canal. 

The proposal is to erect 13 new dwellings, in the form of two, two and a half storey blocks each 

containing 6 apartments and one semi detached dwelling. The proposal would be linked to the 

adjacent estate road via the raised causeway. 


The site is located within a defined settlement boundary and this application is considered 

against Policies H14, B4, T1, R8, G4, G1 & G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001 including Housing Amendments September 2003). The 

relevant sections of Policies H14 and B4 require that: proposed housing is of a scale, layout, 

design and in materials sympathetic to that part of the settlement in which it would be located, 



and would not cause harm to the character and appearance of that part of the settlement; the 

density proposed is at as high a level as is acceptable in townscape and amenity terms; the 

development includes dwellings of various sizes, both in respect of physical size and type; it 

would not cause the loss of, or damage to, features of characteristic value; and where dwellinghouses 

are proposed, an appropriate area of private amenity space is provided for the occupiers 

of each dwelling-house. Where other types of residential accommodation are proposed, an 

appropriate level of amenity space to serve the scheme as a whole is provided; and important 

views into and out of the site are protected. Policy T1 requires that appropriate levels of parking 

are provided in accordance with the Council's adopted standards and may require traffic calming 

or highway improvements were relevant. The development will not directly affect the historic 

route of the canal and the relevant section of Policy R8 and requires that development relates to 

the canal setting. Policy G4 will not permit development on land liable to flood or where it would 

increase the risk of flooding. The other policies seek to ensure that no detrimental effects result 

either on highway safety or the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. 

In and close to Stroud Town Centre the character of the canal corridor is that hard edge, built 

form abuts close to both sides of the canal. As you move in a westerly direction along the canal 

the proportion of built form decreases, and the relationship with open spaces and vegetation 

becomes more important. More specifically once you leave Wallbridge area there is built form to 

the southern side interspersed with significant open /soft landscaped areas with sporadic 

development to the north. Once the canal passes under the Dudbridge Road, the openness of 

the corridor has already been significantly enclosed by the Bridgeside Estate and further to the 

west by the more recent Chelbury and Bryant Homes developments. These recent 

developments have very significantly increased the hard edge of the canal corridor in this vicinity 

increasing the relative importance of those remaining open/landscaped parcels of land. The 

perception of the area with the proposed development would be hard built form along the entire 

side of this part of the canal, which is not in keeping with the more rural character of the 

surroundings (away from the ribbon development on the roads). This harm is exacerbated by the 

canal edge development being a substantial two and a half storey building with a historically 

uncharacteristic plan width, which results in a large dominating structure. The proposal would 

harm the character of this section of the canal corridor contrary to criteria 1, 5 & 6 of Policy H14 

and criteria 1, 2 and 3 of Policy B4. Concern is also expressed in the loss of views that would 

result from the canal corridor up to historic properties to the north, while these are not listed many 

are important character buildings in the vicinity. The proposal results in harm to views out of the 

canal corridor and its relationship to these buildings contrary to criteria 4 of Policy B4. 

The proposal would relate differently to the canal than the neighbouring development and refusal 

would not be warranted due to Policy R8. No response has been received from County 

Highways regarding the access to the site and highway safety. This response should be 

available and verbally presented at the committee meeting, and as such no comment is made 

regarding highway safety and Policy G5 at this stage. The proposed development is set at a 

lower level than those neighbouring properties fronting onto Westward Road, such that the 

proposal would have no significant affect on the amenities of their occupiers. Further the 

orientation and distance from other properties would not result in significant effects either by 

dominating effect, loss of light or privacy on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring 

properties in accordance with Policy G1. 

The Environment Agency state the site is within an area at 'high risk of flooding'. As the 

application is not supported by a Flood Risk Assessment the Agency objects as it may increase 

the risk that future residents will be cut off from dry land, place extra strain on emergency 

services and put lives at risk, contrary to Policy G4. 











ITEM No: 13 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1240/REM 

Former Hazlewood Factory, Newmarket Road, Nailsworth, Stroud 

20518 




Development: 



Case Officer: 


Approval of Reserved Matters 

Approval of reserved matters application S.01/624 granted on appeal 

for the erection of 5 houses and 28 apartments. (Additional Plans 

received 25th June 2004). (Revised Plans received 9th July 2004) 

Builders Ede Ltd 

Marlborough House, High Street, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 2DN 

None 

Darryl.J. Rogers 


Recommendation Approval 


1. No development shall take place until a materials schedule, together with 

samples of all external materials to be used in the construction of the 

external surfaces of the building works hereby permitted have been 


Services. Development shall then only be carried out in accordance with 

the approved schedule and samples. 

Reason: 


2. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until further 

details of all external joinery (including doors and windows), together with 



the proposed surface finish, have been submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Head of Development Services. The approved scheme 

shall then be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of any 

residential unit to which it relates. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the appearance of the building. 

3. No work of any description must commence on site until details of any 

proposed changes in levels have been submitted to and agreed in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 



4. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until further 

details of the proposed boundary treatment to the southern roadside 

elevation of the development site have been submitted to and approved 

in writing by the Head of Development Services. The approved details 

shall then be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of the 

development and maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

These matters require further consideration in order to safeguard the 

visual amenity of the area. 

5. All existing trees shall be retained unless shown on the approved 

drawings as being removed. Prior to any equipment, machinery, 

materials or vehicles being brought onto the site for the purposes of 

commencing development or the demolition of the existing building, and 

until all such equipment, machinery, vehicles and surplus materials have 

been removed from the site after completion of development, all trees on, 

and immediately adjoining the site, must be securely protected in 

accordance with details previously submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. Each of the trees retained must 

be fenced to protect the area within the crown spread, or at a radius 

equal to half the height of the tree, whichever is greater, unless otherwise 

stated in the approved scheme of tree protection. 

a) The protective fencing must be sited in accordance with the approved 

tree and landscape survey, and it must not be removed at any time 

during development without the written consent of the Head of 


b) Within the protected area ground levels must remain as existing and 

no excavations must take place. 

c) No vehicles, materials, spoil, equipment, containers or chemicals must 

be placed or stored within the protected area. 

d) No fires must be lit within 25 metres of the canopy edge of any trees. 

e) Before any work commences on the site, details of all proposed 

arboricultural works to existing trees on or adjoining the site shall be 

submitted to and be approved in writing by the Head of Development 

Services. No works to existing trees on or adjoining the site shall be 

carried out without the prior written consent of the Head of Development 

Services. 

f) Any existing trees not shown as being removed on the approved 

drawings which die, are removed or become so damaged or diseased 



within a period of 5 years from the completion of development that they 

have to be removed, must be replaced as soon as reasonably 

practicable. In practice, this will be during the next available planting 

season. The size, species and location of the replacement tree(s) must 

be agreed in writing by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 



6. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the car 

parking and manoeuvring facilities shall be provided in accordance with 

the approved drawings and maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that adequate car parking and manoeuvring space is made 

available to serve the development. 

7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a 

scheme of hard landscaping shall be submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Head of Development Services. The approved scheme 

shall then be implemented in full prior to first occupation of the 

development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Head of 


Reason: 

These matters require further consideration in the interests of the visual 

amenity of the area. 

Informatives: 


(General Development Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order 

2003, the following reasons for the Council's decision are summarised 

below together with a summary of the Policies and Proposals contained 

within the Development Plan which are relevant to this decision: 

The siting, design, means of access and external appearance of the 

proposal represents an acceptable form of infill development, which 

creates a string and distinctive form of urban design and thereby 

enhances the character and appearance of the surrounding street 

scene. The form and layout of the scheme is compatible with the 

rhythm of the existing built form and provides car parking and amenity 

facilities in accordance with adopted standards appropriate for this type 

of development. The imposed conditions further securing the on-site 

provision of such facilities and the final materials for the development. 

The proposed site access will not give rise to highway conflict with all 

other matters of traffic generation remaining in line with the original 

appeal decision S.01/624. In this manner the scheme accords with 

Policies H14, G5, B2, B11 and G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


The acknowledged wildlife and arboricultural interests on the site have 

been fully considered in light of Local Plan Policies N3 and N10, with 

controls imposed by both conditions and the existence of more 

appropriate legislation contained within The Wildlife and Countryside 



Parish / Town 


Act 1981. 

2. This approval of reserved matters relates to the siting, design, means 

of access and external appearance only. The reserved matter of 

landscaping is not included in this approval and will require a further 

reserved matters application. 

3. The applicant's attention is drawn to the presence of protected species 

on the site and the need to obtain the relevant licence before 

commencement of any works. The applicant is advised to contact 

English Nature at Bronsil House, Eastnor, Nr.Ledbury, Herefordshire, 

HR8 1EP or via telephone on 01531 638500 for further guidance. 

Object: 

The apartment building is out of scale with the surrounding area. We propose that the 28 

apartment block should have one storey removed. This would reduce the visual impact from the 

opposite side of the valley. A reduction in the number of dwellings would also reduce the 

pressure on street parking which will be inevitable given the number of spaces proposed for this 

site (33 - one space per each unit). 

On road parking could stretch from the Britannia Inn to the George Inn at Newmarket which 

would present a pedestrian hazard owing to the lack of pavement and lighting. 

At the Nailsworth end of the site, building into the bank would be necessary which could cause 

instability in the hillside. 

The traffic volume generated by 33 additional units would overload an already congested and 

sub-standard road and the junction between Old Market and Spring Hill. 

If there is no reduction in numbers we expect 30% to be affordable. 


No response received at the time of writing. 

Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust 

Comment that they hold no information regarding this site but suggest that if an ecological impact 

is suspected, a wildlife survey should be conducted. 


Have no observations regarding this proposal. 

Severn Trent 

No response at the time of writing. 


Raise no objections in connection with a reserved matters application. 

Alderley Parish Council 



No response received at the time of writing, although members will be verbally updated at the 

meeting. 

Badger Group 

No response received at the time of writing, although members will be verbally updated at the 

meeting. 



Mr M Vick, Ivy Cottage, Newmarket Road 

Mr H Rose, Clematis Cottage, Newmarket Road 

• Welcomes the development and states that the mill design would blend in with the surroundings. 

• Comments however that an additional 33 cars will be using the existing narrow roads and 

requests that provision is made for the creation of a footpath along Newmarket Road. 



Site Report: 



This is an application for reserved matters approval relating to the construction of 5 houses and 

28 apartments on land on the Newmarket Road on the outskirts of Nailsworth. 

The application site consists of the former Hazelwood Factory set into the valley wall on the 

northern side of the Newmarket Valley. The large 1960s factory building borders listed buildings 

to either side with the local road to the front. The three-storey building is of a plain, simple 

functional design set into the rising valley wall with a number of mature trees to the side and rear. 

At the current time the factory has vehicular and loading access on the lower level with office and 

factory accommodation on the three floors above. Secondary vehicular access is also available 

to the side of the building via the local road which also serves a small terrace of dwellings and the 

George Public House together with the former delivery / dispatch area for the factory. As a direct 

consequence of its sheer functional industrial design and bulk the building dominants the 

surrounding residential street scene. 

The proposal seeks the demolition of the building and its replacement with a 'millesque' style 

building with residential units across four levels with parking on the lower level with access from 

Newmarket Road. The building would provide 28 two-bed apartments and be of an industrial mill 

design and natural stone and slate construction with corresponding detailing. In addition to the 

main building the proposal also includes the erection of 5 three-bed dwellings to the west of the 

site adjacent to the existing dwellings. 


S.01/624 Outline Application for Residential Development Allowed 

On Appeal 

30/7/2002 

This appeal decision followed a previous refusal by the Local Planning Authority for the following 

reason: 

The proposal will result in the loss of an employment site contrary to the provisions of Policy E2 

of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

In allowing the appeal the Inspector stated that: 

'In my opinion the closure of the factory has brought significant benefits in terms of reduced traffic 

and that the traffic problems would be likely to return if the building were again to be used for 

employment at anything approaching its full capacity.........On the main issue (loss of employment 

land), I find there is limited evidence that the site is required to meet existing or future 

employment needs and some evidence to show that its no longer suitable for employment use. I 

therefore find that the proposal would not lead to the unacceptable loss of employment land on 

this site. Moreover, I consider that the previous use created unacceptable noise and traffic 

congestion and that if a similar use were to be resumed that these problems would probably 

return. I therefore find that there are demonstrable benefits to the community that outweigh the 

loss of the employment land in any event. I therefore conclude on the main issue that the 

proposal would satisfy the criteria in Structure Plan Policy E5 and in emerging Local Plan Policy 

E2.' 

The Appeal Inspector therefore accepted that the principle of residential development was 

acceptable and approved the outline application. Matters of siting, design , external appearance, 

access and landscaping were reserved for future consideration. Other matters pertaining to 

possible contamination, tree retention and drainage works were covered by condition. 




The relevant planning consideration for an application of this type is contained with principle 

policies H14 and G5 which seek to ensure that proposals are of a suitable design and scale when 

viewed in the local context and do not give rise to concerns of highway safety. In addition regard 

must also be had to policies B11, B1, B2 which promote the production of good design and the 

preservation of the setting of listed buildings, along with policies N3 and N10 regarding protected 

species and trees. 

It is apparent from the history of the site and the representations received that the key issues 

relate to the design and scale of the proposed buildings, the corresponding traffic generation and 

highway implications along with the safeguarding of the protected species and trees. The 

principle of development was clearly established at the appeal stage. 

Design and Scale of the Building 

It is clear from the appearance of the existing building that the site makes little or no positive 

contribution to the Newmarket area and indeed represents something of a negative local 

landmark. With the removal of the building the site has a number of constraints controlling the 

form and scale of any replacement building, not least of which is the local topography. In light of 

these constraints and the general ribbon development associated with the Newmarket Valley, the 

design solutions for the site are restricted. 

In line with advice contained with Policy B2 and Planning Policy Guidance Note Number 3, the 

submitted scheme would create a strong and distinctive design in its own right, which in turn 

would enhance the appearance of the area. The use of an industrial scale of development would 

reflect the previous activities of the valley and enable the overall scale of the site and its 

associated constraints to be used in a positive manner. The creation of a distinctive style of millbased 

development is considered preferable to a series of three or four storey-terraced dwellings, 

which formed the basis of the original illustrative plans, considered at the appeal. With the use of 

the proposed conditions it is considered that the scheme represents a strong and distinctive 

urban form, which significantly enhances the visual amenity of the area. 

Although a number of concerns have been raised regarding the overall height of the building, it 

will not be unduly dominant given the impact of the existing building and the rising land levels. 

One of the characteristics of the Newmarket Valley is of tall building set into the valley wall, with 

rising land levels behind. Given the comparable heights of the proposed and existing buildings 

the proposal will not cause unacceptable additional harm in terms of its scale and will preserve 

the overall form of development in the area. The impact of the building will be significantly 

reduced by its location further back into the site than the existing one, thereby improving the 

street scene elevation. 

The detached terrace dwelling units are in keeping with the local vernacular and will preserve the 

setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Again subject to suitable controls over the final materials, 

an acceptable form of development is proposed. 

Traffic Generation 

One of the key factors considered by the Appeal Inspector was that the closure of the factory and 

the re-development of the site for residential purposes would bring with it considerable amenity 

and traffic generation benefits due to the nature of the existing activities. Whilst the comments of 

the Town Council and local residents are noted regarding traffic generation, the development will 

give rise to a reduction in vehicular movements both in terms of frequency and type over the 

authorised use of the site. At the time of the Appeal it was estimated that the factory provided 



around 150 jobs with employees arriving over a two or three shift work pattern daily along with 

associated delivery and dispatch traffic. 

Although the received comments are appreciated with regard to the potential need for highway 

improvements along the Newmarket Road, this application is for reserved matters only. In the 

absence of suitable conditions on the appeal decision, it would not be appropriate or possible to 

require such improvements on this application. 

With regard to the comments of the Town Council regarding the provision of affordable housing 

units, the application under consideration is a reserved matters one with the original outline 

making no requirement for such provision. Under these circumstances it is not possible to seek 

affordable housing on this application. 

Trees and Protected Species 

In line with the requirements of policy N3 and N10, the applicant has submitted surveys of the 

bats and badger groups on the site and these are currently subject to consultation by the 

specialized groups. Whilst it was concluded at the appeal stage that the site was capable of redevelopment 

without causing harm to such species, the exact impact of a detailed scheme is 

being assessed and members will be updated verbally at the meeting. 

In terms of the protected trees on the site a detailed tree survey has been submitted to indicate 

the impact of the proposal on the trees with the scheme itself not requiring the felling of any trees. 

Issues of tree protection and retention are covered by the suggested conditions with condition 5 

of the appeal decision controlling any outstanding matters. It should be noted that the an 

additional reserved matters application will be required for the overall site landscaping prior to the 

commencement of the development and as such further controls can be imposed at that time. 


