Allotment containers and access at Roots Allotments Land Off Abbots Leigh Road, Abbots Leigh

What was proposed

The application sought permission for two timber-clad containers, two CCTV cameras, a vehicle access and gravel access track, partly retrospectively.

“As set out in the introduction of this report, the existing use of the land for allotments is not development requiring planning permission. Therefore, the only matters which fall to be assessed under this application relate to operational development, namely the storage and office containers, CCTV cameras, the vehicular access and associated access track.”

“This application is part retrospective and so should be determined in part under section 73A TCPA as planning permission for development already carried out. The retrospective works include the relocation of the existing tools and equipment storage container (following removal of the access ramp and trailer), two CCTV cameras on wooden poles the formation of a new vehicle access and the associated gravelled access track into the site.”

Officer report

The site

The allotment field lies in the Green Belt near Leigh Woods, listed buildings and a registered historic park and garden.

“The application site is located off Abbots Leigh Road and is accessed off an unadopted private access road which serves the Leigh Woods Forestry Commission car park. The site comprises a field consisting of 5.403 hectares (Ha) which is being used for allotments. The site is accessed via an entrance which has been formed approximately 29 metres from the junction with the A369.”

“The application site is located within the Green Belt and is adjacent to Leigh Woods and the registered historic park and garden for Leigh Court. Grade II Listed buildings ‘The Gateway and West Gateway’ are situated opposite the entrance of the site.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the works were ancillary to lawful allotments, preserved Green Belt openness and complied with relevant planning policies.

“As referred to in the report above openness is held to be an absence of development and may have both visual and spatial aspects. When assessing if openness is ‘preserved’ it is important to look at the visual and spatial character of the surrounding land and decide whether the established character of openness is preserved. Officers have considered the openness of the area is perceived in the context of other development in the area.”

“Officers have considered the cumulative effect of the existing allotments together with the development applied for and have concluded that it does not impact the visual and spatial openness of this part of the Green Belt. Officers have considered openness in the context of the existing allotments.”

Officer report

What people said

Objections raised Green Belt, ecological, heritage, landscape, highway, privacy, neighbour and commercial-use concerns; supporters cited biodiversity, security, storage and wellbeing benefits.

“Green Belt. • No very special circumstances have been provided • Substantial harm to the Green Belt due to the cumulative impact • Harms the openness of the Green Belt. Ecological and Environmental Concerns • The ecology considerations have not been adequately considered even though there is evidence of protected species being present on the site • Ecological impact – loss of habitat. The ecology report has undervalued the biodiversity of the site.”

“Highway impact • Survey by applicant was taken in October and not during peak estimated usage. Data has been taken from the Roots Bath site which is not comparable. • Increase in vehicle movements leading to adverse traffic impact • Concerns raised about the suitability of the existing highway networks to support the intensified commercial use and the potential for increased accidents • The new access also serves as a joint pedestrian access to the site however there is no…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident spoke against the application, the applicant spoke in support, and the ward councillor addressed the committee.

What members debated

Members asked questions and debated whether the ancillary site office and CCTV were necessary on an allotment site.

“Members debated the application and asked questions to which the officers responded. Questions were asked whether an ancillary site office and CCTV were necessary on an allotment site.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The committee resolved to approve the application in line with the officer recommendation, subject to an additional timber-cladding condition.

“Motion: that the application be APPROVED in line with officer recommendation, subject to the addition of the following condition:”

“Both shipping containers approved shall be clad in vertical timber boarding to minimise visual impact and assist integration into the rural setting. The cladding shall be installed within three months of the date of this permission, in accordance with the details submitted with the application. It shall be retained and maintained in good condition for as long as the containers remain on site.”

Minutes