98 dwellings at Land West Of Hatherop Road, Fairford

The site and its setting

The site was agricultural land beside Fairford, outside the district settlement boundary but allocated for housing in the Fairford Neighbourhood Plan.

“The application site is bordered to its north and west by agricultural fields. The northern and western boundaries of the site are defined by hedgerows. The eastern boundary of the site adjoins a lane which runs northwards from Fairford to the village of Hatherop approximately 3.5km to the north. Agricultural fields are located to the east of the aforementioned road. The site's eastern boundary is also defined by a hedgerow.”

“The site is located outside a Principal or Non-Principal Settlement for the purposes of the Cotswold District Local Plan 2011-2031. The southern boundary of the application site lies adjacent to Fairford Development Boundary as designated in the Cotswold District Local Plan 2011-2031.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because the neighbourhood plan allocation carried greater weight, the scheme provided housing and affordable homes, and impacts were considered manageable.

“This Council's Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (2021) recommended that both of the aforementioned sites are deallocated from the Local Plan. Site F_35B is deemed undeliverable and site F_44 is now unsuitable for development due to a recent Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) designation.”

“It is noted that the allocation of the current application site in the Neighbourhood Plan results in a development that is in conflict with Local Plan Policy DS4. In instances where there is a potential conflict between Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Policies, it is necessary to have regard to the Government's Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) which states that 'should there be a conflict between a policy in a neighbourhood plan and a policy in a local plan or…”

Officer report

Who spoke

Speakers included a town council representative, an objector, the agent and the ward member, who addressed housing, sewage, lighting, parking and infrastructure.

What members discussed

Members discussed school and surgery capacity, Thames Water commitments, landscaping, affordable and smaller homes, solar panels and the amount of parking.

“The Case Officer confirmed there was sufficient school capacity, with no education contribution required other than £19,208 for libraries. No issues had been raised by the NHS regarding GP capacity. • It was confirmed that the Environment Agency was not a statutory consultee; any discharge into watercourses would fall under their separate licensing and permit controls.”

“Concern was expressed about the lack of a response from the County Council on the impact on schools and queried whether the Town Council was confident that the local school and doctor’s surgery could cope with additional demand. • Support was given to ongoing engagement with Thames Water, highlighting the need for firm commitments to safeguard local infrastructure schemes.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor David Fowles proposed accepting the recommendation with delegated authority to amend conditions, and Councillor Julia Judd seconded it; the committee agreed.

“Councillor David Fowles proposed accepting the Case Officer’s recommendations to ACCEPT the application with Delegated authority to amend conditions and Councillor Julia Judd seconded the proposal. This proposal was put to the vote and agreed by the Committee.”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was granted subject to a legal agreement covering housing, biodiversity, conservation mitigation, open space, access and transport-related contributions.

“RESOLVED: to PERMIT the application subject to the completion of S106 legal agreement(s) covering affordable housing, custom/self-building housing, Biodiversity Net Gain monitoring, financial contribution to North Meadow and Clattinger Farm Special Area of Conservation, provision of public open space, access connection to field to west, financial contributions to library services, public transport and travel plan.”

Minutes