The proposal represents a strong and distinctive form of urban development, which will enhance 

the character, and appearance of this part of Newmarket. The scheme will not give rise to undue 

traffic generation given the authorised use of the site and will safeguard the protected trees and 

species on the site whilst also preserving the setting of the adjacent listed buildings. The proposal 

therefore accords with Policies H14, B11, B1, N3 and N10 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and conditional approval is recommended. 








ITEM No: 14 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/1143/FUL 

Land Adjacent, Etheldene Road, Cashes Green, Stroud 

110

Site No: 

Parish: 


25379 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of a bungalow. 

Mr D Orchard 

14 Shepherds Croft, Stroud, Glos, GL5 1US 

Mr Richard Wadley 

Byway, Kingscourt Lane, Rodborough, Stroud, GL6 8DD 

Andrew Case 






Reason: 








Reason: 




3. No window or door openings shall be formed in either the walling or roof 

above ground floor on either the south, west or east elevations. 

Reason: 


property, to accord with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 

Revised Deposit Version as amended June 2001). 






operations. 

111


Reason: 


construction traffic, in the interests of highway safety, to accord with 

Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 


5. Prior to the commencement of development details of parking provision 

to serve the site shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Head 

of Development Services. Such provision as agreed shall be provided, 

and made available for use prior to first occupation of the dwelling, and 

similarly maintained thereafter solely for the parking of vehicles. 

Reason: 

To ensure sufficient parking is provided and maintained to serve the site, 

in the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policy G5 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 

2001). 

6. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until drainage 

works for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage have been 

carried out in accordance with the details to be submitted to and agreed 

in writing by the Head of Development Services. 

Reason: 

To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of 

drainage as well as to reduce the risk of flooding and to minimise the risk 

of pollution, to accord with Policy G2 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 


Informatives: 






The site is located within a settlement boundary and it is considered 

against Policies H14, T1, G1 and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 including Housing 

Amendments September 2004). The relevant sections of these require 

that development: is of a scale, layout and design compatible with that 

part of the settlement in which it would be located, and would not cause 

harm to the character and appearance of that part of the settlement; it 

would not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is 

important to the character of the settlement; any natural or built features 

on the site and worthy of retention have been incorporated into the 

scheme; and an appropriate area of private amenity space is provided 

for the occupiers of the dwelling-house; appropriate levels of parking 

are provided in accordance with the Council's Parking Standards; and 

no detrimental effect results either on the amenities of the occupiers of 

neighbouring residential properties or highway safety result. 

The proposal is of a scale, layout and design in keeping with the 

character and appearance of the surrounding settlement, it is not 

112


Parish / Town 


important to the character of the settlement, nor are there any important 

features on the site worthy of retention. The area of amenity space 

provided is appropriate to serve the future occupiers, all in accordance 

with Policy H14. 

One parking space is provided to serve each dwelling and it would be 

unreasonable to require increased provision. The proposal is in 

accordance with Policy T1. No significant harm would result either by 

loss of light, loss of privacy or dominating effect on the amenities of the 

occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy G1. On 

balance the proposal would not harm highway safety to a level where 

refusal would be warranted solely for this reason. The proposal is in 

accordance with Policy G5. 

2. There is a public sewer which crosses the site. The applicant may wish 

to discuss with Severn Trent the implications of this and apply for its 

diversion. 

Comments: 

We are concerned that another house will exacerbate the congestion and parking problems. 



Mrs W Thickey, 63 Etheldene Road, Cashes Green 

Mr & Mrs Chilcott, 65 Etheldene Road, Cashes Green 

Anna Burns & Dale Burrell, 1 Devonia Terrace, Springfield Road 

R Maller, 34 Etheldene Road, Cashes Green 

H D & D M Legg, 3 Devonia Terrace, Springfield Road 

Mr T Browning, 2 Hillcrest, Springfield Road 

• Access opposite writers driveway. 

• Narrow road. 

• Poor services. 

• Increase in traffic. Difficult to park. 

• Increase noise. 

• Overcrowding and loss of privacy. 

• Loss of privacy and light, if built level with the footpath. Traffic problems in an already 

crowded area. 

• Passing road is narrow and creates problems accessing the site, and is too narrow to cope 

with the building activity. Condition on nearby property regarding site workers car park was 

ignored and SDC admits in practice is often unenforceable. 

113


Site Report: 



The site is a small single "allotment" located in Cashes Green. At the northern end of the site is a 

raised area of hardstanding, containing a single concrete block garage. The neighbour to the 

east has a dilapidated prefabricated garage accessed off the hardstanding on the site. There is a 

mature privet hedge on the northern boundary of the site with the passing narrow road, with 

vehicular accesses to both the garage and hardstanding. On the western boundary of the site is 

a 2 metre high close boarded fence, to the south 2 metre fence panels and to the east is a low 

chain link fence beyond which are two large sheds at the rear of neighbours gardens. 

The proposal is to construct a small, 2 bedroom, bungalow on the lower "allotment" at the rear of 

the site. Materials are proposed as white render with blue/black concrete roof tiles. The 

hardstanding and garage are to be retained to serve the new dwelling. 


The site is located within a settlement boundary and it is considered against Policies H14, T1, G1 

and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 

including Housing Amendments September 2004). The relevant sections of these require that 

development: is of a scale, layout and design compatible with that part of the settlement in which 

114


it would be located, and would not cause harm to the character and appearance of that part of 

the settlement; it would not cause the loss of, or damage to, any open space which is important 

to the character of the settlement; any natural or built features on the site and worthy of retention 

have been incorporated into the scheme; and an appropriate area of private amenity space is 

provided for the occupiers of the dwelling-house; appropriate levels of parking are provided in 

accordance with the Council's Parking Standards; and no detrimental effect results either on the 

amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties or highway safety result. 

The proposal is a small scale bungalow, which is set back from the passing road a similar 

distance to those other properties in the surrounding area. It's scale, layout and design are in 

keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding settlement and it would not harm 

the appearance of the area. The site is a small enclosed area that is not important to the 

character of the settlement, nor are there any important features on the site worthy of retention. 

The area of amenity space provided is limited, but given the small scale of the dwelling, is 

appropriate to serve the future occupiers. This is all in accordance with Policy H14. 

Policy T1 requires designated parking to be provided to serve dwellings. In this case the existing 

dwelling has an area of hardstanding to the front for parking a vehicle, and the proposed dwelling 

is served by the existing hardstanding. Therefore one parking space is provided to serve each 

dwelling and it would be unreasonable to require increased provision. The proposal is in 

accordance with Policy T1. 

The eaves height of the property is 2.6 metres and taken with the existing boundary treatments, 

so long as the development is built at the existing ground level, no significant harm would result 

either by loss of light, loss of privacy or dominating effect on the amenities of the occupiers of 

neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy G1. 

In relation to highway safety it is noted that the existing roads in the vicinity are narrow. However 

as at least two cars could be easily parked within the curtilage of the site and due to the 

increased use of the existing access it is unlikely the proposal would increase the likelihood for 

parking in the street particularly when there is presently no restriction on parking in this vicinity. 

Further the road serves a large number of existing properties and recently a new dwelling has 

been constructed in very close proximity. On balance the proposal would not harm highway 

safety to a level where refusal would be warranted solely for this reason. The proposal is in 


Permission is recommended. 








ITEM No: 15 

Application 

S.04/1067/FUL 

115


Site Address: Land At, Stinchcombe Manor, Clingre Lane, Stinchcombe 

Site No: 

Parish: 

1482 

Stinchcombe Parish Council 



Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of a dwelling. 

Blanchworth Care 

C/o Hoddell Asscoaites, Tickton Lodge, 8 Bellevue Road, Clevedon, 

Bristol BS21 7NR 

M B Johnson 

Hoddell Asscoaites, Tickton Lodge, 8 Bellevue Road, Clevedon, Bristol 

BS21 7NR 

Mark Newcombe 






Reason: 



2. No development shall take place until samples of the roofing and walling 

materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the 

building works hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Head of Development Services. Development shall then 

only be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to accord with 

policies H16 and B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001 and Housing Policy amendments 




Development Services, of the method of disposal of surface water within 

the curtilage of the site. The development shall not be brought into use 

until that agreed method has been provided and is available for use. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate surface water drainage is provided. 


116


works for the disposal of sewage have been provided on site to serve the 

development, in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in 

writing by the Head of Development Services, prior to the 

commencement of development. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate provision is made for the disposal of sewage. 


provision is made for the parking of vehicles on a properly made-up 

surface, within the curtilage of the site, in accordance with the Local 

Planning Authority's adopted vehicle parking standards. This provision 

shall be maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that sufficient parking spaces are made available and to 

accord with policy T11 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit 

Version (as amended June 2001 and Housing Policy amendments 





Services. 

Reason: 


policy n6 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001 and Housing Policy amendments September 2003). 










Reason: 


policy n6 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 



of the proposed treatment of all external joinery (including doors and 

window frames) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the 



Reason: 

In the interests of the appearance of the building and to accord with 

Policy B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as 


117


Parish / Town 


Informatives: 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1, G5, H14, N6, 

B11 and B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version 

(as amended June 2001) which seek to ensure proposals do not 

adversely affect the amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of 

neighbouring dwellings by reason of overlooking, overbearing effect or 

loss of light. The design, scale, and size of the development is in 

keeping with the character of the area, it does not extend the built form 

into the open countryside, it would not involve the loss of an important 

open space, adequate amenity and parking space is provided. The 

design and materials compliment the character of the area. the 

development does not involve the loss of features of important historic 

or characteristic value to the Conservation Area. That the setting of the 

Listed Building is preserved. The proposal will not cause highway 

dangers. 

Support: 

Councillors do not object to the proposals providing that adjacent properties do not suffer a loss 

of privacy. 



Mr & Mrs Hamilton, Manor Farm, Wick Lane 

J R Wood, Eaves Cottage, Stinchcombe 

Mr & Mrs Townsend, Pound Cottage, Wick Lane 

D C Leach, Church Cottage, Stinchcombe 

• Conservation Area. 

• Contrary to the District Local Plan. 

• Should protect open grounds around an historical building in order to protect the original 

environment. 

• Will require the removal of the swimming pool and tennis courts - there is a covenant within 

planning consents giving Stinchcombe residents access to these facilities. 

• Public right of way. 

• Footpath would pose a security risk to residents of the dwelling and is not in keeping with the 

type of potential purchaser. 

• Motorway noise. 

• Out of design, scale and character of the existing buildings. 

• Will be a significant addition to the skyline. 

118


• Will lead to urbanisation. 

• Tennis courts are a benefit to the children of the village. 


Site Report: 

This is a detailed planning application for the erection of a dwelling within the grounds of 

Stinchcombe Manor at Stinchcombe. The proposal would involve the removal of a small garage 

and garden shed and overlaps onto part of the site presently used as a tennis court. 

The site is within the Stinchcombe Conservation Area, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

and also within the settlement boundary for Stinchcombe as shown on the Stroud District Local 

Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 and Housing Policy amendments 

September 2003). The adjacent Manor is presently used as a nursing home and is a Grade II 

Listed Building. The adjacent Old Vicarage is also Grade II Listed. The proposed development 

would share the existing access to Stinchcombe Manor part of which is a Public Right of Way. 

The main issues in considering this application are whether it complies with the policy relating to 

development within a settlement boundary, the effect upon neighbouring properties, The effect 

upon the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the affect upon the Conservation Area, the affect 

upon the setting of the adjacent Listed Buildings, And the suitability of the access. All these 

issues are contained within policies H14, G1, G5, N6, B11 and B4 of the Stroud District Local 

119


Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 and Housing Policy amendments 


It is considered that the proposed dwelling is of a suitable scale and design for this conservation 

area location and would not result in the loss of an important open area. Adequate amenity and 

parking space is provided for the development. 

The site of the proposed dwelling is fairly spacious and in character with the surrounding large 

dwellings. The proposal is unlikely to have any significant impact upon the adjoining surrounding 

dwellings being some 40m away from the adjacent Old Vicarage. It is therefore considered that 

there would be no detrimental affect to neighbouring properties. 

It is considered that there would be no detrimental affect upon the setting of the adjoining listed 

buildings or the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. 

The Highway Authority have raised concerns regarding the suitability of the access serving 

Stinchcombe Manor, however, it is not considered that the traffic generated by this additional 

dwelling would significantly increase the level of which is already generated by the use as a 

nursing home which would justify refusing the application on these grounds. Objectors have 

raised issues which include a covenant on the use of the tennis court. This is a civil matter and 

not one for your consideration. Other matters they have raised are dealt with in this report. 

Permission is therefore recommended. 








ITEM No: 16 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0797/COU 

Land At, Cranham Lodge, Sanatorium Road, Cranham 

22076 

Cranham Parish Council 



Development: 

Change of Use 

Conversion of redundant building to residential dwelling with parking to 

the rear. 

120



Case Officer: 



The Trustees Of The Witcombe Estate 

C/o Carter Jonas LLP, Anchor House, 269 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 

7LL 

Mr Ian Gillespie 

Carter Jonas LLP, Anchor House, 269 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 7LL 

Jane Breakspear 




Parish / Town 


1. The proposed development would be likely to result in an intensification 

in vehicular use of the sub-standard access serving the site to the 

detriment of highway safety. The proposal is therefore not in accordance 

with Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version 

(as amended June 2001). 

2. The site is served by a series of narrow sub-standard access roads and 

hazardous road junctions and, such conditions are totally unsuitable to 

cater for the increased traffic resulting from the proposed development. 

The proposal is therefore not in accordance with Policy G5 of the Stroud 


3. The site is located within open countryside and is not served by adequate 

footpaths, cycleways, or public transport facilities and the development 

would be likely therefore to increase reliance on the private car contrary 

to central and local planning policy and Policy T1 of the Stroud District 


Support - will enhance this somewhat derelict area. 


Support: 

Will enhance this somewhat derelict area. 


121


Site Report: 


This application is for the conversion of a building at Cranham Lodge to a residential unit. The 

building is located within the grounds of the Saw Mill and is set back from the road. 

The property is of traditional construction built at the base of a hill with the south and east 

elevations set into the hillside. It consists of two adjoining buildings that do not have shared 

access, the smaller east building having been constructed at a later date. It has solid dressed 

limestone walls beneath a pitched plain clay tiled roof and a secret lead valley separating the 

roofs of each building. The building is currently being used for the storage of miscellaneous 

domestic and saw mill goods. 

There is also a large timber framed outbuilding, clad in timber weatherboarding under a profiled 

corrugated iron roof to the rear of the property, adjoining the west building. An open timber 

framed lean-to beneath an asbestos cement sheet roof adjoins the east elevation providing 

protection over the main entrance. 

The building has an interesting history and the applicants have tried to have it spot listed. The 

site is part of the Georgian Pleasure Gardens created in 1820. Cranham Lodge was created in 

1869 when the estate was remodelled. It seems likely at that time that this building was adapted 

and windows from the main house were inserted into the building. Cranham Lodge was then 

122


used as a Sanitorium until its demolition and it was here that George Orwell proof read the novel 

'1984'. 

The building has been deemed as not being of Listable standard despite its attractive windows. 

The proposed conversion will create a detached three bedroom house after the removal of the 

poor quality addditions. The proposal has been revised following Officer advice to be less 

intrusive and to respect the character of the original building much more. 

The proposal should be considered against Policies G1, T1 N6 B15 and 16 of the Stroud District 


Due to its position and size the building is not considered suitable for reuse for commercial or 

business use. It is in an unsustainable location and the roads leading to the site are unsuitable to 

cater for additional traffic. The building is therefore more suitable for residential use than any 

other purpose. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy B16 of the Stroud District 


The poorer quality elements of the building are to be removed as part of the conversion scheme. 

The remaining building is of permanent sound construction and alterations and rebuilding is fairly 

minimal. The proposed conversion respects the style of the building and is in accordance with 

Policy B16 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

To the front of the building is the Sawmill operative's cottage. There is however sufficient distance 

between the two buildings to not result in a loss of amenity to either occupier. The proposal is 

therefore also in accordance with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 


The proposal has no landscape implications and will not only improve the appearance of the 

building but its surrounding area. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy N6 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

The property is however located in an unsustainable location, remote from facilities and public 

transport routes. The proposal is therefore not in accordance with Policy T1 of the Stroud District 


Further attempts to improve the visibility at the access cannot be achieved without significant 

loss of trees, which are not within the application site and would be detrimental to the appearance 

of the area. In addition, the roads leading to the site are sub-standard. The proposal is therefore 

not in accordance with Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


Despite the conversion scheme for the building itself being acceptable the location of the building 

makes the proposal unacceptable and therefore the application is recommended for refusal on 

the grounds of highway safety and sustainability. 







recommended. 

123

ITEM No: 17 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/1023/OUT 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Land At Brookside, Seven Waters, Bath Road, Leonard Stanley 

20071 

Leonard Stanley Parish Council 

Outline Planning Permission 

Outline application for 2 dwellings with new access. 

