Farm access track at Land East Of Manor Road North Of Barrow Hill, Wick

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by South Gloucestershire Development Management Committee on 30 Oct 2025.

P25/01850/FApproved

No officer report was published for this decision; this summary is from the committee minutes.

What was proposed

The applicant said a new access track would not change the Green Belt's openness and would take farm traffic further from a listed barn.

“Attention was drawn to the planning history • The plan does not change the openness of the Green Belt • The track sits low and is screened by hedging • The plans represent a small, practical improvement that allows safe access to a home and smallholding, supporting a sustainable rural livelihood while maintaining the land.”

“Storage will now be outside the applicant’s our land, meaning more traffic, but the new access keeps it away from the Listed Barn and Beckside • Previous applications were submitted but not implemented to protect heritage and the Green Belt, but now officers advise that the business is not expanding enough to justify the access • Small scale, sustainable rural life should be supported • The alternative option suggested by officers would in fact be more harmful to both the…”

Minutes

Support from residents

Two local residents spoke in support, saying the track was low and screened by hedging and that the family's rural livelihood should be supported.

“The track sits low and is screened by hedging • Heritage assets remain protected • Taking farm traffic and activity further away from the Listed Barn enhances its setting • The applicants are committed to the considerate management of their land • Rural enterprise and a rural way of life should be supported • The applicant has undertaken extensive, biodiverse planting on his land…”

“Attention was drawn to the level of local support • Taking farm traffic and activity further away from the Listed Barn enhances its setting and provides greater safety for residents • If the plans are refused, the existing track will need to be widened and require an industrial sized gate, to the detriment of the Green Belt and heritage assets • The track sits low and is screened by hedging • The applicants are committed to the considerate management of their land, and the…”

Minutes

Ward councillor's view

The ward councillor said the applicants' personal circumstances and the level of local support should be taken into account.

“Councillor Ben Stokes spoke as the Ward Councillor and made the following points:”

“The personal circumstances presented by the applicants should be taken into consideration • The applicants are committed to the considerate management of their land • The plans represent a practical improvement that allows safe access to a home and smallholding, supporting a sustainable rural livelihood while maintaining the land • The track sits low and is screened by hedging • Attention was drawn to the level of local support • The applicant does not wish to create a…”

Minutes

Objection to the new access

A resident's letter said creating another vehicular access on the narrow, busy lanes was unreasonable and unnecessary.

“I am a Parish Councillor but am submitting this as a local resident. I use Barrow Hill and Manor Rd regularly along with other walkers, cyclists and horse riders. There is a busy livery at the bottom of the hill and a working farm at the top. These narrow lanes are sometimes used as 'rat runs', so, generally speaking, they become quite busy at times.”

“Putting another vehicular access onto these constricted lanes in such close proximity to an existing access and where Manor Road and Barrow Hill converge, is unreasonable and undesirable in this setting.”

Minutes

Officers' response

The planning officer said the application would not intensify the agricultural use, and the highway officer said access width concerns could be addressed by condition.

“Referring to the planning history and issues raised, the Planning Officer explained that the application now under consideration did not propose to intensify the agricultural use, and as such the need to separate the different traffic uses did not appear necessary as it would be no worse than the existing situation. Further, no evidence had been provided to suggest there were any safety issues with the current arrangement or that landownership issues are now a consideration.”

“The Highway Officer clarified that there was some concern regarding the width of the proposed access, which could be overcome through condition, rather than the proximity to an existing access.”

Minutes

Councillor's support

A councillor said the applicant had shown very special circumstances for Green Belt development and that public benefit outweighed the heritage harm.

“Councillor Tristan Clark spoke in support of the application. He noted that the NPPF was supportive of rural enterprise and considered that whilst the proposal did not fall within the limited categories of development normally considered appropriate within the Green Belt, the applicant had demonstrated very special circumstances and that the normal presumption against development in the Green Belt should be overridden.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Tony Williams moved to grant permission with delegated authority to set conditions, and the motion was carried 7 to 1 with one abstention.

“Councillor Tony Williams subsequently moved…”

“That officer be granted delegated authority to impose appropriate conditions.”

Minutes

Councillors at the meeting

Apologies Paul Hughes Conservative

Source: Plota analysis of the council's minutes; parties from the council's list of councillors.

Sources

  • South Gloucestershire Development Management Committee minutes, 30 October 2025
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of South Gloucestershire's committee minutes. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Date
Thursday 30 October 2025
Committee decided
Approved
Vote
7 for, 1 against, 1 abstained
Councillors
9Conservative 3Labour 3Lib Dem 3Show councillors
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.

This committee's year

9 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →