MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY PARISH COUNCIL MEETING
HELD AT 7.30PM 2 OCTOBER 2009
IN
PRESENT ~ Cllrs. Ambrose (Chairman), Thompson (Vice Chairman), King, Sheppard, Delmas & Sage.
IN ATTENDANCE ~ Liaison Officer Sally Varley & Clerk Freda Shattock.
PUBLIC ~ 21 including 1 Press.
APOLOGIES ~ Cllrs. Mrs Moon, Mrs Shaw, Law, Pitt & Public ~ Roger Sykes.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST ~ Nil
RE:
LAND TO THE EAST OF
a)
Review of information we have received ~
It was acknowledged that some items were not on the
Web.
b)
Questions arising from the information we have. ~ Nil.
c)
Do we have enough information to make a decision ~ Yes.
d)
If yes, debate the Planning Application formally.
One Councillor to put the
case FOR.
Cllr. Thompson had been
asked to put the case for and his speech
included the following
comments ~
Housing shortage – Demand outstripping supply – Population
growth.
Government set a target of
10,500 before 2026.
Brown
field sites are finite and inevitably Green Belt has to be used.
Green
Belt legislation dates back to 30’s with most in 50’s – to stop
ribbon
development & settlements in the countryside.
With
prosperity comes the need for growth.
The land
in question is Grade 3 Agricultural land and so there is no
overwhelming reason for not using it for
residential use.
Mixed development complies
with Government Sustainable Development.
Work is proposed and facilities for the
over 60’s
A schools is proposed – this would be a feeder
school for St Catherine’s.
A better bus service is proposed.
The proposed development would be a high density;
twice the density of Failand triangle.
It would be built to high thermal efficiency.
Failand triangle provides no work – all workers must
travel.
There is nothing to suggest that anything worthy
would be lost.
If ‘Outline’ is approved it could be made more
viable later.
One Councillor to put the
case AGAINST.
Cllr.
Sage had been asked to put the case against and his speech
included
the following comments ~
Government is introducing major changes to planning policies –
The
draft RSS permits expansion of housing into immediately
adjacent
Green Belt ~ not 5 miles away.
This
proposal is classed as ‘inappropriate’ development in the Green
Belt. No
very special circumstances have been given to overcome
that.
There is nothing in the draft RSS to condone village expansion
into the
Green Belt at Failand indeed it prohibits such development.
Various
proposals e.g. Doctor’s surgery, School etc. could vanish
as the
proposal is only Outline and the applicant will not be the
builder:
The applicant states that the land, with planning
permission, will be sold on for development. Travel from Failand is
difficult for cyclists and pedestrians ~ it is very hilly to and from the surrounding areas and the roads are fast, unlit and at times suffer from Failand Fog The applicant indicates that this form of travel is a viable transport option. Cars are the only realistic option but that will add to the already congested roads. An increased bus service is muted using Section106 monies but the bus service they speak of only goes to one destination.
Although there is 22h of
land only 14h is for residential use.
This would indicate 169% higher density than in Failand’s existing
village. The development is not
sympathetic with the surrounding countryside.
The proposed location has more in common with National Trusts’
Tyntesfield than with the suburbs of
Many objections on the Web
site, only 1 for the proposal.
PC is very keen to support
the Parish Plan. The responses showed
82% ‘against additional housing development adjacent to Failand’.
Cllr. Sage stated that he
had been to the public meeting of the Working Group but was ‘in the audience
and had no involvement’.
The latter two were
for discussion purposes only and do not indicate any predetermination on behalf
of the Councillor concerned.
Cllr. King said
that the two presentations were both good but it must be remembered that when
the Elms was approved in 1989/90 it was much like this proposal. However all things other than houses and the
Nursing Home were ‘dropped’. The Nursing
Home was built to accommodate those from a NSC Home in Nailsea which they
closed. The land was held by the
developers for 5 years and as there were no takers to develop a Church or
School housing was built on than land.
He had grave
concerns on what is proposed. Green Belt
now may not be in the future. He
suggested that there could be ‘urban’ development adjacent to the Park & Ride/John
Lloyd Sports. The proposed
Cllr. Sheppard said
that it is clear that new homes are needed but he greatly disputes the numbers
given by Government.
