6 to 9 homes at Land East Of Cherry Gardens, Bitton

What was proposed

Permission in principle was sought for between six and nine dwellings on a 0.49-hectare parcel of land.

“Clearly as this is a PIP application technical detail is not available at this time, but other objections include building on the Green Belt, this site acts as a buffer between urban sprawl and the rural environs that is the make up of Oldland and Bitton.”

“OFFTEM 1.3 The permission in principle consent route therefore has two stages: -The first stage (or permission in principle stage) establishes whether a site is suitable in-principle, and -The second stage (‘technical details consent’) is when the detailed development proposals are assessed. 1.4If the grant of permission in principle is acceptable, the site must receive a grant of technical details consent before development can proceed.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the site met the Grey Belt definition, satisfied the relevant Green Belt requirements and was sufficiently sustainable.

“5.14The next issue to consider is whether the development accords with para. 155 in full. Para. 155 states that the development of homes [officer emphasis], commercial and other development in the Green Belt should also not be regarded as inappropriate where all the following apply: a)The development would utilise grey belt land and would not fundamentally undermine the purposes (taken together) of the remaining Green Belt across the area of the plan; b)There is a…”

“5.22Overall, it is considered that the site is sufficiently sustainable for new residential development of this scale, and so can be regarded as being in a sustainable location. The proposed development would therefore accord with the definition of grey belt as set out in the NPPF and would accord with para.155 in full. On that basis, the development would not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while transport raised no objection and drainage requested a detailed strategy at the technical details stage.

“OFFTEM PSP7Development in the Green Belt PSP8Residential Amenity PSP11Transport Impact Management PSP16Parking Standards PSP19Wider Biodiversity PSP20Flood Risk, Surface Water, and Watercourse Management PSP43Private Amenity Space Standards 2.3Supplementary Planning Guidance Design Checklist SPD (Adopted) August 2007 Residential Parking Standard SPD (Adopted) December 2013 Landscape Character Assessment SPD (Adopted) November 2014 CIL and S106 SPD (Adopted) March 2015 Waste…”

“4.3Drainage (LLFA) At Stage 2 ‘Technical Design Consent’ we require a Drainage Strategy’ including drawings which outlines full detailed foul sewage and surface water drainage provisions to be utilised.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in support, a local resident spoke against, and Councillors Erica Williams and Paul Hughes represented local concerns.

Members’ debate

Officers and specialists explained that only location, land use and amount were being considered, while detailed access and drainage would follow later.

“Regarding the suitability of a Permission in Principle application and need for an EIA and screening decision – the development does not fall within schedule 1 or 2 of the 2017 EIA regulations and therefore is not EIA development and does not need to be screened. • This is a minor development on a 0.49-hectare site. • Drawings show adequate visibility splays can be achieved based on the 85% percentile of speed data along the road.”

“It would be unreasonable to impose conditions upon the technical details consent to resolve an existing issue. • Members were being asked to look purely at whether the location was sufficiently sustainable and officers considered that the site was sufficiently sustainable for new residential development of this scale, and so the site could be regarded as being in a sustainable location.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to grant Permission in Principle was carried by seven votes to two, with no abstentions recorded.

“Councillor Angela Morey move that Permission in Principle be granted.”

“On being put to a vote, the motion, which was seconded by Councillor June Bamford, was CARRIED (7:2:0) and RESOLVED that Permission in Principle be granted.”

Minutes

The decision

Permission in Principle was granted.

“RESOLVED that Permission in Principle be granted.”

Minutes