Meeting documents

The Federation of Bath Residents' Associations

Statement by Chris Beezley to B&NES' Council Executive meeting - 7th June 2006

Councillors,

This statement is made on behalf of the Federation of Bath Residents' Associations which represents approximately 5,000 of the city's residents. We understand that this and two subsequent meetings of the Executive will consider the Inspector's recommendations on and propose modifications to the Local Plan. We wish to draw your attention to recommendations R9.4 to R9.9 relating to the University of Bath site.

You will recall that the Revised Deposit Draft Local Plan proposes to remove 55 acres of land from the Green Belt at Claverton Down to facilitate expansion of the University of Bath. At R9.7 the Inspector recommends a significantly smaller amendment to the Green Belt boundary due to the exclusion of the 15-acre St John's Field from the proposal. St John's Field lies between Norwood Avenue and the Cat & Dogs' Home

The Inspector agrees with objectors, including this Federation, the National Trust and the Cotswolds Conservation Board, that St John's Field contributes to the fundamental purposes of Green Belt land by checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas, safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and preserving the setting and character of Bath. Further, she is not convinced that the necessary exceptional circumstances exist to justify re-drawing the boundary here (para. 9.32).

This Federation strongly welcomes this recommendation and the fact that the Inspector further recommends (R9.9) that St John's Field be included in a precisely-identified protected green heart to the campus and thus afforded long-term protection. We strongly urge the Executive to accept these recommendations accordingly.

However, consistent with its 2005 `Better for Bath' publication, the Federation is deeply disappointed that the remaining 40 acres are recommended for removal from the Green Belt when the Inspector has identified a `key objective' to maximise the development potential of sizeable areas of the existing campus not considered by the University in its evidence to the inquiry (paras. 9.25-9.26). The Federation submits that these could readily accommodate the claimed total requirement for additional floorspace (accepted without question at para. 9.24), including 1,750 student residences, without impacting the Green Belt at all.

The Federation notes that adoption of the Local Plan is currently scheduled for February 2007, i.e. some 6 months after the cut-off date beyond which a Strategic Environmental Assessment is required to be undertaken, referred to in the Inspector's covering letter. In the context of an independent Sustainable Development Appraisal which reported `major sustainability concerns' with the University of Bath proposal, the Federation believes that such a Strategic Environmental Assessment is essential before deciding the fate of land which will remain within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

To summarise, the Federation strongly urges the Executive to endorse the Inspector's recommendation to maintain St John's Field within the Green Belt long-term. We also call on B&NES to commission the mandatory Environmental Assessment as a matter of urgency to inform any final decision on the remaining 40 acres of land under threat of removal from the Green Belt.

Thank you.