Cllr. Ambrose
stated that, according to CPRE,
Cllr. Sheppard
reminded others that the Core Strategy is still awaited to see how much GB can
be moved.
The Primary Health
Care Trust would decide if a Doctor’s Surgery was to be build and the Education
Dept if a school should be built ~ NOT FLP.
He queried how much employment could be generated in the proposal. Much more would be needed to provide work for
residents of the 500 proposed houses plus those in the 300 houses already existing
in Failand. FLP could not justify
‘enhancing the lives of those living in Sixty Acres’. They state that there are no cycle paths and
no PROW’s through Tyntesfield. That is
incorrect ~ there are cycle paths and 3 ROW through Tyntesfield. He felt that the countryside should be shared
but not with such a dense development as that proposed.
Cllr. King queried
if NSC had a portfolio of brown field sites.
Cllr. Ambrose said
that they did.
MEETING CLOSED 8:15PM
Peterjohn Smyth made an ‘Aunt Sally’ comment:-
So that we know what we are up against he listed the following.
Failand is short of facilities.
It is a classic of what the Government want to avoid.
It is unsustainable.
Buses etc. could be seen as good by the Government ~ that will be
difficult to contest.
If not enough on site employment most would have to travel.
Emma Chapman, aged 10, gave her views:- Failand residents were not
being selfish in objecting to the proposals.
If there is building on the Green Belt there would soon be no fields
left. There would then be no horses or
stables and no employment on that land.
John Chapman, Chair of the Working Group, told us that members had been
made aware of objections. FLP ~ the land
speculators were exploiting the land.
The Working Group have had written support and substantial donations
from residents, and also from others outside of the Failand area, towards fees
to employ a planning consultant. One
hundred and twenty objectors attended a public meeting in FVH.
The proposed development fails to comply with the wishes of the Failand
residents as shown in Parish Plan responses.
If the proposal to develop this site is allowed then all the Green Belt
in Wraxall & Failand would follow.
Traffic would increase drastically.
The proposed development is twice the size of The Elms. The development in Long Ashton is smaller
that this proposal but has had an impact with residents going, for preference,
to shop in Nailsea.
There are already sufficient Planning Applications on the table to
build the houses said, by the Government, to be needed.
There are now approaching 200 objections on the North Somerset Web
site.
David Robshaw who lives on the existing part of Failand spoke about un-sustainability. The traffic in the morning going into
Colin Seabourne felt that it was an academic argument but realised that
the PC had to decide. He stated that he
and many others are bitterly opposed to the development. The Parish Plan looks to residents wishes
2009-2019. That plan shows the vast majority against build on Green Belt. He felt that the proposed development would
be a carbuncle! He was worried about the lack of infrastructure planned. FLP were only out to make a profit. Much of what they promise is only window
dressing – He urged the PC to take note of the Parish Plan. He commented that of the small amount of
employment that could be created, if all the development went ahead as
proposed, it would not necessarily go to locals. If it did not then there would be more traffic
coming in.
MEETING OPENED 8.30PM
Cllr. Ambrose said that planning applications are usually small but are
all considered logically. The PC have
taken a more detailed look at this one.
It does not meet any official plans or documents at present and no
special circumstances have been shown.
Cllr. Thompson said this was a serious dilemma ~ the PC have to
represent the parishioners but new houses are needed. However he felt that the
proposed site was totally wrong.
Cllr. King reminded councillors that they were elected by the
residents. The Parish Plan states that 82% of the residents of Wraxall &
Failand were against the proposal. Taking
just Failand residents the figure was 92% against. ‘Let us remember that we represent the
residents’.
Cllr. Sage said that Government proposals for new houses were to be
‘urban’. Failand was in no way ‘urban’.
Cllr. Ambrose reiterated that there were no special circumstances
shown.
The RSS would benefit the objectors. The emerging Core Strategy will
state that Failand is ‘rural’.
Emotion does not count.
The known views of residents
must be taken into account.
e)
Decision was then made by Councillors votes. Unanimously AGAINST.
f)
Action ~ Advise
Pass declaration
to Long Ashton.
The meeting of the Long Ashton Parish Council, to
make a recommendation, will be held on Monday 5 October 2009 in
Meeting closed at 8.45pm.