M Davies 

The Drovers, Bristol Road, Cambridge, Glos 







1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the 

expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or before the 

expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the 

reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. 

Reason: 



2. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the 

Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the 

date of this permission. 

Reason: 



3. Before any development is commenced, approval shall be obtained from 

the Local Planning Authority in writing of the details of the external 

appearance and design (hereinafter called "the reserved matters"). 

Reason: 

124




4. Before the development hereby authorised is brought into use the 

proposed vehicular access shall be laid out constructed in accordance 

with the submitted plans with the area of access road within 5m of the 

carriageway edge surfaced in bituminous macadam or other approved 

material and similarly maintained thereafter and the first 10m of this 

access road from the carriageway edge shall be a minimum width of 

4.5m. 

Reason: 

To ensure a satisfactory means of access is provided and maintained in 

the interests of highway safety. 

5. Before the access is brought into use provision shall be made within the 

site for the disposal of surface water from the driveway in accordance 

with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of 

Development Services and the works as approved shall thereafter be 

similarly maintained. 

Reason: 

To ensure that surface water does not discharge onto the highway, in the 


6. No works shall commence on site until details of vehicular parking and 

manoeuvring facilities within the curtilage of the site have been submitted 

to and approved in writing by the Head of Development Services. The 

parking and manoeuvring facilities shall then be completed in all respects 

in accordance with those details before the development is brought into 

use and shall be maintained as such thereafter. 

Reason: 


7. Before the development hereby authorised is brought into use a properly 

consolidated and surfaced turning space shall be constructed within the 

site in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Head of Development Services. Such turning space shall 

thereafter be maintained free from parked vehicles and other obstruction 

at all times. 

Reason: 



8. The existing vehicular and pedestrian access to the site shall be stopped 

up, there uses permanently abandoned and the verge/footway crossing 

reinstated in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to 

and approved I writing by the Head of Development Services. Such 

works shall be completed within one month of the new vehicular access 

hereby authorised being first brought into use. 

Reason: 


125


9. The proposed development shall not be brought into use until the existing 

frontage boundaries either side of the vehicular access have been 

removed and lowered to provide visibility splays extending from a point 

2.4 metres back from the carriageway edge along the access centre line 

to a point on the nearside carriageway edge at the edge of the boundary 

with the applicants control in each direction. Any new boundary, fence or 

other enclosure shall be erected on or behind the splay lines so defined, 

with the area in advance maintained permanently clear of obstructions to 

visibility at a height not exceeding 0.75 metres above the adjacent 

carriageway level. 

Reason: 

To ensure that adequate visibility is provided and maintained in the 


10. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a 

scheme for the provision of surface water drainage works and the 

disposal of foul sewage has been submitted to and agreed in writing by 

the Head of Development Services. All such drainage works shall be 

completed in accordance with the details so agreed and maintained as 

such thereafter. 

Reason: 

To prevent the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a 

satisfactory means of surface water disposal and to minimise the risk of 

pollution. 

11. A strip of land 8 metres wide adjacent to the top of both banks of all 

watercourses on the site shall be kept clear of all new buildings and 

structures (including gates, fences and walls) unless agreed otherwise in 

writing by the Head of Development Services in consultation with the 

Environment Agency. Ground levels shall not be raised within this area. 

Reason: 

To maintain access to the watercourse for maintenance or improvements 

and to provide for overland flood flows. 

Informatives: 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) 

which seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the amenities at 

present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring dwellings by reason of 

overbearing effect or loss of light. 

The proposal should be considered against Policy H14 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001 

which seeks to ensure that developments are of a scale layout and 

design compatible with the settlement and would not cause harm to its 

character and appearance. The revised layout improves the proposal 

126


Parish / Town 


and the scheme can now be designed to accord with that policy. 

The proposal should be considered against Policy G4 which seeks to 

prevent flood risk as a result of development proposals and policy G5 

which seeks to ensure that highway safety is not compromised as a 

result of development. 

2. The proposed development will require the provision of a vehicular 

crossing from the carriageway and the Applicant is required to obtain the 

permission of Gloucestershire County Council's Divisional Surveyor for 

the area: Southern 01453-822193 before commencing works on the 

highway. 

3. Floor levels should be set at least 600mm above the 1 in 100 year flood 

level to provide adequate protection to the new dwellings from flooding. 

Support: 

Parish Councillors support a development of two houses but would object to any further 

development of this site for reasons stated on S.03/373. 



F Robson, 6 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Mr & Mrs D Longworth, Hafren, Seven Waters 

Ms M Forder, 38 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Mrs L Niebrzydowski, 40 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Sarah Shaw-Maslin, 2 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Mr & Mrs Hinchcliffe, 32 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

M A Mukasa, 4 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Mr Cooke & Ms Beckingham, 22 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Ms E Semadeni, 26 Seven Waters, Leonard Stanley 

Mr D Price, Church Villa, The Street 

• If permitted could leave space for 2 more dwellings which have previously been rejected - 2 

larger centrally placed dwellings with extra parking/garages would be more appropriate. 

• As no garages shown, only parking spaces, could lead to further on road parking in area. 

• Previous appeal dismissed less than 2 years ago. Why is this application being considered? 

Those reasons still apply. 

• Revised Plans - Remain non-central and still resemble the first phase of a 4 dwelling 

development. 

• More suitable to renovate existing house. 

• Similar to the refused application. 

• Size and position of the building inappropriate. 

• Poor parking provision. 

127


• Dangerous road. 

• Sewerage and drainage problems. 

• Road would be unsuitable to serve more than 2 houses. 

• Existing property is only derelict due to neglect. 

• Access has already been put in. 

• Layout suggests further plans may be submitted for more dwellings. 

• Stream has been re-routed without permissions. 

• Concerns about construction works - when work being done previously telephone pole 

supports were ripped out. 

• Safety. 

• Not derelict. 

• Holds historical interest. 

• Brookside can be restored tastefully. 

• Part of village landscape will be lost. 

• Part still agricultural land. 

• Increase in traffic on an unsuitable road. 

• Access would be better placed alongside the existing access to Tannery Cottages. 

• Brookside should be restored. 


128

Site Report: 

The site and the proposal 


The site lies at the edge of the village, within the development boundary located on the western 

side of Leonard Stanley. The application is for outline planning permission for the erection of two 

dwellings. The external appearance and design and have been reserved for future consideration. 

The site is within the curtilage of the existing dwelling, Brookside which was damaged by fire 

some time ago. Brookside is removed as part of this scheme and replaced with two dwellings 

facing onto Bath Road. The site plan shows the means of vehicular access to the site being taken 

to the side of plot 1 and on the other side of the stream. 

Relevant Site History 

S.00/1277. A planning application was granted on 10/10/2000 which allowed the property known 

as Brookside, located within the settlement area, to be converted into two dwellings with 

parking/garaging to the rear. In granting this a new access was permitted to serve both of the 

resulting dwellings. 

S.00/1669 Erection of two dwellings on land to the side of Brookside. Refused 2000. 

S.02/1057 Outline application for the erection of six dwellings (two affordable) and construction of 

vehicular access. Refused and dismissed at appeal in May 2003. 

S.03/366 Outline application for five dwellings including one affordable unit. Refused 13.1.04 

S.03/373 Outline application for four dwellings. Refused 13.4.03. 

Planning considerations 

The site is bordered on three sides by hedging and small trees. A brook runs across the front of 

the site and along both sides. Part of the hedge to the front of the site is to be removed to provide 

visibility for the new access. This has however already been permitted under S.00/1277, above. 

Policies G1, G2, G5, and H14 and T1 of the Stroud District Local Plan are all relevant to this 

application. 

Policies G1 and G2 seek to prevent development which would have an unacceptable effect due 

to noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of day light or sunlight, loss of privacy, have an 

overbearing effect or be development which will create an unacceptable atmospheric or 

environmental pollution to water, land or air. 

The design of the houses is a reserved matter and therefore will be considered at a later stage. 

The houses fronting the road are however positioned exactly on the footprint of the existing 

dwelling and therefore no greater loss of amenity will exist to the occupiers of the dwellings 

opposite than on the approved scheme to split Brookside into two dwellings, assuming that 

detailed plans are submitted for dwellings of similar size, height and fenestration. The houses are 

approximately 20 metres away. 

The proposal should be considered under Policy H14. The indicative plans show two large 

detached dwellings. This would not normally be in accordance with Policy H14 which requires the 

site to be developed as densely as possible and with a mix of house types. However as the 

Highway Authority have objected to any increase in numbers on the grounds of sustainability, two 

dwellings are considered acceptable in this particular case. 

129


The application site and surrounding area is at risk of flooding from the brook which surrounds 

the site. The Environment Agency have confirmed that the improvements to the brook are 

acceptable and have recommended conditions. 

Policies G5 and T1 seek to promote highway safety and consider the highways leading to the 

site. The application site is located remote from amenities and services and therefore is not in 

accordance with the Governments declared aims of sustainability. However permission has 

already been granted to split the existing cottage into two dwellings and therefore this application 

should be considered as a like for like replacement. 

The access to serve the existing two dwellings has already been allowed and therefore the 

highway authority recommend permission with conditions. 

The proposal to erect two dwellings on this site is now considered acceptable. Whilst it would be 

preferable to maintain and restore the original dwelling on the site the building is not of listable 

quality and therefore its retention cannot be required. Careful detailing and design of the two 

replacement dwellings will ensure a satisfactory street scene is retained and that both policies 

B2 and H14 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) 

are complied with. 

The proposal is accordingly recommended for approval. 








ITEM No: 18 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0890/COU 

21 - 23 Russell Street, Stroud, Gloucestershire, GL5 3AQ 

4585 

Stroud Town Council 



Development: 


Change of Use 

Change of use of offices to restaurant and take-away (resubmission 

following refusal S.03/1849). 

Papa Johns Pizza Ltd 

The Forum, Hanworth Lane, Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 9JX 

130


Case Officer: 



Mr Richard Perkins 

Ky-Lin, Kenilworth Close, Banstead, Surrey, SM7 2BJ 

Andrew Case 






Reason: 



2. The odour filtration/extraction system detailed on drawing number 

PJ/STD/002/2 shall be fully implemented in accordance with those details 

and made operational prior to first operation of the business hereby 

permitted. The system shall be maintained as such thereafter in full 

accordance with the manufacturers instructions. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring 

properties, to accord with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 


3. The premises shall not be open for trade or business before 7:30 hours 

or after 24:00 hours. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby residential 

properties, to accord with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 


Informatives: 






The application is considered against Policies S3, B17, G1 and G5 of 

the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended 

June 2001). These seek to ensure that: * changes of use to uses which 

will assist in enhancing the vitality and viability of the town centre will be 

permitted; * Replacement shopfronts are sympathetic to the 

architectural style and materials of the building and contributes to the 

enhancement of its surroundings; * No detrimental effect is had either 

on the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties, or highway 

safety. 

131


Parish / Town 


The most recent use was for financial and professional services and 

the active use of the premises will assist in enhancing the vitality and 

viability of the town centre in accordance with Policy S3. The existing 

shop front is neglected and the proposal, which retains the existing 

stallriser and proportions of the shopfront, would contribute to the 

ongoing improvements in the surrounding area in accordance with 

Policy B17. Subject to conditions the proposal would not have a 

detrimental effect on the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining 

properties in accordance with Policy G1. The proposal would not have 

a significant detrimental effect on highway safety, in accordance with 

Policy G5. 

Comment: 

Concern at quality of detail on proposed new shop front. Use of wooden frames with suitable 

detailing would be more suitable them plain glass. Would prefer eat-in facilities as well as take 

away, as this is greatly needed in town. 



Site Report: 

132



The site is located on the corner of Russell Street and Station Road, with the designated 

Conservation Area in Stroud Town Centre. The property is three storey with the ground floor 

being an aluminium and glazed shop front and yellow brick above with sliding sash windows. 

The property has been vacant for a long period and appears in a somewhat dilapidated condition. 

The proposal is to change the use of the property from Class A2 (Financial and Professional 

Services) to Class A3 (Restaurants, pubs, snack bars, cafes). 


Application S.03/1849 for "Change of use from Class A2 (financial and professional services) to 

Class A3 (restaurant, pubs, snack bars, cafés etc)" was refused on 9/12/2003 by Full 

Development Control Committee contrary to officer advice. 

Application S.98/131 for "Change of use from Class A2 (Financial & Professional Services) to 

Class A3 (Restaurants, pubs, snack bars, cafes" was approved on 28/04/1998. 

Application S.02/2263 for "Removal of condition 2 of permission S.98/131 preventing the sale of 

food or drink to be consumed off the premises" was approved on 29/1/2003. 


The application is considered against Policies S3, B17, G1 and G5 of the Stroud District Local 

Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). These seek to ensure that 

* changes of use to uses which will assist in enhancing the vitality and viability of the town centre 

will be permitted. 

* Replacement shopfronts are sympathetic to the architectural style and materials of the building 

and contributes to the enhancement of its surroundings. 

* No detrimental effect is had either on the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties, or 


The existing unit has been empty for a considerable period, and significantly detracts from the 

character and appearance of the area. The most recent use was for financial and professional 

services and the active use of the premises will assist in enhancing the vitality and viability of the 

town centre in accordance with Policy S3. 

On the previous application officers raised concerns regarding the design of the shopfront. The 

proposal retains the existing stallriser and the proportions of the shopfront. The existing shop 

front is neglected and the proposal would contribute to the ongoing improvements in the 

surrounding area in accordance with Policy B17. 

Environmental Health have advised the extraction system proposed is adequate, and request a 

condition to ensure that this is maintained as such. Opening hours on the previous approval 

were until 11.00pm, the applicants have requested until 12.00 midnight and as this is the closing 

time of a number of nearby takeaway uses it would be unreasonable to set a shorter time period. 

Subject to conditions the proposal would not have a detrimental effect on the amenities of the 

occupiers of adjoining properties in accordance with Policy G1. 

County Highways objected to the previous applications on the site, however Russell Street has 

double yellow lines and is therefore self regulating, Station Road has a 1 hour parking restriction 

and there is a large car park available in very close proximity adjacent to the neighbouring 

Hotel/Railway Station. There is also a permitted take away use immediately to the east of the 

site on Russell Street. The proposal would not have a detrimental effect on highway safety, in 


133

Conditional permission is recommended. 









ITEM No: 19 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1421/FUL 

Canon Park Recreation Facility, Canon Park, Berkeley, Gloucestershire 

25159 




Development: 



Case Officer: 



Extension to existing community facility to provide dedicated Youth 

Room, Community Games/Social Room and new toilets. 


Town Hall, Salter Street, Berkeley, Glos. GL13 9DB 

None 

Rachel Brown 






Reason: 



Informatives: 


134




S Smith, 4 Canon Park, Berkeley 

Occupier, 14 Canon Park, Berkeley 

Mr & Mrs Kirk, 17 Canon Park, Berkeley 

Mrs J Hodges 

Mrs J Gregory 

G Martin, 3 Canon Park, Berkeley 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and G5 of the 


2001). Policy G1 seeks to ensure proposals do not have an adverse 

effect on the amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring 

dwellings by reason of loss of light, loss of privacy or have an 

overbearing effect. Policy G5 seeks to ensure permission is only granted 

for development which is unlikely to be detrimental to highway safety. 

• Window in the shower room will look out to writers property. 

• Disturbance for the people living close to the site. 

• Lack of parking. 

• Poll tax should be used to improve facilities for the good of everyone. 

• Waste of Council money. 

• Will create problems. 

• Should be for community use and centrally situated. 



Mr P W Glastonbury, 1 Canon Park, Berkeley 

135


Site Report: 


This application is brought before Committee in view of the letters of objection received. 

SITE AND PROPOSAL 

This site is located on the outskirts of Berkeley. This site consists of an existing sports field with 

a football stand at the western end of the field and a building providing changing facilities in the 

south eastern corner of the field. The building is detached and faced in red brick and is located 

close to the entrance of the site. 

This proposal seeks permission for the erection of an extension to the existing building to provide 

a dedicated youth room, community games/social room and new toilets. The extension will be to 

the north east elevation and faced in red brick with concrete roof tiles. 

RELEVANT HISTORY 

S.10030/C - Erection of football stand - permission 12/07/78. 

S.10030/E - Use of pavilion by pre-school group - permission 14/03/79. 

S.10030/F - Extension of use of sports pavilion for community and social gathering - permission 

11/04/79. 

136



This application is considered under Policies G1 and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 

Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

Policy G1 states: 

"Permission will not be granted to any development that would be likely to lead to an 

unacceptable level of noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of 

privacy or have an overbearing effect." 


"Permission will not be granted for development that would be likely to be detrimental to the 

highway safety of any user or any highway or public right of way." 

A number of letters of objection have been received from nearby residents. They object on the 

use of the site by the local youth club and other functions and the possible increase in trouble 

and disturbance associated with that use. 

