Four bungalows at 22 Tyning Road, Saltford

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing bungalow and building four bungalows with an access road and landscaping.

“Planning permission was refused by Planning Committee on 22nd January 2026 for the demolition of the existing bungalow and the erection of 5no. bungalows with an access road and landscaping.”

“The current application seeks a revised scheme for the demolition of the existing bungalow, and the erection of 4no. bungalows on the site, with an access road and associated landscaping.”

Officer report

The site

The site was an existing bungalow with a large rear garden on a residential street within Saltford’s housing development boundary.

“Tyning Road is an existing bungalow within the housing development boundary of Saltford. It is located on a residential street which features a range of architectural styles and dwelling sizes. It has a large rear garden.”

Officer report

What people said

The parish council, a ward councillor and 14 objectors raised concerns including overdevelopment, parking, privacy, trees, biodiversity, drainage and traffic.

“- Overdevelopment of the site - Discrepancies in the application - In agreement with Saltford Parish Council comments - Impact to biodiversity - Offsite trees to offset loss of biodiversity unacceptable - Bungalow A1 on the boundary line shows overdevelopment - Number of dwellings should be reduced to three or two…”

“- Increase in traffic - Increase in on street parking - Insufficient levels of parking - Overdevelopment - Lack of EV charging - Loss of privacy - Overbearing and oppressive development - Poor outlook and loss of visual amenity - Potential overshadowing impacts - Inaccurate plans - Inadequate visibility splays - Tree siting conflicts with drainage - Removal of hedgerow and trees…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident spoke against the application, an architect spoke in support, and one ward councillor spoke while another councillor’s statement was read.

What members debated

Members discussed overdevelopment, the access location, overlooking, housing accessibility, the need for bungalows and the lack of a five-year housing land supply.

“In response to Members’ questions, it was confirmed: There would be some impact on residential amenity due to a degree of overlooking but this was not considered to be significant enough to warrant refusal. The proposal was for single storey housing and so this would reduce intervisibility with the neighbouring property. In terms of accessibility, the new dwellings would be all built to M4(2) standard. 3.”

“Cllr Gourley opened the debate and referred to the lack of a 5-year land supply for housing and the need for bungalows which were suitable for older people. She confirmed she was minded to support the application.”

Minutes

The votes

A motion to refuse permission was defeated by four votes to five, while a motion to permit was carried by five votes to four.

“Cllr Hughes spoke in support of the motion to refuse the application.”

“On voting for the motion to refuse the application, it was NOT CARRIED (4 in favour and 5 against).”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was granted subject to the conditions set out for the development.

“Cllr Simon moved the officers’ recommendation to permit the application as he considered it was a good use of the land and noted that the dwellings would be built to M4(2) accessibility standards. This was seconded by Cllr Gourley.”

“RESOLVED that permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.”

Minutes