The Stroud District Council Development Control Committee met on 2 September 2025, and refused an application for the adaptation of a car showroom into an education facility due to concerns about its design and impact on the surrounding area. The committee also approved a schedule for Biodiversity Net Gain monitoring fees and reviewed the budget monitoring report for the first quarter of 2025/26.

Planning Application: 31 Kingshill Road, Dursley

The committee refused planning permission for the adaptation and extension of an existing car showroom into a new education facility (Use Class C2) at 31 Kingshill Road, Dursley (application S.25/0257/FUL).

The Planning Officer's report recommended refusal, and Councillor Bob Hughes called the application to the committee.

Key points raised in the officer's report included:

• The proposed development's design, scale, and detailing would be visually intrusive and incongruous, failing to respond positively to the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
• The scheme does not successfully replicate the architectural qualities of the adjacent garden suburb, nor does it reflect the historic proportions, detailing, or material palette of nearby designated heritage assets, including The Pike House and Nos. 2-10 Parsonage Street (Grade II listed), or the character of the Dursley Conservation Area located approximately 30 metres from the site.
• The development would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of these heritage assets and their settings.
• The proposed development lies within the 12.6km core catchment zone of the Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC)¹, where residential development, in this case 25 student and staff residential accommodation rooms, is considered to have a likely significant effect on the integrity of the protected site in virtue of increase visitation.
• In the absence of either a bespoke mitigation strategy or a financial contribution to the council's established mitigation scheme, the proposal fails to adequately mitigate its impact on the SAC.

The report stated:

On balance, the public benefits of the proposal are not considered sufficient to outweigh the identified harm to heritage assets and the poor design quality of the scheme. The proposal therefore fails to comply with the relevant provisions of the NPPF and Policies ES10, ES12 and CP14 of the Stroud District Local Plan.

Dursley Town Council supported the application, noting that an education facility was a much better use of the building compared to the previously permitted houses, and commented positively on the design of the proposed building.

Natural England submitted a no objection consultation response to the proposed HRA Screening in relation to the Severn Estuary.²

Severn Trent submitted a consultation comment which offered no objection, subject to detailed drainage design conditions.

The applicant responded to the HRA Screening, seeking a further reduction to the calculated mitigation due to the proposed use.

Biodiversity Net Gain Monitoring Fees

The committee approved the introduction of a S106 BNG Monitoring Fee Charging Schedule, as detailed in the Biodiversity Net Gain Monitoring Fees report. They also delegated authority to the Strategic Director of Place to review and update these fees every 12 months to reflect the actual costs in providing that service.

The council is allowed to charge 'S106 monitoring fees' under Regulation 122(2A) of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, to help cover the cost of monitoring Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) Section 106 legal agreements. The government suggests doing this via the publication of a 'S106 Monitoring Fee Charging Schedule' which sets out the fees which will be charged.

The report stated that:

The adoption of the proposed BNG monitoring fees will enable the council to reasonably resource its duty with regard to the monitoring and reporting of Biodiversity Net Gain within the District, relating to planning applications received by Stroud District Council.

The proposed fees for 2025/26 are:

Budget Monitoring Report Q1 2025/26

The committee reviewed the Budget Monitoring Report Q1 2025/26 and resolved to note the outturn forecast for the General Fund Revenue budget for the committee.

The monitoring position for the committee as at 30 June 2025 shows a projected net revenue underspend of £56,000 against the latest budget. The current budget for the Development Control Committee is £709,000.

Planning application fees are currently in line to be on budget for the year. As part of the budget approved in February 2025, the planning application fee income target has been reduced in 2025/26 (for one year only) by £350,000, from £1,438,000 to £1,188,000.

Pre-application fees and Planning Performance Agreement fees continue to be higher than budgeted, with a forecast of additional income of £173,000.

There is a forecast cost for planning appeals of £99,000. An earmarked reserve of £150,000 is available for the cost of planning appeals, however this cost is currently expected to be funded from within the additional planning income forecast.

There are currently expected to be vacancy savings, where posts are vacant before successfully recruiting to the posts, of £98,000.