The extension of the existing building will provide a room specifically for use by the youth club 

which currently uses the existing facilities on site. Therefore the use of the building will remain as 

it is and there is unlikely to be an increase in disturbance to the occupiers of the nearby 

residential properties. The building is being extended on its north western elevation facing 

towards the recreation field and will not extend the built form towards the adjoining residential 

curtilages and will therefore not lead to an increase in loss of light, privacy or have an 

overbearing effect on the nearby residents. 

No response has been received from Gloucestershire County Council with regard to highway 

issues. The proposal however is unlikely to lead to an increase in traffic using the site and does 

not effect the existing parking arrangements. 

Therefore in view of the above, the proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and G5 

and permission is recommended. 








ITEM No: 20 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/1251/FUL 

Land At, Whitminster Lane, Frampton On Severn, Gloucestershire 

137

Site No: 

Parish: 

Grid Reference: 375362,208516 


Development: 



Case Officer: 



25262 

Frampton On Severn Parish Council 


Application for the re-siting of the changing facility building (following 

approved application S.04/0578/COU). 

Mr I Palmer & Mr S Martin 

4 Phillimore Gardens, Frampton On Severn, Glos, GL2 7HN 

Mr Eric Cartwright 

42 Cumbria Close, Thornbury, Bristol, BS12 2YF 

Rachel Brown 






Reason: 



2. No development shall take place until samples of the roofing and walling 





Reason: 


3. The development hereby approved (including changing rooms/pavilion) 

shall only be used for recreational purposes incidental to the use of the 

land for sports activities. The changing rooms/pavilion shall not be used 

independently of these sports activities and shall not be used for private 

functions, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Head of 


Reason: 

To enable the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the use of 

the premises in the interests of the public amenity of the area. 

Informatives: 


138


Parish / Town 

Support. 

Mr W Davison 






The proposal, subject to compliance with the conditions attached to this 

permission, complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and G5 of the 


2001). These seek proposals do not have an adverse impact on the 


reason of unacceptable level of noise and general disturbance and loss 

of privacy. The development would be unlikely to detrimental to the 

highway safety of any user of any highway or public right of way. 

Draw applicant's attention to HSE Guidance note GS6 (Avoidance of danger from Overhead 

Electric Lines, Third Edition 1997). 


No highway objection 



M Hazlewood, Miramont, Whitminster Lane 

Mr & Mrs Harding, Southfield, Whitminster Lane 

Mr & Mrs Hall, Brookhurst, Whitminster Lane 

Pip Lawson & Richard Kirby, The School House, Whitminster Lane 

Mr M John, Oatfield Cottages, Whitminster Lane 


• Greenbelt. 

• Poses a danger to vehicles and walkers in the lane. 

• Power lines present a danger to footballers. 

• The proposed changing facilities building is outside the village development boundary how 

can it be possible for them to have a permanent structure there? 

• Access. 

• Traffic will spill into the road and pose a safety issue. 

• Movement of the changing facilities will restrict parking spaces. 



139


Mr D Turpy, Frampton Village Society C/o, Holly House 

• No objection. 


Site Report: 

This application is reported to the Committee in view of the number of letters of objection 

received. 

The site and Proposal 

This application site is located to the north east of the settlement of Frampton on Severn. The 

site consists of agricultural land with an existing access onto Whitminster lane. To the north of 

the site is the hamlet of Oatfield. To the south west is Frampton Cricket ground. 

A planning application for the change of use of this site from agricultural to football pitches with a 

single storey football changing facility was granted conditional permission on 01/06/2004 under 

planning reference S.04/0578/COU following a visit by the Sites Inspection Panel. 

Condition (8) of the permission stated: 

140


"Notwithstanding the submitted details the development hereby permitted shall not be 

commenced until full details of a revised siting of the changing rooms/pavilion has been 

submitted to and agreed in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The changing rooms/pavilion 

shall then only be sited in accordance with those approved plans." 

This application seeks permission for the re-siting of the changing rooms/pavilion. The building 

was originally shown to be under the overhead power lines. The plans now show it to be 

positioned 6m away from the power cable. Materials are to be agreed prior to construction. 


This application is considered under Policies G1 and G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 









Following the previous permission the principle of the football pitches and changing facilities have 

been established on this site. We should therefore consider the repositioned building against the 

above policy advice. With regard to Policy G1 the revised position of the building is not felt to 

lead to an increased effect on the amenities of any residents or occupiers of adjacent land. The 

access details remain the same and Gloucestershire County Council raise no highway 

objections, therefore Policy G5 is satisfied. 

A number of letters of objection have been received and whilst the contents are noted and 

considered, these were considered when determining the previous application and the principle 

of the development has now been established. 

Frampton on Severn Parish Council Support this application and the Frampton Village Society 

have no objection. 

In view of the above and that the principle of the development has been established on the site, 

permission is recommended. 








141

ITEM No: 21 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/1220/COU 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Woodmans Farm, Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley, Wotton-Under-Edge 


Hillesley And Tresham Parish Council 

Change of Use 

Change of use from agricultural building to stables and loose boxes. 

(Resubmission following refusal S.03/1042). 

Mr & Mrs D Joynson 

46 Woodlands Close, Charfield, Glos 

Mr R Shirley 

Church House, Long Street, Wotton Under Edge, Glos, GL12 7ES 





1. The stables and site hereby permitted shall only be used by the applicant 

or successor in title for private purposes only and not for any commercial 

or business activity. 

Reason 

To allow the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the use of the 

site as the access is not suitable to cater for additional traffic. 

2. The development hereby permitted shall not be used for any trade or 

business operation and other than for purposes ancillary to the use of the 

adjacent land, known as Woodmans Farm. 

Reason: 

To ensure that no separate additional site usage/unit is established on 

the site requiring further vehicular access or parking provision. 

Informatives: 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 of the Stroud 

142


Parish / Town 




present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring dwellings by reason of, 

noise, general disturbance, smell or loss of privacy. 

The proposal should also be considered against Policy N6 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001), 

which seeks to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the 

landscape within the A.O.N.B. As there are no external changes to the 

building the proposal has no impact on the landscape and therefore the 

proposal complies with this policy. 

Comments: 

The council are not concerned about the declared proposal i.e. the change of use of the barn, but 

have identified other changes on the site drawing shown on the submitted plan. The Council 

would not wish to see approval for these other changes to be given without the changes being 

properly described in a planning application. The changes relate to the other submission for the 

site, so should only be dealt with through that submission. 



Mrs H Pinch, Mr C Simkiss And Mrs & Mrs Butler, 21 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

H Gigg, Pleasant View, High Street 

S M Chappell, Meres House , Hillesley 

J E & V J Fell, Trebaros, Hillesley 

Occupiers, 14 St Giles Barton, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs Stanley, 5 St Giles Barton, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs Hill, Cobwebs, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs Burns,, Portcullis, Hillesley 

B N O'Brien, Kilcott House, High Street 

Mr W Franks, The Cottage, High Street 

Mr & Mrs Hibbitt, Martine Cottage, Hawkesbury Road 

Livy McGrath, 4 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Richard Davis, No Address On Letter 

Paul Hill & Tracey Smale, 19 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Mr N Young & Ms S Jeffs, 7 Reeds Row, Hawkesbury Road 

Occupier, Horseshoe Cottage, Hillesley 

C Buckley, 6 School Close, Hillesley 

Mrs J Barrett, 1 The Deans, Hawkesbury Road 

A L Doughty, The Old Manor House, High Street 

J Witt, Ebenezer Cottage, High Street 

D A Lamb, Lavender Cottage, Kingswood Road 

Mr J Hicks, Roseladden, High Street 

S Hicks & S Garland, Tuliptree Cottage, Hawkesbury Road 

Mrs M Plummer, Thornaway, Kingswood Road 

I P & J E K Dickens, Petty Croft, Hillesley 

143

Petition With 101 Signatures 


• Outside the village development boundary. 

• AONB. 

• Two equestrian centres nearby. 

• Access unsuitable. 

• Not a sustainable location. 

• Increase in traffic. 

• Object to additional noise and disturbance. 

• Entrance is totally unsuitable. 

• Changes to access/road will be detrimental to visual amenity. 

• Will involve removal of large section of hedgerow which is unnecessary. 

• No limits to what this may mean eg trading estates, warehousing 

• Prone to flooding. 



• Erosion of green field sites due to ad hoc development. 


• Already have riding facilities and livery in the village so this service is already provided. 

• Permission given for a smaller development but was 'built wrong' so retrospective was 

applied for, for 'commercial size'. 

• Will result in sporadic commercial development on Green Field site outside the village 

boundary. 


• Contrary to Highways Policy G5. 

• Additional buildings inevitable to accommodate facilities needed. 

• Served by a single road. 

• Greenfield site. 

• One in a series of developments appears to be 'development by stealth'. 

• Detrimental to the village of Hillesley. 

• Entrance and roadside already altered without permission. 

• Owners live elsewhere which is unsatisfactory where the care of animals is concerned. 

• Previous application rejected. 

• Land does not comprise a farm. 

• When owners bought the land they stated it was only for personal use. 

144


Site Report: 


This is a retrospective application for the conversion of an agricultural building to stables and 

loose boxes at Woodmans Farm, Hillesley. 

The application should be considered in conjunction with application S. 04/1222, an application to 

vary a condition to allow the site to be used for trade or business. 

The building was originally erected for agricultural storage under the prior notification procedure. 

Since the land changed ownership the building has been sub-divided internally to provide loose 

boxes and stables for the horses which are kept on the site. A sheep pen, tack room and haystore 

are also included within the building. 

No external changes to the building are required as a result of this proposal. Therefore there are 

no landscape implications and the proposal is in accordance with Policy N6 of the Stroud District 


The use of this building for the stabling of horses for private use has no implications outside of 

the site. Permission has already been granted for a change of use of the land from agricultural to 

equestrian therefore the internal sub-division of this building has less impact than a new stable 

block. 

145


The stables are sufficiently far away from nearby dwellings to have little impact on their residents. 

The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 


The applicants have not provided any background information in conjunction with this application 

and it is not clear whether the stabling is for the applicant's own horses. To that end the 

application is only considered acceptable if the use of the building is conditioned to private use 

for the applicants horses only. 

Application S.04/1222 seeks to remove a condition to allow the entire site to be used for trade or 

business. If that permission is granted then the stables would also be capable of business use 

and the condition limiting use would not be required. It is therefore recommended that members 

do not consider this application in isolation but also consider the implications of S.04/122 when 

reaching a decision. 

The proposal is however recommended for permission with the relevant condition to control the 

use of the site. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 22 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1222/VAR 



Development: 



Woodmans Farm, Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley, Wotton-Under-Edge 




Removal of condition 2 of permission S.00/1712 to allow for trade and 

business to be operated from site. Alterations to access and 

improvements to service roadway. (Previously known as The Mears, 

Hawkesbury Road). 

Mr & Mrs D Joynson 

45 Woodlands Close, Charfield, Glos 

Mr R Shirley 

Church House, Long Street, Wotton Under Edge, Glos, GL12 7ES 

146

Case Officer: 







Parish / Town 


1. The proposal would result in a commercial development not served 

adequately by public transport, remote from potential client and staff 

bases and would thus place a higher reliance on the use of the private 

motor vehicle and would be likely to result in increased journey lengths 

contrary to the sustainability aims of central and local government and to 

Policy T1 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


2. Notwithstanding the submitted drawings the proposal would be likely to 

result in an intensification in vehicular use of the sub-standard access 

serving the site to the detriment of highway safety. The proposal is 

therefore not in accordance with Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local 

Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

3. The loss of the length of hedgerow necessary to improve the visibility 

sight lines would be detrimental to the rural character of the area which is 

within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The proposal is 

therefore not in accordance with Policy N6 of the Stroud District Local 


Object: accept access improvements are proposed but would still prefer to see no increase in 

traffic to this site. Traffic could be disruptive to village and increase road hazards in area. 

Commercial use is inappropriate given site location above and close to village. Site has been 

subject to incremental development over years from single pasture field and barn to current site 

with large buildings, riding area and access road. Parish Council wish to see continued 

development stopped and note there is considerable disquiet in village by the proposal. 



Ms H Pinch & Mr C Simkiss & Mr. & Mrs. D. Butcher, 21 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Heather Gigg, Pleasant View, High Street 

S. M. Chappell, Meres House, High Street 

J E & V J Fell, Trebaros, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs Hill, Cobwebs, Hillesley 

Mr Dennis Ellwood, 6 Reeds Row, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs Stanley, 5 St Giles Barton, Hillesley 

147


Mr & Mrs T Burns, Portcullis, Hillesley 

B N O'Brien, Kilcott House, Hillesley 

Mr W Franks, The Cottage, High Street 

Mr & Mrs Hibbitt, Martine Cottage, Hillesley 

Mr & Mrs McCoubrie, Oakfield House, Hawkesbury Road 

Livy McGrath, 4 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Mrs Janet Cadman, Hazel Cottage, High Street 

Alan S Clark, 25 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Mr R Davis, No Address On Letter 

Paul Hill & Tracey Smale, 19 Hawkesbury Road, Hillesley 

Mr N Young & Ms S Jeffs, 7 Reeds Row, Hawkesbury Road 

Mr Hicks, Roseladden, High Street 

Occupier, Horseshoe Cottage, Hillesley 

C Buckley, 6 School Close, Hillesley 

Mrs J Barrett, 1 The Deans, Hawkesbury Road 

J Witt, Ebenezer Cottage, High Street 

A L Doughty, The Old Manor House, High Street 

D A Lamb, Lavender Cottage, Kingswood Road 

S Hicks & S Garland, Tuliptree Cottage, Hawkesbury Road 

Mrs M Plummer, Thornaway, Kingswood Road 

I P & J E K Dickens, Petty Croft, Kingswood Road 

Ms P Glider, No Address 

Petition With 101 Signatures 

• Outside the village development boundary. 

• AONB. 

• Two equestrian centres nearby. 

• Access unsuitable. 

• Not a sustainable location. 

• Increase in traffic. 

• Object to additional noise and disturbance. 

• Entrance is totally unsuitable. 

• Changes to access/road will be detrimental to visual amenity. 

• Will involve removal of large section of hedgerow which is unnecessary. 

• No limits to what this may mean eg trading estates, warehousing 

• Prone to flooding. 



• Erosion of green field sites due to ad hoc development. 

• AONB. 

• Increased noise and pollution. 

• The site access is visually restricted but also opens on to a road carrying fast moving traffic. 


• Already have riding facilities and livery in the village so this service is already provided. 

• Permission given for a smaller development but was 'built wrong' so retrospective was 

applied for, for 'commercial size'. 

• Will result in sporadic commercial development on Green Field site outside the village 

boundary. 

• If the business/land what trade will be carried on by the new owners? 

• Level of traffic means it will only be a matter of time before an accident happens. 

• Hedgerow a consistent theme along Hawkesbury Upton Road. 

• Removal of the hedgerow would have a significant impact on writers privacy. 


• Contrary to Highways Policy G5. 

148


• Additional buildings inevitable to accommodate facilities needed. 

• Served by a single road. 

• One in a series of developments appears to be 'development by stealth'. 

• Detrimental to the village of Hillesley. 

• Entrance and roadside already altered without permission. 

• Owners live elsewhere which is unsatisfactory where the care of animals is concerned. 

• Previous application rejected. 

• Land does not comprise a farm. 

• When owners bought the land they stated it was only for personal use. 


Site Report: 

This application is for the removal of a condition placed on a previous application (S.00/1712)to 

allow the site to be used for trade or business purposes. The site is located at Woodmans Farm 

in Hillesley. 

Members may remember that a similar application was refused following a visit by the Sites 

Inspection Panel in January of this year. That application also included other works, including the 

149


retention of stables within an existing building. That work is now shown on a separate application, 

S.04/1220 which is also under consideration at this meeting. 

The original application was for a riding arena and the applicants were informed at that time that 

permission was unlikely to be forthcoming to use it for business purposes. The previous 

application to remove the condition was refused in January of this year on the following grounds; 

"The proposal would result in sporadic commercial development in the open countryside at a 

location which is poorly served by public transport and where there would be a high reliance on 

the private motor car to serve the site, As a result the development would be likely to result in an 

intensification in vehicular use of the sub- standard access serving the site to the detriment 

of highway safety and contrary to Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 

Version as amended June 2001". 

In order to attempt to overcome this objection the applicant has proposed alterations to the site 

access and access road. The alterations include the removal of a length of mature boundary 

hedgerow to improve visibility. This hedge is visually important to the edge of the village and its 

loss would be detrimental to the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty of the 

landscape. The hedgerow may be considered 'important' under the terms of the Hedgerow 

Regulations 1997 and the section of hedge is being considered against the set criteria at the time 

of writing. The result of this investigation will be verbally reported at the meeting. If the hedgerow 

is considered important then the application should also be refused under Policy N11 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version as amended June 2001. 

Nothwithstanding these proposals the Highway Authority still object to the proposal which is 

accordingly recommended for refusal. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 23 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1286/COU 



Development: 

Stable Building, Furlong Lane, Tresham, Wotton-Under-Edge 

16114 


Change of Use 

Conversion of redundant stable building to mixed use residential/ 

business use. 

150



Case Officer: 



Mr N Kingston 

Furlong Farm, Tresham, Wotton-Under-Edge, Glos, GL12 7RW 

Roberts Gardner Limited 

Friars Court, College Street, Gloucester, GL1 2NJ 

Eleanor Jackson 




Parish / Town 


1. Policy B15 of the Stroud District Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001) states that the re-use and adaptation of buildings in 

rural areas to alternative uses will only be permitted if the buildings are of 

substantial, sound and permanent construction and are capable of re-use 

and adaptation without major or complete reconstruction. In this instance, 

the building that is the subject of this application is roofed in corrugated 

metal and as such does not meet the requirements of the above 

mentioned policy. 

2. Policy B16 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001) states that the adaptation and re-use of a building 

in a rural area for residential use will not be permitted unless every 

reasonable attempt has been made to secure a suitable employment or 

community re-use. In this instance it is considered that the applicant has 

failed to demonstrate that the requirements of this policy have been met. 

3. The site is located remote from amenities, facilities and services and is 

not served by adequate footpaths, cycleways, or public transport facilities 

and the development would be likely to increase reliance on the private 

car contrary to national Planning Policy and Policy T1 of the Stroud 


Support: 

The proposal will protect a building which adds to the specific character of Tresham, which might 

otherwise decay to the point that it is lost. However, the Council does have a concern about the 

parking provision, in that the parking space described has a very severe slope (1 in 3), so might 

prove to be unusable. Tresham has poor street parking provision, so the Council feel that 

development should not be allowed to increase this problem. 


151


Site Report: 

The Site and Proposal 


The rectangular shaped application site is located within the village of Tresham and comprises a 

substantial stable building and sloping land to the side and rear. The building is sited on a narrow 

slip road to the south of the lane running through the village. The building has stone walls and a 

corrugated metal roof. Internally, the building has two floors, the first floor comprising of timber 

beams and boarding supported by a central timber post. 

The application proposes the conversion of the building to a two bedroom dwelling with a work 

space at fist floor to enable home working. The proposal involves replacing the corrugated metal 

roof with plain tiles and installing rooflights on the front and rear elevations to gain additional 

natural light to the first floor. 


In April 1989, an application was submitted to Northavon District Council (The then Planning 

Authority) for the conversion of the stable to a three bedroom dwelling. The application was 

refused because the building was considered of no special merit and was considered to require 

152


substantial rebuilding contrary to policies in the Avon County Structure Plan and Draft Northavon 

Rural Areas Local Plan. 


Tresham has no defined settlement boundary and the application proposes the conversion of an 

agricultural building to a predominantly residential use with a live/work facility. It must therefore 

be considered in relation to Policies B15 and B16 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 

Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). Policy B15 states that the re-use and adaptation of 

buildings in a rural area for commercial use will be permitted subject to a number of criteria the 

first of which is that the building should be of substantial, sound and permanent construction. 

The final criteria is that the building must be capable of re-use and adaptation without major or 

complete reconstruction. 

A structural survey has been submitted with the application. This concludes that the stonework 

needs some repair, lintels require replacement, the first floor structure is in poor condition and 

would need replacing and a new ridge purlin would be required to support existing roof trusses. 

Although the stone walls are basically sound, the roof is corrugated iron and para7.8.9 of the 

Local Plan explains that substantial, sound and permanent construction does not include 

buildings roofed with corrugated plastic, metal or any form of sheeting. The condition of the 

building does not therefore comply with the requirements of Policy B15. This is also consistent 

with the previous refusal in 1989. 

Policy B16 states that residential conversion will only be permitted if every reasonable attempt 

has been made to secure a suitable employment or community re-use of the building. No 

evidence has been to submitted to indicate that the building has been advertised for commercial 

use. In a supporting statement the applicant appears to have dismissed the possibility of an 

employment reuse for the building on the basis of traffic generation and lack of parking. There is 

not considered demand for a community use in Tresham and such a use is not considered 

financially viable Residential conversion for holiday letting has been considered by the applicant 

but this use is not considered to offer sufficient return to justify the cost of conversion. It is 

therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to Policy B16 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


The Parish Council support the proposal which they consider would protect a building that 

contributes to the character of the village, which otherwise might decay and be lost. Concern is 

however expressed about the parking provision. Whilst it is agreed that the building has attractive 

stonework representative of the area, this is not felt to outweigh the policy objections to the 

proposal. 

At the time of preparing this report, no formal response had been received from the Highway 

Authority. However, given the rural location of the building it is considered that the proposal 

would be contrary to Policy T1 of the Local Plan in that the site is remote from facilities and the 

proposed use would be likely to result in additional reliance on the use of private cars. 

The supporting statement describes the proposal as an opportunity to increase the diversification 

of housing stock in Tresham through the provision of a more affordable property. It is considered 

that the proposal will not result in a genuinely affordable property and for the reasons set out in 

this report, the application is recommended for refusal. 

Human Rights 





153




recommended. 

ITEM No: 24 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0929/FUL 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Minchinhampton Architectural Salvage Co, Cirencester Road, 

Minchinhampton, Stroud 

9754 



Erection of an extension to existing single storey lean-to storage 

building. 

Ms D Kedge & Mr & Mrs Hopwood 

Wilcuma, Frome Park Road, Rodborough, Stroud, Glos 

Country Building Designs 

Bramshaw, Theescombe Lane, Amberley, Stroud, Glos GL5 5AU 







Reason: 



2. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the 

vehicle parking, turning and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved 

plans are made available for use. This provision shall be maintained as 

such, free of obstruction, thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that sufficient parking and turning space is made available. 

154


Parish / Town 


Informatives: 


(General Development Procedure)(England)(Amendment) Order 2003, 




The proposal complies with the provisions of Policy G1 of the Stroud 



present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring dwellings by reason of 

noise, general disturbance or overbearing effect. The design, scale, and 

size of the development is in keeping with the existing buildings and their 

wider setting and is therefore in accordance with Policy N6 of the Stroud 


The proposal also complies with the aims of policy E5A to retain and 

improve employment provision in rural areas. 

Object - size and appearance of extension is detrimental to site. 



L Turley, Farcroft, Cirencester Road 

L Sally Morgan, Orchard Barn, Peaches Farm 

• Condition on previous consent that no further buildings be put on the site. 

• Applicant does not show a need for further space. 

• Would add to the scatter of non-agricultural uses and buildings at Aston Down. 

• AONB. 

• Has been a significant increase in buildings on this site. 

• Will restrict car parking on the site and may lead to cars being parked on the main road. 

• Previous consent strictly for storage/distribution - the buildings are not being used as this. 

• At the end of the personalised consent the land will revert back to agricultural. 

• Application on an adjacent site refused due to sustainability. 

• Additional person added to the personal consent. 

155


Site Report: 


This application is for the erection of a single storey extension to an existing storage building at 

the reclamation yard at Aston Down. 

The site is within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the proposed building is parallel to 

the road and adjacent to the field boundary at the rear of the site. The proposal is to erect a link 

between the original double height storage building on site and a lower, smaller store. Another 

extension to the other end of the store is also proposed. 

The land to be covered by the store is currently used for outside storage. The additional covered 

space will therefore have little impact and will simply allow goods to be kept dry. The parking and 

turning arrangement remain unaltered from the original planning application and it is not 

envisaged that the proposal will result in an increase in the volume of traffic visiting the site. 

The proposal is located at some distance from the nearest residential properties and therefore 

the proposal is in accordance with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit 


The design and materials of the building is similar to the agricultural appearance of the other 

buildings on site and in keeping with the site's rural surroundings. The proposal is therefore in 

156


accordance with Policy N6 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 


The proposal improves facilities at this existing employment site though not resulting in an 

increase in employment. It is in accordance with the general aim of policy E5A, to improve the 

rural economy by supporting local businesses. 

The proposal is therefore recommended for permission. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 25 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1221/VAR 

Land Adjoining, Charfield Road, Kingswood, Wotton-Under-Edge 

22588 

Kingswood Parish Council 



Development: 



Case Officer: 



Removal of condition 7 of application S.03/C0296/FUL (for the erection 

of three industrial units) relating to the provision and construction by the 

developer of a footpath along Charfield Road frontage. 

FTC Southwest Ltd 

Clovers, The Drive, Charfield, Wotton-Under-Edge, Gloucestershire 

GL12 8RL 

Mr David Barnes 

Wistaria House, May Lane, Dursley, Glos, GL11 4JH 

Mark Newcombe 





157



Reason: 





Development Services, of the method of disposal foul sewage of surface 

water within the curtilage of the site. The development shall not be 

brought into use until that agreed method has been provided and is 

available for use. 

Reason: 

To ensure adequate surface water drainage is provided and to ensure 

that the development accords with Policy G2 of the Stroud District Local 











Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to ensure that the 

development accords with Policy G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


4. The development hereby authorised shall be used for B1 purposes only, 

as described within the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use 

Classes) Order 1987 (as amended). 

Reason: 


the premises in the interests of the amenities of adjoining dwellings and 

to ensure that the development accords with Policy G1 of the Stroud 



provision has been made within the site for the loading and unloading 

and turning of service and delivery vehicles in accordance with further 

details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Head of 

Development Services, and the facilities so approved shall then be 

similarly retained for those purposes thereafter. 

Reason: 

To ensure that adequate off-road parking and turning facilities are 

available, in the interests of highway safety and to ensure that the 

development accords with Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan 


158


6. Before the development hereby authorised is brought into use the car 

parking and manoeuvring facilities shall be completed in all respects in 

accordance with the submitted details and shall be similarly maintained 

thereafter for that purpose. 

Reason: 


interests of highway safety and to ensure the development accords with 



7. The area of land shown for a future footpath alongside Charfield Road, 

as shown on the applicants submitted plan No. 2303/10/C, shall be 

reserved for that use and be made available, as required, for the 

provision of this facility. 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the development accords 

with Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version 


Informatives: 


Parish / Town 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1, E3, G2 and G5 


June 2001) which seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the 


reason of noise and general disturbance. To ensure that the 

development is on land allocated for employment purposes. To ensure 

that the development does not cause pollution, and to ensure that the 

development is not detrimental to highway safety. 

Object: 

Kingswood PC asked for a condition to be imposed in respect of the provision of a footway in 

Charfield Road for pedestrian safety. 

Although other units have not had this restriction, it is an intensification of the Mill complex, added 

to which traffic movements have increased both in size and volume. 

159



J Moss, 6 Charfield Road, Kingswood 


• Lack of footpath along Charfield Road is a concern for writer and residents. 

• Danger to pedestrians. 

• Inadequate traffic calming measures. 

• Would leave the department open to litigation from any pedestrian killed or injured. 


Site Report: 

This is an application for the removal of a condition from a planning permission granted in April 

2004. 

The original application was for the erection of three light Industrial units, extension of existing 

site road and landscaping. 

160


The site was on land adjoining Charfield Road Kingswood. 

The condition which this application is to remove required that: 

'Before the development hereby authorised is commenced details of the proposed footpath along 

the Charfield Road frontage shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Head of 

Development Services in consultation with the Highway Authority and the footpath details so 

approved shall be completed in all respects in accordance with the submitted details and shall be 

similarly maintained thereafter for that purpose.' 

Reason: 

In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the development accords with Policy G5 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

At the time the application was originally considered, concerns from local residents and the 

Kingswood Parish Council were raised regarding the traffic situation in Charfield Road and how 

this could be improved by the provision of a footpath along the Charfield Road. To provide a 

suitable footpath would involve land outside of the applicants control and furthermore the 

Highway Authority do not feel that a safe footpath arrangement can be achieved. The developer 

at the time offered the site frontage of the land in their control to be used as a public footpath. 

The offer of this land remains. 

The wording of the condition requires that the applicants provide and maintain this section of new 

footpath before their development is commenced. The applicants feel such a requirement is 

unreasonable. They remain willing to make the land available but consider that the construction 

and maintenance of the footpath should be the responsibility of another body, such as the 

Highway Authority. 

The applicants also argue that the condition does not meet the test of reasonableness laid out in 

"Circular 11/95, The Use of Conditions in Planning Permission", particularly with regard to the 

need for the condition resulting from the new development itself and must be "genuinely" required 

by the users of the development. In this respect this argument is accepted. 

It is therefore recommended that the application be permitted and the condition replaced with a 

condition which requires the land for the footpath to be made available. 








ITEM No: 26 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/1084/VAR 

21 Barcelona Drive, Minchinhampton, Gloucestershire, GL6 9DS 

161

Site No: 

Parish: 

Grid Reference: 


Development: 





25395 


386588,200937 


Variation of condition 17 of permission S.02/610 to allow the relocation 

of car parking space from back garden to drive. 

Mr J Dixon 

21 Barcelona Drive, Minchinhampton, Gloucestershire, GL6 9DS 

None 

Case Officer: Rachel Brown 




Informatives: 


Parish / Town 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policy G5 of the Stroud 


This seeks to ensure the proposal does not have a detrimental impact 

on highway safety. 

Object: concern about parking in area and relocation from garage would exacerbate this. 

Implications for on street parking in surrounding roads. 


162


Site Report: 


This application has been brought before committee in view of the objections from the Parish 

Council. 


This site is located on a modern residential estate in Minchinhampton. The site consists of a 

detached dwelling finished in reconstructed stone. There is a single integral garage. The front of 

the property is open plan in nature with an area of driveway. To the rear of the property is an 

enclosed garden with an area immediately behind the garage designated for parking. 

This application seeks the variation of a condition to allow a parking area for this property to be 

moved from the rear garden to the front driveway. 

This site forms part of a development recently constructed under planning reference S.02/610. 

Condition 17 attached to that permission stated: 

"The garages and parking spaces shown on the submitted plans shall be provided prior to the 

occupation of the dwelling unit to which they relate and shall be maintained free from obstruction 

for the purposes of parking thereafter." 

163



The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within policy G5. 




Minchinhampton Parish Council objects to this application. They are concerned about parking in 

this area and feel the relocation would exacerbate this. 

The maximum car parking requirement for dwelling houses is two spaces per unit. The existing 

garage provides one parking space and the driveway to the front of the garage provides enough 

room to park two cars. Therefore the maximum car parking requirement for this dwelling is met. 

The original condition was imposed to ensure that the minimum standards were retained. In 

those circumstances there can be no reason to refuse this application. 

In view of the above permission to vary condition 17 of permission S.02/610 is recommended. 








ITEM No: 27 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

Agent Details: None 

S.04/1197/FUL 

76 Coldwell Lane, Middleyard, Kings Stanley, Stonehouse 

25416 

Kings Stanley Parish Council 




Development: Retrospective application for erection of a conservatory. 


Mr & Mrs Jones 

76 Coldwell Lane, Middleyard, Kings Stanley, Stonehouse, 

Gloucestershire, GL10 3PS 

164

Case Officer: 



Rachel Brown 




Informatives: 


Parish / Town 






The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and H23 of 


June 2001). These seek to ensure proposals do not have an adverse 

effect on the amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring 

dwellings by reason of loss of light, loss of privacy or have an 

overbearing effect. The size of the plot is large enough to 

accommodate the proposal without resulting in a cramped or 

overdeveloped site. The height, size and design of the proposed 

extension is in keeping with the scale and character of the parent 

dwelling. Following construction of the extension sufficient space will 

exist for the parking of cars in accordance with the Council's standards 

and for use as private amenity space by the occupiers of the enlarged 

dwelling in accordance with the Council's adopted standards as outlined 

in its Residential Design Guide. 

Object: 

This is a retrospective application although it was not mentioned on the forms received. 

It seems apparent from the PCs inspection that this development has had a considerable impact 

on the local scene, The conservatory is very large and my council feels that it could be an 

overdevelopment of the site. In my Councils opinion it creates an overbearing and unneighbourly 

effect and we understand that a fence has been erected by a neighbour to reduce 

the effect it has had. We also understand that it is brightly lit at night and this could well create 

an unwelcome effect on the local scene. 

My council understands this is matter is being referred to Principal Planning Officers and the 

Enforcement Officers for discussion. My Council would ask that it be referred to the Planning 

Committee. 


165


Site Report: 


This application is brought before Committee in view of the Parish Council's objections. 

THE SITE AND PROPOSAL 

This site is located at the end of a residential cul-de-sac on the edge of Middleyard. The site 

consists of a mid terraced dwelling which due to the topography of the land, is elevated from the 

highway. Access, which is pedestrian only, is gained via a set of steep steps to a small area of 

garden to the front of the property. To the rear of the dwelling the garden rises slightly up away 

from the property. Beyond the site is agricultural land. On the rear elevation is an existing 

conservatory constructed with a white upvc frame and dwarf wall. 

This proposal seeks retrospective permission for the erection of this conservatory. 


The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within policies H23 and G1 of the 



166




Kings Stanley Parish Council has considered this application and object on the following grounds: 

"It seems apparent from my Council's inspection that this development has had considerable 

impact on the local scene. The conservatory is very large and my Council feels that it could be 

an overdevelopment of the site. In my Council's opinion it creates an overbearing and unneighbourly 

effect and we understand that a fence has been erected by a neighbour to reduce 

the effect it has had. We also understand that it is brightly lit at night and this could well create 

an unwelcome effect on the local scene". 

No letters of representation have been received as a result of neighbour notifications and the 

posting of a site notice. 

Whilst the conservatory is fairly large the roof slopes away from the neighbouring property 

minimising any loss of light or overbearing effect and the height of the eaves is not much higher 

than that of a fence which can be erected under permitted development rights. The effect of the 

conservatory on the neighbouring property to the north east, which is at a slightly lower level, has 

been inspected on site and is not felt to be unreasonable. Windows on the neighbouring 

properties which are closest to the conservatory are obscurely glazed and do not provide light to 

principal rooms. The neighbouring property to the south west is at a similar level with a much 

larger area of amenity land. Therefore the effect on the amenities of the occupiers of the 

neighbouring properties is not felt to be of a level to warrant refusing this application. 

Following construction of the conservatory the size of the remaining private amenity land for use 

by the occupiers of the enlarged dwelling, meets the Council's standards as outlined in its 

Residential Design Guide. The height, size and design of the conservatory is felt to be in keeping 

with the scale and character of the existing dwelling. 

Therefore the proposal complies with the requirements of Policies G1 and H23 and permission is 

recommended. 








ITEM No: 28 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1370/FUL 

Fox House, The Street, Coaley, Gloucestershire 

21629 

Coaley Parish Council 

167




Development: Construction of new access including conversion of dining room to 

garage. (Resubmission following refusal S.03/C0304/FUL) 




Case Officer: Eleanor Jackson 


Mr And Mrs J Carter 

Fox And Hounds, The Street, Coaley, Gloucestershire 






Parish / Town 


1. Policy G5 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001) states that permission will not be granted for 

development that would be likely to be detrimental to the highway safety 

of any user of any highway or public right of way. In this instance, the site 

frontage is too restricted to provide for the visibility splays necessary to 

serve the proposed development. In addition, the layout of the vehicular 

access would be likely to encourage vehicles to reverse out onto the 

adjacent classified road all to the detriment of highway safety and 

contrary to the above policy. 

Object: 

The Council still had concerns about visibility leaving the site, constituting a highways safety 

issue. Also that visibility was somewhat dependant on the neighbouring property keeping their 

hedge at a fairly low height. 


Recommend refusal on grounds that inadequate visibility and would encourage reversing onto 

highway. 


168


Site Report: 


This application is brought to Committee by Cllr Janet Wood, the Ward Councillor. 

The Site and Proposal 

Members may recall that outline permission was granted for the erection of a detached dwelling 

on land adjoining The Fox and Hounds Public House in Coaley at the Development Control 

Committee on 14th January 2003 following a visit by the Sites Inspection Panel. A reserved 

matters application was subsequently approved under delegated powers and the dwelling has 

been completed. 

Both the outline and reserved matters applications did not included any vehicular access onto the 

road. This was a requirement of the Highway Authority, which advised that visibility onto The 

Street was inadequate. The approved house is therefore accessed from the pub access and has 

two designated car parking spaces within the pub car park. 

As part of their construction works, the applicant formed a new vehicular access onto The Street. 

It was initially claimed that the access was only temporary to facilitate the delivery of construction 

materials without causing obstruction in the pub car park. An application seeking to retain the 

access and to construct a single garage in place of the previously approved dining room was 

refused by Committee on 10th February 2004 on the grounds that visibility was inadequate and 

169


the layout would have encouraged vehicles to reverse out onto the highway. The proposal was 

therefore considered contrary to highway safety. 

The applicant has now resubmitted the application for the access to include visibility splays in 

both directions. It is understood that whilst this includes land outside his ownership, his 

neighbours at Cherry Tree House are prepared to accept a covenant on their property to secure 

a reduction in height of their side boundary wall adjoining the site and the maintenance of the 

visibility splay in perpetuity. 


The proposal is for a new access and must be considered in relation to Policy G5 of the Stroud 

District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001), which states that 

permission will not be granted for development that would be likely to be detrimental to the 

highway safety of any user of any highway or public right of way. 

The Highway Authority again recommend that the application be refused on highway grounds 

because the site frontage is too restricted to provide for the required visibility splays necessary to 

serve the proposed development. In addition, the Highway Authority again consider that the 

layout of the vehicular access is such that it would encourage vehicles to reverse out of the site 

onto the adjacent classified road, all to the detriment of highway safety. Therefore, the proposal 

does not comply with the above Policy. 

Coaley Parish Council object to the application on the grounds of the poor visibility leaving the 

site and are concerned that visibility is dependant upon the neighbouring property retaining a low 

level wall. 

In summary, the dwelling on this plot was approved on the basis of there being no vehicular 

access other than through the existing pub car park. This was for highway safety reasons. The 

applicant has constructed an unauthorised access onto a busy classified road, contrary to Policy 

G5 of the Local Plan. For the reasons set out in this report, the application is recommended for 

refusal. 

In the event that this recommendation is accepted authority is sought for enforcement action to 

be taken against the unauthorised access. 

Human Rights 








ITEM No: 29 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/0970/FUL 

Whispering Trees, Lower Washwell Lane, Painswick, Stroud 

170

Site No: 

Parish: 



25361 


Grid Reference: 387100,209965 


Development: 



Case Officer: 



Erection of extensions. 

Mr S Bates 

Whispering Trees, Lower Washwell Lane, Painswick, Stroud, 

Gloucestershire GL6 6XW 

Mr Anthony Webster 

5 Port Terrace, Brimscombe, Stroud, Glos, GL6 7ER 

Will Bridges 


Permission 




Reason: 



2. No development shall take place until samples of the walling and roofing 





Reason: 

In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with 

Policy G1 of the Stroud District Council Local Plan Revised Deposit 


Informatives: 


(General Development Procedure)(England)(Amendment) Order 2003, 




The proposed development meets the criteria as set out in Policies G1 

and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001). Both of which seek to ensure that the amenities 

of the neighbouring properties are not adversely affected by the 

proposal. The proposal would not result in the host dwelling having an 

171


Parish / Town 


overbearing effect or creating significant loss of light to the 

neighbouring properties. The size, design and scale of development is 

in keeping with the existing property and its wider setting. 

Object: 

The roof tiles and the extensions fenestration must match the house. 

Revised Parish 

Object: 

We support the reduction in size of the extension, but remain opposed to the application because 

of the colour of the roof tiles and wall, which should match existing. 



Mr & Mrs Watts, Fairhills, Lower Washwell Lane 

• Object: Materials not in keeping with the existing property. 

• Question design of windows to rear elevation. 


Dr R Evans, Glebe End, Lower Washwell Lane 

172


Site Report: 


The application is brought before this Committee due to the objections received by the Painswick 

Parish Council. 

The application site is located towards the north eastern edge of the village of Painswick. The site 

consists of a two storey detached property finished in Bradstone. To the north east and north 

west of the property are similar detached dwellings with public highways bounding the south east 

and south west of the site. The application is made for the erection of a single storey side 

extension to provide a sun room to the property. 

Planning History. 

None 

Planning Considerations. 






173


The proposed extension has been revised from that originally submitted. The extension originally 

extended some 7 metres from the side elevation of the existing property. This was subsequently 

reduced at the request of the Council to a more suitable 5 metres in depth. The reduced size 

extension is more in keeping with the scale and design of the host property. 

The majority of the objections that have been received from members of the public relate to the 

proposed materials that are to be used, which were to be render and clay roof tiles. 

After further discussions with the agent it has been agreed that the walling for the extension 

would be finished in either a recon. stone or Bradstone to match the main dwelling, the exact 

detailing will be controlled through a condition to be imposed as will the colour and type of the 

roofing material to be used on the extension. 

For the reasons set out above the application is now considered to comply with the provisions of 

Policies G1 and H23. 

The application is duly recommended for conditional permission. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 30 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/1072/FUL 

Site No: 

25393 

Parish: Dursley Town Council 


6 Woodland Avenue, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 4EW 


Development: 



Case Officer: 

Two storey extension. 

Mr & Mrs Butler 

6 Woodland Avenue, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 4EW 

D.S.W. Design Consultants 

8 Spencer Close, Hucclecote, Gloucester, GL3 3EA 

Will Bridges 

Date Received: 21.05.2004 

174






Reason: 



2. Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, any window 

proposed in the southern elevation of the extension shall be glazed in 

obscure glass, and maintained as such thereafter, to the satisfaction of 

the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring 

residential property in accordance with Policy G1 of the Stroud Local 

Plan Revised Depoist Version (as amended June 2001). 

Informatives: 


Parish / Town 






Object: disproportionate to the size of the house/plot. 




2001). These seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect 


reason of loss of light, loss of privacy or have an overbearing effect. The 

plot size is large enough to accommodate the proposal without resulting 

in a cramped or overdeveloped site. The height, size and design of the 

proposal is in keeping with the scale and character of the parent building. 

Following the construction of the extension, sufficient space will exist for 

the parking of cars in line with the Council's vehicle parking standards 

and for use as private amenity space for the occupiers of the enlarged 

dwelling in accordance with the Council's adopted standards as outlined 

in its Residential Design Guide. 

175


Site Report: 


This application is brought before the Committee due to the objection and comments raised by 

Dursley Town Council. 

The application site is located on the northern side of the town of Dursley on a plot that falls away 

to the east. To the north and south of the site are the adjoining and neighbouring properties 

respectively. To the east is the rear garden and finally to the west is a small amount of private 

amenity space with the road Woodland Avenue beyond that. The application has been submitted 

for the erection of a part single storey part two storey side and rear extension. 


None 


The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within Policies H23 and G1 of the 





176


The proposed extension would effectively create an extension that would wrap around the south 

eastern corner of the dwelling. From the front elevation, that faces onto the highway the proposal 

has the form of a simple single storey side extension with a newly formed access point into the 

dwelling. To the rear of the property the ground level falls away, this have the effect of enabling a 

two storey element to be introduced to the rear, that follows the line of the existing land levels. 

The comments raised by the Town Council have been noted and fully considered. However, 

when the topography of the site is considered the proposal does not create an overly dominant 

addition to the property, with the maximum distance the proposal would extend from existing 

dwelling being some 2.3 metres. In addition there would be adequate rear garden remaining for 

the use of the occupants of the dwelling. 

The proposed extension has an acceptable height, size and design that would be in keeping with 

the host property and the surrounding area. The proposal would not create any significant 

increase in any loss of amenity or privacy. The two proposed windows to the side elevation are to 

be fitted with obscurely glazed glass to prevent any potential loss of privacy to the neighbouring 

property. 

The proposal complies with the relevant criteria contained with Policies G1 and H23 of the Local 

Plan and is duly recommended for conditional permission. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 31 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 



Development: 


S.04/1384/FUL 

Castle Lodge, Cheltenham Road, Painswick, Stroud 

9569 


387614,212634 


Erection of a single storey greenhouse/store. (Existing outbuilding to 

be demolished). 

Mr And Mrs P Moody 

Castle Lodge, Cheltenham Road, Painswick, Stroud, Glos, GL6 6TU 

Agent Details: Brooks Chartered Surveyors 

2 Princes Street, Bath, BA1 1HL 

177

Case Officer: 



Tim Brookman 






Reason: 



Informatives: 


Parish / Town 






The proposal is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies G1 

and N6 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001). These policies seek to ensure that proposals have 

no adverse affect on the amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of 

neighbouring dwellings by way of loss of light or an overbearing impact 

and that any development is sympathetic and in keeping with the AONB. 

The design, location, scale and size of the development are all 

considered to be appropriate. The proposed development would not be 

unduly detrimental to the character of the area and the AONB. The 

proposed materials are in keeping with the existing house and the plot 

size is considered able to accommodate the proposal without appearing 

cramped or overdeveloped. There are no neighbours in the immediate 

vicinity that would be affected by the development. Adequate amenity 

space remains for the private use of the occupiers of the property, in 

accordance with the Council's adopted standards as outlined in its 

Residential Design Guide. 

Object 

The site is in a prominent position alongside the lane leading to the Beacon from the Royal 

William Inn. The absence of any landscaping between the site and the lane will make the 

proposed store very visible. The replacement building will be considerably larger and higher than 

the existing derelict structure. Our recommendation is that the present building be demolished 

and the proposed store be positioned to the south of the site, towards the Beacon, where there 

are various trees and bushes which would make the structure less visible from the lane. 

178



Site Report: 


This application is reported to the Committee in view of the objection by Painswick Parish 



The application site is a large detached dwelling that is constructed from reconstituted stone with 

concrete tiles on the roof and it has black PVCu windows. The dwelling is accessed via a track, 

which runs behind the Royal William and up to Painswick Beacon. The property is set in a large 

area of gardens and grounds, which slope down from the dwelling and look out over the valley. 

The proposal site currently contains a part stone and part rendered out building, with a flat 

corrugated roof, which is in a dilapidated condition. It is located away from the main dwelling and 

is adjacent to the lane and the walled boundary. 

The proposal seeks permission to erect a single storey greenhouse/store with the existing 

outbuilding to be demolished. The proposed materials include reconstituted stone walls to match 

the existing dwelling, a slate tile roof and a powder coated conservatory frame with glazing. 

179



Application S.99/901. Erection of replacement store building and retention of existing stable block 

following permission S.5969/Y dated 12/06/1990. Approved 08/03/2000. 


The application is considered under policies G1 and N6 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised 


Policy G1 States 



privacy or have an overbearing effect". 

Policy N6 States 

"Development within, or affecting the setting of the AONB will only be permitted if all the following 

criteria are met: the nature, siting and scale are sympathetic to the landscape; the design and 

materials complement the character of the area; and important landscape features and trees are 

retained and appropriate landscaping measures are undertaken". 

The objection by Painswick Parish Council is noted but the proposed design is not inappropriate 

and its development would not be unduly detrimental to the character of the area and the AONB. 

The proposed design and materials are in keeping with the rural area and they complement the 

existing dwelling and the setting. 

Therefore the proposal is in accordance with policies G1 and N6 of the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and permission is recommended. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 32 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1180/FUL 


Greenhay Farm, Coombe , Wotton-Under-Edge, Gloucestershire 

18745 

Wotton Under Edge Town Council 

180


Development: 



Case Officer: 




Proposed alterations and additions to existing farmhouse and 

refurbishment of existing outbuildings including swimming pool, 

gymnasium and stabling of livestock. (Re-submission following refusal 

S.03/1781). 

Mr & Mrs Davies 

Greenhay Farm, Coombe, Wotton-Under-Edge, Glos, GL12 7ND 

Pantecknikon 

Cotsal, Bisley Road, Stroud, Glos, 







Reason: 








Reason: 


3. The hereby permitted shall only be used for domestic purposes incidental 

to the enjoyment of the dwelling house as such, and not for any 

industrial, commercial or business use. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of nearby residential 

property. 

4. The development hereby permitted shall only be used for domestic 

purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house as such, and 

shall not be converted to, or used as, living accommodation. 

Reason: 


the premises. 

5. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time 

other than in conjunction with the residential use of the dwelling known as 

181


Greenhay Farm; 

Reason: 

To ensure that no separate additional dwelling units are established on 

the site. 

6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in all respects in 

strict accordance with the approved plans 

Reason: 

To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the 

approved plans. 

Informatives: 


Parish / Town 








2001) which seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the 


reason of overbearing effect, noise or general disturbance. The design, 

scale, and size of the development is in keeping with the existing 

property and its wider setting. 

The proposal should also be considered against Policies B15 and B16 of 


June 2001 )which deal with the conversion of buildings in open 

countryside. The proposal complies with these policies which seek to 

ensure that the building is used for a suitable use, is capable of 

conversion and that the conversion is in keeping with the local building 

styles and design. 

Support: An archaeological survey should be carried out because of the likelihood of medieval or 

even Roman remains in this area. Records show that Elias de Coombe was granted a licence in 

about 1260 to build a chapel which may have been on this site. 


182


Site Report: 


This application is brought before Committee as it was originally down to 'oppose' under the 

scheme of delegation. 

This application is for various alterations and extensions to the Grade II Listed farmhouse as well 

as alterations to outbuildings to provide a swimming pool, gymnasium and stable block. 

Members may recall that a similar application was refused last year under reference S.03/1781. 

This application differs from the previous in that it no longer includes a dependant relatives 

annex. However it now also includes a gymnasium and a stable block. 

