15th June 2015

Bloor 2, land off Arnolds Way

Current status: Reserved Matters application approved by officers on 14 February 2018. (Registered by NSC on 25 Sept 2017.)


Reserved Matters application no. 17/P/2253/RM

The following are excerpts from the Planning Officer’s report:

  • 107 Dwellings comprising 4 x 5 bed, 46 x 4 bed, 41 x 3 bed and 16 x 2 bed.
  • The applicant is not prepared to agree to [Yatton] Parish Council’s request that four bungalows be provided on the site on the grounds of viability.
  • Because land has been secured under the s106 agreement for the proposed extra care apartments, there is no requirement for the provision of affordable housing within the current application site area. The 30% Affordable Housing provision for Phase 2 as required by policy and the Outline Planning permission / Section 106 Agreement is provided within the proposed Extra Care part of the outline site which is shortly to be the subject of a separate detailed planning application submission by a Housing Association provider. There is therefore no requirement for the additional provision of affordable housing within the residential red line of this reserved matters planning application.
  • The site will be within the newly defined settlement boundary for Yatton.
  • North Somerset Levels Internal Drainage Board object[ed] to the application… “the drainage path from this site passes into a particularly vulnerable area which already suffers from periodic water-logging and flooding of both highways and domestic and commercial properties. Notwithstanding any attenuation arrangements which can at best only mitigate the consequences of developing green field land, the increased volumes of run-off from the development will inevitably exacerbate the existing problems in the catchment.” [NSC has sought further detail/clarification on these issues…]
  • Surface water drainage has been a particular area of concern throughout the consideration of this Reserved Matters application however, following several initial shortfalls in providing adequate information, it is now considered that satisfactory detail and mitigation is now in place to resolve the previously identified areas of uncertainty.
  • [Yatton] Parish Council has sought footpath provision to the main road adjacent to school land/extra care and towards the north eastern end of the applicant’s Phase 1 development. The location of such a footpath link however falls outside the site area of this particular Reserved Matters application, and indeed outside of the applicant’s Phase 2 outline consented area. There however exists the undeveloped area of land that was identified under the applicant’s Phase I development for a possible school site. The area of land in question would appear to support the opportunity to accommodate a footpath connection between the applicant’s Phase I development and North End Road which in turn will integrate with the wider aspirations for a cohesive and safe infrastructure in the future within the northern part of the Parish.
  • The red line of the outline application however covered a greater site area than this reserved matters application which excludes the site of the proposed primary school and an extra care development, which it is understood will comprise approximately 40 60 apartments.
  • On site Archaeological evaluation commenced in August 2017 in the form of strip, map and sample in two separate areas falling within the red line boundary for the outline planning permission 15/P/1488/O. The northern area is now complete, which was in the boundary of this reserved matters application and the other is located within the Extra Care boundary. These two areas were chosen due to the high level of archaeological activity and the requirement to assess the character, survival, date and extent of this resource. The area proposed for the Extra Care facility is still undergoing evaluation and a roadside cemetery of possible Roman to post-Roman date is being excavated within this adjoining area. There are some residual features in the southern area of the development area that showed up on the geophysical survey. The current excavations appear to have located the most significant areas of archaeology and are being evaluated accordingly. It is unlikely that the remaining features in the reserved matters application area will be of high enough significance to warrant further investigation. Therefore, there is no objection raised by the Council’s archaeologist with regard to the Reserved Matters consent.

YPC s106 request to NSC

Outline planning application no. 15/P/1488/O

Granted outline planning permission on 9 March 2016, “subject to finalising a legal agreement. Heads of Terms have been drafted, further discussions ongoing between Roger Willmot, Strategic Developments Manager, and Bloor Homes, specifically in relation to affordable housing and social services. No evidence that site cannot be delivered quickly.” – NSC

Bloor Homes submitted an application for outline planning permission to NSC on 19 June 2015. The case file appeared on the Council’s planning portal on 30 June 2015.

bloor-proposed-second-phase-700

bloor2-app-letterOn 16 April 2015 Bloor put in a formal request (15/P/0872/EIA1) for a ‘screening opinion’ on whether an Environmental Impact Assessment is required to be submitted with a planning application for a further 200 homes on their second tranche of land behind the houses on the left-hand side of North End Road in the direction of Clevedon – until just before the Bridge Inn.

