Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft

Comment ID 8128065//2
Document Section Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities DM73 View all on this section
Respondent Deleted User View all by this respondent
Agent Deleted User
Response Date 18 Apr 2013
Comment

We are the owners of No. 60 Station Road Nailsea and write to support the removal of the allocation of the land to the rear of No. 60 Station Road as Amenity Space as currently shown on the adopted Local Plan Proposals Map. We note a number of objections from local residents to this deallocation who are resistant to development of this particular site and have requested that the site along with the wider area be designated as Local Green Space.


In response the site is privately owned and is used as a garden area in relation to the dwelling at No. 60 Station Road. The site is fenced off and no public rights of access to this site exist.
Previous appeals against the refusal of planning permission by NSC have been dismissed on the grounds that the site is an amenity area per se and because of the impact of the particular development to adjoining residents. Development has not been resisted because the site makes a contribution to the essential amenities of the area.  Indeed we question why the site was ever included.  Other neighbours who are now objecting to this proposal have built in their own back gardens and it would seem inconsistent to object on these grounds. 

The characteristics of the site include a number of trees that are the subject of a Group Tree Preservation Order. These controls will remain in place and the visual amenities of the site and the area are therefore protected.

The Council has removed the designation of this site as a Local Green Space because it does not comply with guidance in the NPPF which at para 77 requires that the following criteria be adhered to:


“The Local Green Space designation will not be appropriate for most green areas or open space. The designation should only be used:
• where the green space is in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves
• where the green area is demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance, for example because of its beauty, historic importance, recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquillity or richness of its wildlife; and

• where the green area concerned is local in character and is not an extensive tract of land”
As indicated above the site is privately owned with no existing or previous public rights of access. There is no evidence by the local community that the site meets the NPPF criteria i.e. the site holds a ‘particular’ significance, or is of particular wildlife significance. Ecological reports submitted with previous applications have demonstrated that development of the site would not be harmful to any protected species. The Council has never indicated through a desk top studies that the site is of ecological value.
The Council indicates in its evidence paper that privately owned sites should not be allocated as Local Green Spaces.


We would support the inclusion of the bridleway and the woodland which is public open space to the south of Nowhere Lane on the grounds that this meets the NPPF criteria fo LGS.

Attachments