The house is located in open countryside on the edge of the hamlet of Coombe and within the 

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

The main farmhouse has an attached barn to the front which is to be converted to form part of the 

main house. The proposal also includes other extensions to the main house which are in 

accordance with Policies B9 and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version 


183


The scheme involves the rebuilding and extension of a detached barn to provide a gymnasium 

and swimming pool. The proposal must be considered against Policies B9, B15 and B16 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) 

Due to the location of the buildings in relation to the farm house as well as the road network 

leading to the site the buildings are clearly not suitable for any other use than as domestic 

curtilage buildings. The proposal is therefore in accordance with policy H16 of the Stroud District 


Part of the barn is constructed of sub-standard materials and in purely planning terms is not 

worthy of retention in its current form. The applicant has provided a structural survey to 

demonstrate the degree of rebuilding which would be necessary to bring the buildings back into 

use in conjunction with the farmhouse. 

The proposal will involve substantial rebuilding which is not strictly in accordance with Policy B15 

of the plan. However the refurbishment of the curtilage Listed building and its retention in the 

farmyard setting of the listed building are considered important in Listed building terms and 

therefore a greater degree of refurbishment than usual is deemed acceptable. The proposal 

requires less alteration than the previous proposal and the repair and retention of curtilage Listed 

buildings is normally welcomed. 

The proposal will improve the setting of the listed farmhouse and is therefore in accordance with 

policy B11 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

The change of use of the building will preserve it as it is no longer required for the purposes of 

agriculture and may fall into further disrepair if the building is not brought back into use. The 

proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy B10 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised 


The remaining element of the application is to reinstate another former farm building at the other 

side of the site entrance which has been demolished. This building is to be re-built on its original 

footprint to provide stabling. The reinstatement of this building will enhance the setting of the 

Listed building due to the sense of enclosure it will add to the traditional farmyard. 

All of the buildings are to be used for domestic purposes incidental to the use of the farm house 

and should be conditioned as such. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 33 

Application 

Site Address: 

S.04/1244/FUL 

33 Upper Queens Road, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10 2QA 

184

Site No: 

Parish: 




25406 





Development: Erection of extensions. 

Case Officer: 


Mr N Jew 

33 Upper Queens Road, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10 2QA 

Dorrel Ferguson 

DF CAD Services, Unit 19 The Coach House, 2 Upper York Street, 

Bristol, BS2 8QN 

Rachel Brown 






Reason: 



2. No window or door openings (other than those shown on the approved 

plans) shall be formed in the north west and south east side elevations of 

the extension hereby permitted. 

Reason: 


property to comply with the requirements of Policy G1 of the Stroud 


Informatives: 






The proposal, subject to compliance with the conditions attached to this 

permission, complies with the provisions of Policies G1 and H23 of the 


2001). These seek to ensure proposals do not adversely affect the 


reason of loss of light, loss of privacy or have an overbearing effect. The 

185


Parish / Town 


size of the plot is large enough to accommodate the proposal without 

resulting in a cramped or overdeveloped site. The height, size and 

design of the proposal is in keeping with the scale and character of the 

parent dwelling. Following construction of the extensions, sufficient 

space will exist for use as private amenity space by the occupiers of the 

enlarged dwelling in accordance with the Council's adopted standards as 

outlined in its Residential Design Guide and available for the parking of 

vehicles in accordance with the Council's vehicle parking standards. 

Object: 

The size of the proposed development raises concern that it contravenes Policy H12 of the 

Stroud District Local Plan (Revised Deposit Version). If so, the Town Council would be unable to 

support this application. 



C Swain, Hilcot, 31 Queens Road 


186


Site Report: 


This application is referred to Committee in view of the Town Council's objections. 

SITE AND PROPOSAL 

This site is located on Upper Queens Road, Stonehouse. The property is a detached red brick 

dwelling with profiled concrete roof tiles. To the front of the property a 38m long garden leads 

down to the highway. To the rear the enclosed garden rises up away from the property. On the 

rear elevation of the property are existing two storey and single storey elements with an existing 

flat roofed single storey extension protruding beyond this. 

This proposal seeks permission for the erection of a ground floor lean-to extension on the rear 

elevation and a first floor extension over the existing single storey elements. The extension will 

provide utility and enlargement of lounge/dining room on the ground floor and a bedroom on first 

floor. External finishing materials will be to match the existing. 

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 

There is no planning history related to this site. 

187




Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). 

Policy H23 states: 

"Permission will be granted for the extension of residential properties, and for erection of 

outbuildings incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling, provided all the following criteria area 

met: - 

1. The plot size of the existing property is large enough to accommodate the extension of 

outbuilding without resulting in a cramped or overdeveloped site; 

2. The height, size and design of the extension or outbuilding is in keeping with the scale and 

character of the dwelling to be extended, and its wider setting; 

3. Following construction of the extension, or outbuilding sufficient space is available for the 

parking or cars, in line with the Councils Parking Standards, in a way that does not detract from 

the character and appearance of the area, and 

4. Following construction of the extension, or outbuilding sufficient private amenity space exists 

for use by occupiers of the enlarged dwelling." 





A letter of objection has been received from the occupier of the neighbouring dwelling. They 

object on loss of light to the back of their property. 

Stonehouse Town Council's revised objection to the proposal is on grounds of over-development 

of the site and they have concerns on the impact on neighbouring properties. 

With regard to Policy H23, the size of this plot is relatively large and it is not felt that this 

development will result in a cramped or overdeveloped site. The size and design of the proposed 

extension is in keeping with the scale and character of the existing property. The proposal will 

lead to a minimal increase in the ground floor plan to that of the existing property with the majority 

of the development being at first floor level. The substantial rear garden would remain available 

to provide ample private amenity space for use by the occupiers of the enlarged dwelling. 

With regard to Policy G1, whilst it is possible there may be an increase in loss of light to the rear 

of the neighbouring dwelling, it is not felt to be of a significant level to warrant refusal in this 

instance. 

Therefore, in view of the above, Policies G1 and H23 are satisfied and permission is 

recommended. 








188

ITEM No: 34 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 


S.04/1111/ADV 

Oxford Swindon And Gloucester Co Op, 26 High Street, Stonehouse 

Gloucestershire 

5835 



Application Type: Advertisement Consent 

Development: 



Case Officer: 

Erection of new signage. (Resubmission following refusal 

S.03/C0184/ADV). 

COOP OSG 

16 Cashes Green Road, Cainscross, Stroud, Glos, GL5 4JE 

Sign Specialists Limited 

46 Hockley Hill, Hockley, Birmingham, B18 5AQ 

Will Bridges 


Recommendation Consent 


Parish / Town 

Object: 

The first application for signage was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate following an appeal 

by the applicant. The Committee consider that the resubmission does nothing to alleviate the 

reasons for dismissal: 

The number of signs overburden the front of the building to the detriment of the street scene. 

Excessive signage is incompatible with the low-key signage of the High Street. 

Illuminated signage is out of character with the traditional street scene. 

The signs in their illuminated form would create a prominent and intrusive feature to the detriment 

of nearby residents. 


No highway objections subject to conditions. 


189


Site Report: 


The application is brought before this committee due to the objection and comments received 

from Stonehouse Town Council. 

The site is located within the central area of Stonehouse. The building is a large supermarket and 

has been constructed in two distinct phases, the older section is constructed from rendered brick 

work with grey composite tiles. The section to which the application relates is constructed from 

red brick with large plate glass windows in aluminium frames and a false pitched roof to the front 

elevation in composite tiles. 

The proposal is a revised scheme following a refusal and subsequent appeal that was dismissed. 

The scheme as previously submitted has been in place for some months now. This revised 

scheme is identical in appearance to the previous application except for the omission of the blue 

neon lighting element that down-lights the entire length of the fascia. 

Consultations. 

Stonehouse Town Council have objected to the application. 

The highway authority has no objection to the application subject to several conditions. 

190



S.03/936 Erection of new signage - Refused (16/07/03). 

S.03/C0184 Erection of new signage - Refused (29/01/04). 


The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within policy B18 of the Stroud District 

Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). The Policy seeks to allow 

advertisements that are sympathetic in style, siting and materials, location, number and design 

and where appropriate illumination to the building or location on which it is displayed and that it 

will not prejudice public safety. 

The addition of a new fascia in principle looks to be acceptable in this town centre location. The 

previous applications all incorporated both additional text signage and corporate branding to the 

fascia with blue neon strip lighting throughout the length of the fascia being included on the first 

application but subsequently removed from the most recent application. 

This revised application has reduced the amount of signage generally to the fascia of the 

property with the level of illumination being reduced as well. This would result in the illumination 

of the proposed signage being restricted to internal illumination of the co-op logos and the 

internal illumination of the text. 

This reduction in signage to the proposal, now has a suitable level of illumination for the town 

centre site and the style is acceptable and in accordance with the above mentioned policy. The 

application is therefore duly recommended for consent. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 35 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1362/FUL 

Robina, Churchend, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire 

21120 

Slimbridge Parish Council 



Development: 



Enlarge rear dormer windows. 

Mr A Bray 

Robina, Churchend, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire, GL2 7BL 

191


Agent Details: Compass Studios 

Church Cottage, Tortworth, Wotton Under Edge, Glos, GL12 8HF 

Case Officer: 

Tim Brookman 






Reason: 



Informatives: 


Parish / Town 

Object: 

Further overdevelopment of site. 

Will overlook neighbouring properties. 







The proposal is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies G1 

and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version (as 

amended June 2001). These policies seek to ensure that proposals have 

no adverse affect on the amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of 

neighbouring dwellings by way of loss of light or any overbearing impact. 

The design, scale and size of the development are considered to be in 

keeping with the existing dwelling and the wider setting. The plot size is 

considered able to accommodate the proposal without appearing 

cramped or overdeveloped. The neighbouring properties are shielded. 

Adequate amenity space remains for the private use of the occupiers of 

the property, in accordance with the Council's adopted standards as 

outlined in its Residential Design Guide. 

192


Site Report: 


This application is reported to the Committee in view of the objection by Slimbridge Parish 



The application site is a detached dwelling located in Churchend, Slimbridge. The dwelling is 

finished in an off yellow render with concrete tiles on the roof and white PVCu windows. The 

dwelling has a reasonably sized front parking area and has a large rear garden, which backs out, 

onto open fields. A 2m fence and a number of large trees and bushes bound the garden. The 

dwelling is currently being extended. 

The proposal seeks permission to enlarge the two dormers in the rear elevation and to change 

the Velux window to a dormer as proposed in application 02/2246. The changes to this 

application were seen as too big a departure from the original plans to be a minor amendment to 

that permission. 


193


App: S.02/340. Erection of a double garage with pitched roof. Approved 17/04/2002. 

App: S.02/2246. Erection of a single storey extension and loft conversion. Approved 11/03/2003. 

Request for a minor amendment to enlarge the dormer window on the front elevation. Accepted. 

Request for a minor amendment to enlarge dormer windows on the rear elevation and add three 

light dormer at the western end of the rear elevation. Not accepted. 


The application is considered under policies G1 and H23 of the Stroud District Local Plan, 


Policy G1 States 



privacy or have an overbearing effect". 

Policy H23 States 

"Permission will be granted for the extension of residential properties, and for the erection of 

outbuildings incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling, provided all the following criteria are met: 

1. The plot size of the existing property is large enough to accommodate the extension or 

outbuilding without resulting in a cramped or overdeveloped site; 

2. The height, size and design of the extension or outbuilding is in keeping with the scale and 

character of the dwelling to be extended, and its wider setting; 

3. Following construction of the extension or outbuilding, sufficient space is available for the 

parking of cars, in line with the Council's Parking Standards, in a way that does not detract from 

the character and appearance of the area; and 

4. Following construction of the extension or outbuilding, sufficient private amenity space exists 

for use by occupiers of the enlarged dwelling". 

The objection by Slimbridge Parish Council is noted but the proposal would not constitute over 

development of the site as none of building footprints are enlarged and enough amenity space 

would remain for the occupants. The plot size is considered able to accommodate the proposal 

without appearing cramped or overdeveloped. The proposed dormer enlargement and the new 

dormer would not be out of keeping with the area and the roof line is not altered. The extended 

dormers look over the field and the new dormer would be shielded by a number of trees and the 

neighbouring garage. It is noted that some of the garden of the neighbouring property would be 

over looked but the trees offer some privacy and enough private amenity space would remain 

around the rear and the opposite side of the property. The proposed design and materials are in 

keeping with the local area and they compliment the existing dwelling and the wider setting. 

Therefore the proposal is in accordance with policies G1 and H23 the Stroud District Local Plan 

Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001) and permission is recommended. 







recommended. 

194

ITEM No: 36 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 



Development: 


Agent Details: None 

Case Officer: 


S.04/0228/FUL 

Haresfield C Of E Primary School, Haresfield Lane, Haresfield, 

Stonehouse 

11741 


381489,210249 


Erection of extensions and alterations to replace temporary 


Head Of Corporate Property Services 

Gloucestershire County Council, Shire Hall, Gloucester, GL1 2TG 

Will Bridges 



No Objections 


Parish / Town 


Support but acknowledge that there is a concern of the height of the roof at the rear of the 

building raised by the householder in close proximity to the rear of the school. 


Recommend this application be refused on highway grounds for the following reasons: 

RQ12: The vehicular access intended to serve the site, from Upper Green Lane, is located at a 

point where visibility is restricted and the construction and use of this access would be likely to 

introduce conflicting vehicular movements in close proximity to and existing junction all to the 

detriment of highway safety. 

N13 Note: 

More favourable consideration may be given if the access were to be removed from the 

application or relocated away from the junction and its use restricted to emergency access only. 

195



Mr Hart, 7 The Merryfields, Haresfield 

Mrs A Robinson, Dovetail, Haresfield Lane 

M Stone, Willow House, Haresfield Lane 



• Loss of sunlight. 

• Rerouting of HT Cable will pose a danger to writers property. 


• Parking problems. 

• Playground next to a dangerous road and oil tank. 

• Devalue property. 

• Materials don't match existing. 


E Waterson, The Beeches, Haresfield Lane 

• Development not in keeping with existing Listed Buildings and surrounding properties. 

• Proportions of the construction overwhelm the site. 

• Road safety - entrance to the school is by the road. 

• Different plans submitted to those that were shown to the public during an open viewing 

session, the original plans were acceptable. 

196


Site Report: 


This application is brought before the committee due to the Council's initial opinion to oppose the 

application. 

Site Report 

This application is for the replacement of three temporary classrooms at Haresfield Church of 

England School with a large extension to the listed, original school building. 

The existing buildings are located within the playground area, to the north of the original building. 

The proposed extension would also extend to the north of the property and provide four 

additional classrooms, associated areas and a multi purpose hall to the north western corner of 

the site. This proposal would be phased with three overall phases, to accommodate the day to 

day functions of the school. 


There are several applications relating to the site in question, mainly concerning the provision of 

temporary classroom accommodation with the most recent application being S.99/1005 for the 

retention of the Elliott Classroom that was permitted on the 13th July 2000. 


197


The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within Policies G1 and B11 of the 


seek to allow development within the District subject to a number of criteria. These aim to protect 

and enhance the setting of the listed building, to which the extension is to be attached, as well as 

preserving the amenities of the surrounding properties. 

The scheme as originally submitted was initially opposed by officers due to the fact that the siting 

and massing of the proposed extension was such that it would have dominated the listed building 

on the site and would have had a detrimental effect on the overall street scene. The proposed 

materials were also not considered to sufficiently differentiate the two elements of the site (the 

extension and the listed building). 

Revised plans have now been received which address the issues mentioned, the siting, design 

and materials of the proposal have all been altered. Due to the size constraints of the site it is not 

possible to make hugely significant adaptations. However the proposal has been altered so that a 

larger area is made between the listed building and the extension, this when combined with the 

lowering of the ridge height and the fact that the extension has been set back from the highway 

frontage, means that the proposal is now considered to have a much reduced impact on the 

setting of the listed building and provides an improved street scene. 

The proposed extension, as now revised, would clearly have an effect on the setting of the 

adjoining listed building however the need for such an extension and the overall benefit from the 

proposal would outweigh any negative elements. With the constraints of the site in mind and the 

existing situation of the school it is considered that this scheme is the most acceptable outcome 

of the site with both Policy G1 and B11 being satisfied. 

As this application is one being determined by the County Council it is recommended that the 

application is returned to the County Council with no observations, subject to subsequent 

approval of the materials. The accompanying Listed Building application will have to be sent to 

the Government Office of the South West for determination. 







recommended. 

ITEM No: 37 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/0229/LBC 

Haresfield C Of E Primary School, Haresfield Lane, Haresfield, 

Stonehouse 

11741 


Grid Reference: 381489,210249 

198


Development: 



Case Officer: 




Erection of extensions and alterations to replace temporary 


Gloucestershire County Council 

Shire Hall, Gloucester, GL1 2TG 

None 

Chris Bladon 

Recommendation Refer to Government Office 


Parish / Town 

Support. 


1. The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five 

years from the date of this consent. 

Reason: 

To comply with the requirements of Section 18 of the Planning (Listed 

Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 

2. No development shall take place until samples of the facing brick and 

roofing slates to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of 

the building works hereby permitted have been submitted to and 

approved in writing by the Head of Development Services. Development 

shall then only be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason: 

In the interests of the preservation of the character of the listed building. 

199


Site Report: 


This application is reported to Committee in view of the initial opposition to the scheme. 

The Building 

Small Church of England Primary School dating from 1873 with various later additions. Plain tile 

roof with decorative patterning over red brick walls with buff and blue brick detailing. Coped stone 

verges and a small entrance porch at the road end with a bellcote above incorporating a carved 

panel depicting a hare. 

The Application 

This application is for alterations and extensions to the school. The proposal is for a phased 

replacement of various temporary buildings in the grounds, to accommodate the school in one 

permanent building. 

Policy Considerations 


200


Paragraph 3.12, says "In judging the effect of any alteration or extension it is essential to have 

assessed the elements that make up the special interest of the building in question." 



Internal spaces....... are part of the special interest of a building and may be its most valuable 

feature." 

Paragraph C.7 says, " Modern extensions should not dominate the existing buildings in terms of 

scale, material or situation. There will always be some historic buildings where any extensions 

would be damaging and should not be permitted. Successful extensions require the application of 

an intimate knowledge of the building type that is being extended together with a sensitive 

handling of scale and detail." 

Paragraph 2.16 of PPG 15 says Local Planning Authorities are required by the Planning (Listed 

Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 ".... to have special regard to the desirability of 

preserving the setting of a listed building. The setting is often an essential part of a building's 

character, especially if a garden or grounds have been laid out to complement its design or 

function. Also...the character of historic buildings may suffer, and they can be robbed of much of 

their interest, and of the contribution they make to the townscape or the countryside if they 

become isolated from their surroundings, e.g. by new traffic routes, car parks or other 

development". 

Paragraph 3.13 says, "Many listed buildings can sustain some degree of sensitive alteration or 

extension to accommodate continuing or new uses. Indeed, cumulative changes reflecting the 

history of use and ownership are themselves an aspect of the special interest of some buildings, 

and the merit of some new alterations or additions, especially when generated within a secure 

and committed long-term ownership should not be discounted. Nevertheless, listed buildings do 

vary greatly in the extent to which they can accommodate change without loss of special 

interest." 

Consultees. 

The Ancient Monuments Society whilst not entering a formal objection were concerned (in the 

original proposals) about the alterations to the interior of the listed building and that the 

extensions presented an unacceptable challenge to the historic frontage. 

Conclusions 

This is a small late Victorian School surrounded to the North and East by a sea of various 

temporary buildings- classrooms and an assembly hall. The setting of the building has therefore 

already been significantly compromised, although immediately to the North of the listed building 

is the school playground, which manages to retain something of the space around the building. 

The proposals are to replace the temporary buildings with a permanent extension to the school 

and the task is compounded by a relatively small site and the need to keep some of the 

temporary buildings in use whilst the building operations are in progress. A phased building 

programme will be necessary. 

The originally submitted scheme caused your Officers some concern in terms of the alterations to 

the building and the effect on its setting. The siting and massing of the extension was such that it 

would have dominated the listed building. Additionally the materials were felt to be too 

complementary to the existing materials making it more difficult to differentiate between extension 

and parent building. Additionally the proposed scheme use the listed building for all the 

administrative functions of the school, dividing it up into a series of small spaces. This was seen 

as harmful to the large single space with its typical folding screen. 

201


Revised plans have been submitted which have changed the siting, design and materials of the 

proposed extension. The size of the site makes it difficult to make major changes in terms of 

siting but the revised proposals have made a larger space between listed building and extension. 

The building has been set back from the road frontage making it less challenging to the front 

elevation of the listed building. 

The interior alterations now retain the large single space and the folding screen, thus preserving 

more of the character of the interior of the building. 

The proposed changes will permanently alter the setting of the listed building and the tight site 

means almost inevitably that the extensions are nearer to the listed building than might be 

desirable in a perfect world. However, offset against this is the considerable gain in the loss of 

the ugly temporary buildings. The changes in the design and materials of the extension mean 

that the difference between listed building and extension is emphasised and the reduction in 

height and changes in plan form and siting all combine to make this a more acceptable proposal 

in terms of the character and setting of the listed building. This is a County Council application 

and the Secretary of State ultimately makes the decision. You are therefore recommended to 

refer this application to the Secretary of State with no observations. 








ITEM No: 38 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1294/LBC 

Court Moat, Stone, Berkeley, Stroud 

14079 

Ham And Stone Parish Council 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Retrospective application for erection of conservatory and alteration to 

fireplace. 

J Nowicki 

Court Moat, Stone, Berkeley, Stroud, Gloucestershire, GL13 9JY 

None 

Natalie Foster 

202






Parish / Town 

Support: 

In keeping with the property. 



1. The proposed works are contrary to the guidance laid out in Paragraphs 

3.3, 3.12, 3.13, C.5, C.7, C.37, C.47 and C.49 of PPG 15, 'Planning and 

the Historic Environment'. 

The removal and subsequent treatment of the fireplace has caused harm 

to the historic fabric of the house and to the character and appearance of 

the Listed building. 

2. Whilst the principle of a conservatory may be acceptable, the existing 

building is inappropriate in terms of methods of construction, materials 

and design. PPG 15 is clear that the use of UPVC is nearly always 

unsuitable in historic buildings. 

The present conservatory detracts from, and causes harm to, the 

character and appearance of the historic building. 

203


Site Report: 


THE BUILDING 

Court Moat is a late 18th century house. It was added to the Statutory List in 1952, Listed Grade 

II. 

Based on an L- shaped plan, this substantial farmhouse is brick built under a clay tile roof. It 

features 3- light wood mullion and transom leaded windows with segmental arched heads and a 

6 fielded panel front door with a 19th century gabled timberwork porch. 

Whilst its main frontage was designed to make a grand statement, its side elevations are more 

modest. The garden front has seen the addition of a wood effect UPVC conservatory, built some 

time after 1986. 

Access to the conservatory is gained through a doorway from the kitchen, created by cutting 

through a chimneybreast. 

THE APPLICATION 

This is a retrospective application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a conservatory 

and alterations to a chimneybreast to provide access through. 

CONSULTEES 

Ham and Stone Parish Council have supported the application, stating that the works are in 

keeping with the listed building. 

204


POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 

Policy considerations with regard to listed building matters are given in PPG15 "Planning and the 

Historic Built Environment": 

Paragraph 3.3 states, 'There should be a general presumption in favour of the preservation of 

listed buildings, except where a convincing case can be made out ...for alteration or demolition.' 

Paragraph 3.12 says, ' In judging the effect of any alteration or extension it is essential to have 

assessed the elements that make up the special interest of the building in question.' 

Paragraph 3.13 says, 'Many listed buildings can sustain some degree of sensitive alteration or 

extension...Indeed, cumulative changes reflecting the history of use and ownership are 

themselves an aspect of the special interest of some buildings, and the merit of some new 

alterations or additions...should not be discounted.' 

Paragraph C.5 states, 'Subsequent additions to historic buildings, including minor accretions such 

as conservatories, porches, balconies, verandas, door dressings, bargeboards or chimneys, do 

not necessarily detract from the quality of a building. They are often of interest in their own right 

as part of the building's organic history...' 

Paragraph C.7 says, 'Modern extensions should not dominate the existing building in either scale, 

material or situation. There will always be some historic buildings where any extensions would be 

damaging and should not be permitted. Successful extensions require the application of an 

intimate knowledge of the building type that is being extended together with a sensitive handling 

of scale and detail.' 

Paragraph C.37 states, 'Modern off-the-peg doors are not generally acceptable for use in listed 

buildings, nor are doors with incongruous design features such as integral fanlights. Unpainted 

hardwood or stained or varnished softwood doors are rarely suitable.' 

Paragraph C.47 says, 'Paint is usually the correct finish for timber windows; staining is not a 

traditional finish and should not normally be used. However, early windows of oak were 

commonly limewashed or left unpainted and these should not now be painted but left to weather 

naturally.' 

Paragraph C.49 says, 'The insertion of factory made standard windows of all kinds, whether in 

timber, aluminium, galvanised steel or plastic is almost always damaging to the character and 

appearance of historic buildings. In particular, for reasons of strength the thickness of frame 

members tends to be greater in plastic or aluminium windows than in traditional timber ones.' 

CONCLUSIONS 

The subject of this retrospective application is a wood- effect UPVC conservatory, the removal of 

a fireplace and the creation of doorway through the chimney breast. These works were carried 

out without Listed Building Consent some time after 1986. 

Had this application been submitted prior to construction your Officers believe that it would not 

have been looked on favourably. 

In itself, the removal of the fireplace (a 1950s ceramic tiled replacement) would not have been an 

issue. However, the manner in which the new doorway has been formed, involving significant 

destruction of historic fabric, is insensitive and unacceptable. 

The modern stained hardwood door between the kitchen and the conservatory is inappropriate 

for a Listed building and clearly contrary to PPG 15 policy. 

Whilst the building of a conservatory may be acceptable in principle, the methods of construction, 

design and materials used in this case are all unsuitable. Your Officers are currently involved in 

pre- application discussions with the new purchasers about a possible replacement of the 

205


conservatory to be built along more traditional lines and using more appropriate and sensitive 

materials. 

The alterations that have been carried out to Court Moat have harmed the historic fabric of the 

building, and its character and appearance. This Application is therefore recommended for 

Refusal. 








ITEM No: 39 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 

S.04/1030/LBC 



Development: 



Case Officer: 


Seynckley, Culver Hill, Amberley, Stroud 

16343 



Internal alterations. (Resubmission following withdrawn application 

S.04/0320/LBC). 

R Curtis & M Bremner 

Hill House, St Chloe, Amberley, Stroud, Glos GL5 5AS 

Verity And Beverley 

Spencer House, 34 Long Street, Tetbury, Glos, GL8 8AQ 

Chris Bladon 


Recommendation Consent 



Reason: 



2. The existing chimneypiece (fire surround) in Bathroom 2 on the first floor 

shall be retained in situ and without alteration. 

206


Reason 

To ensure the retention of an important component of the special 

architectural interest of the listed building. 

3. The carved panel above the new door location to Bedroom 1 on the first 

floor shall be retained in situ and without alteration. 

Reason 

To ensure the retention of an important component of the special 

architectural interest of the listed building. 

Informatives: 


Parish / Town 

Object: detrimental to II* Listed Building 


1. For the purposes of Regulation 2 of the Planning (Listed Building and 

Conservation Areas)(England)(Amendment) Regulations 2003, the 

reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below. In considering 

the application, the Council has given special regard to the desirability of 

preserving the building or its setting or any features of special 

architectural or historic interest it possesses. Where relevant, reference 

is made to Government policy set out in PPG 15 "Planning and the 

Historic Environment." 

The changes affect mainly C20 fabric that is not of special interest. 

Paragraph C.58 of PPG 15 is intended to protect the plan form of 

buildings, and none of the proposed alterations will cause any harm to 

the plan form or to features contained in those spaces. 

207


Site Report: 

The Building 


Large detached house, Grade II* and first listed in 1960. Dating from the late C15 with two major 

C17 phases, one being a well-documented addition of 1698 as part of alterations to form a 

Charity School. Built in random and coursed rubble limestone under a stone slate roof, this is a 

hollow square building with a high walled courtyard forming the fourth side. Contains many 

surviving internal features and includes alterations of 1909 by Sidney Barnsley for Henry Payne, 

the stained glass artist. 


This application is for internal alterations in various parts of the building. The Previous 

application, S.04/0320/LBC was withdrawn. 

Consultees 

Minchinhampton Parish object to the proposals, which they say, are "detrimental to the listed 

building." 



English Heritage have no objections and say that the application should be "...determined with 

the benefit of conservation advice locally" 







Internal spaces.......are part of the special interest of a building and may be its most valuable 

feature." 

Conclusions 

S.04/0320/LBC was a far more extensive application involving more alterations than the present 

proposals. This application was withdrawn and all the contentious items have been removed in 

this new submission. 

The majority of the proposed alterations involve minor changes in plan form, which occur at all 

three floor levels. None of the changes affect historic fabric, as the partitions being altered are 

mostly C20 alterations that are not of special interest. A raised platform in the ground floor of the 

North range will be removed, but this is again of C20 construction. None of the proposals is 

significant in its own right and there is no collective harm to the character of the listed building. 

Your Officers assume that the Parish Council comment has re iterated what they said previously 

without considering the impact of much altered proposals. You are therefore recommended to 

grant listed building consent for these alterations. 

As this is a II* Listed Building the application will have to be referred to the Government Office of 

the South West before the notice is issued. 








209

ITEM No: 40 

Application 

Site Address: 

Site No: 

Parish: 




S.04/0404/LBC 


Seynckley, Culver Hill, Amberley, Stroud 

16343 



Development: Extension to studio cottage in grounds of Seynckley House to create 

ancillary accommodation for applicant's parents. Revised drawings 

rec'd.13/5/04 and 3/6/04. 



Case Officer: 


Mr. R. Curtis And Ms. M. Bremner 

Hill House , St Chloe, Amberley, Stroud, Glos 

Verity And Beverley 

Spencer House, 34 Long Street, Tetbury, Glos, GL8 8AQ 

Chris Bladon 


Consent 



Reason: 



2. Prior to the commencement of any works for which consent is hereby 

given, large scale plans shall be submitted to and approved in writing by 

the Head of Development Services showing details of the design, 

construction, materials, surface finish and method of glazing of all 

proposed windows and external doors. The details shall include any 

stone surrounds and mullions etc to windows and doors.. The works 

shall then only be carried out strictly in accordance with those approved 

details. 

Reason: 

To ensure the preservation of the character and appearance of the listed 

building. 

Informatives: 

1. For the purposes of Regulation 2 of the Planning (Listed Building and 

Conservation Areas)(England)(Amendment) Regulations 2003, the 

reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below. In considering 



Parish / Town 


the application, the Council has given special regard to the desirability of 

preserving the building or its setting or any features of special 

architectural or historic interest it possesses. Where relevant, reference 

is made to Government policy set out in PPG 15 "Planning and the 

Historic Environment." 

The proposed extension meets the requirements of paragraph C.7 that 

requires that extensions should not dominate the parent building. No 

harm is caused to the plan form and internal features as required by 

paragraph C.58. 

Object: Close to Seynckley house and the designs of the proposed extension would be 

detrimental to the site. 



211

Site Report: 

The Building 


Large detached house, Grade II* and first listed in 1960. Dating from the late C15 with two major 

C17 phases, one being a well-documented addition of 1698 as part of alterations to form a 

Charity School. Built in random and coursed rubble limestone under a stone slate roof, this is a 

hollow square building with a high walled courtyard forming the fourth side. Contains many 

surviving internal features and includes alterations of 1909 by Sidney Barnsley for Henry Payne, 

the stained glass artist. The Studio, designed by Barnsley for Payne in 1911 (copy of original 

drawing on file) is a curtilage building to the Grade II* house. It is built of random rubble limestone 

under a stone slate roof. 


This application is for alterations and extensions to The Studio. 

Consultees 

English Heritage objected to the original submission, re iterating what they said about a previous 

application. They felt that the proposals were too extensive for this modest building. They also 

said that the applicants should establish the significance of the structure before developing a 

scheme more appropriate for its importance. 







Internal spaces.......are part of the special interest of a building and may be its most valuable 

feature." 

Paragraph C.7 says, " Modern extensions should not dominate the existing buildings in term of 

scale, material or situation. There will always be some historic buildings where any extensions 

would be damaging and should not be permitted. Successful extensions require the application of 

an intimate knowledge of the building type that is being extended together with a sensitive 

handling of scale and detail." 

Conclusions 

Planning Permission for the use of The Studio as a separate dwelling has already been granted 

but these proposals are alterations to create living accommodation for dependant relatives. 

The scale of the proposed extension has been reduced in terms of its footprint and height with 

the aim of ensuring that the extension was genuinely subservient to the parent building. Your 

Officers believe that this reduction in size has met the English Heritage objection. 

The applicants were asked to provide more information about the nature of their alterations, 

especially in respect of the works to the interior of the building, where it is essential that the 

important original features be preserved. The additional information received on 3/06/04 confirms 

that no important original features will be harmed. The alterations are largely confined to the 

212


removal of later additions, which are not of special interest. The restoration of the large glazed 

screen on the North elevation to the original Barnsley design will be a gain. 

The design of the extension is complementary to the parent building yet made distinct by the use 

of a glazed link. The external alterations will cause no harm to the setting of the Grade II* listed 

house. Accordingly you are recommended to grant listed building consent for these works. 

As this is a Grade II* Building the application will have to be referred to the Government Office 

before a decision is issued. 

. 








213

Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?