Bloor was granted outline planning permission for phase 1 in July 2014.

nst-10062015

bloor2doordrop
2nd phase concept plans delivered to addresses in North End


Objections:

We are very concerned with the cumulative effect of multiple housing applications, and there are some interesting comments on the ‘overall concerns relating to drainage in Yatton’ in this internal memo [PDF] from the Council’s Flood Risk Management Team…

Since the original application in Arnolds Way, Yatton, we have had several pre-planning enquiries and applications and both Flood Risk Management NSC and the Internal Drainage Board are now concerned about how surface water (peaks and runoff volumes) from these new developments will be conveyed from the area without causing standing water on the new sites or increasing the risk to existing properties on the fringes of the village. It is the combination of several developments which will influence the drainage of the area.

This page was last updated on: 15 Feb 2018


Every care is taken to keep the information on this page accurate and up-to-date. Please notify us if you believe any information to be inaccurate or inappropriate. 

4 thoughts on “Bloor 2, land off Arnolds Way

  • Following the meeting last Monday (20 July 2015) at Hangstones – I have just submitted an objection to Bloor 2 – heavily drawing upon your advice above and example letter – adjusting it accordingly and adding my own comments.

    I am keen to write letters to the Press (Daily Telegraph) and to our MP, Dr Liam Fox as I am firmly of the belief that nationally we need population control rather than uncontrolled population growth, which is causing mass over-development of our precious green fields.
    (I do not wish to get mired in controversial politics).

    I would welcome any advice as to how further letters/actions by concerned citizens such as myself can have maximum impact upon our policy makers, to prevent them riding roughshod over local opinion. Does local democracy count for nothing?

  • The infrastructure of the village will not cope with all the extra people – doctors, schools, etc – and also the extra traffic on the roads. It’s bad enough getting through our village now (especially between The Avenue and Barberry Farm Rd) on the High Street, plus the heavy lorries.

    Yatton was a lovely reasonably quiet village and it will become a town – what a shame.

  • whilst it is very encouraging to read the many individual objections to Bloor 2 on the NSC planning website, making site specific comments create more impact towards ultimate decisions
    in particular , reading submissions of corporate bodies retained by Bloor shows up fundamental , even dangerous flaws in arguments set out by supporters of Bloor 2

    eg; planning statement of Bristol based TPA…..traffic research is very much in favour of a new cycling/walking path using the old Clevedon railway line to the station will mean less use of cars!…..bus services are fine…distances to precinct & schools are not a problem….& their traffic flow data are limited to just 1 hour peaks am& pm
    PACT analysis + YPC research doc of is hugely more realistic & based on reality rather than a limited academic exercise

    Barton Willmore submission is very aggressive towards NSC & dismissive over traffic issues….congestion on the High Street does not exist as far as they are concerned ( when viewed from their ivory tower in Bristol no doubt !)
    I sent in an objection which aims to expose traffic specific clauses in both TPA & BH predominantly ‘cut & paste’ styles…as much to create a basis for future objections when Persimmon/Taylor
    Wimpey et al put their plans into NSC
    L
    do also read the YPC doc of 12/15 which is on the NMD
    Site ….it is a very thorough doc & points towards site specific issues that can help give NSC planners evidence to challenge greedy planning agents/the financial @ legal might of distant commercial developers who, it seems, have little regard for local opinion…..or want to know about any objections

  • Please consider how the infrastructure will cope with this increase in housing …The road network simply will not cope with this massive influx of cars .The education of these children will require an army of coaches to take them to Clevedon. …as Yatton can’t accommodate them .The proposed site has no funding to build a new school.And finally …Please do not become ill …The health provision is inadequate currently …Some common sense please

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *