Surgery in Stow – decision.
The article below is from the Cotswold Journal.
However the planning portal – tells us that the plans are passed.
COUNCILLORS have again rejected plans to build a new doctors’ surgery in Stow-on-the-Wold.
Developer John Nutbourne proposed plans for a surgery on the gypsy field, off Oddington Road, in April – months after having a similar application for the same site refused.
Mr Nutbourne’s original plan – which included five houses and a GP surgery – was turned down last July in favour of an adjacent plot at Tall Trees, owned by Jenny Scarsbrook.
Both sets of plans were presented to planning committee members at Cotswold District Council but they favoured the Tall Trees site, though both are located with the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
Despite omitting housing from his new application, it was again refused by Cotswold District Planning Committee last week because of fears it would negatively impact the AONB.
Mr Nutbourne said: “It seems illogical that they haven’t supported it. There has been a great deal of local support for our scheme.
“I feel that the council is basically defending harm to the AONB when both sites are in the AONB, over the actual long term care of local community in terms of a health care facility.
“If you roll the clock back this is the third time the Cotswold District Council Planning Committee have basically ignored the wishes of the community and this field affects people in Stow.”
Mr Nutbourne said he believes the gypsy field site was the best option because it will allow room for expansion, while Tall Trees will not. He also criticised the lack of a footpath access to the Tall Trees site.
Tall Trees architect Andrew Eastabrook said: “It [Tall Trees] has got plenty of room for expansion. It is a two-and-a-half acre field. It is not a constricted site. There is a footpath adjacent to the site which is useable by the public.”
He continued to say Mr Nutbourne’s plans were for “the wrong site”.
In its decision notice, Cotswold District Council said: “On balance, it is considered that the adverse impacts of the proposal outweigh the benefit of delivering a Primary Health Care Centre and as such, the proposal would not constitute a sustainable form of development.