Controversial proposals for long-awaited allotments on the edge of Bath have been refused by councillors, against the advice of their planning officers.
The proposals would have seen nine plots created at Derrymans Field at Combe Hay Lane
By a majority vote, Bath & North East Somerset Council’s planning committee rejected the application from Countryside Properties (Vistry) for nine plots at Derrymans Field at Combe Hay Lane.
The site is east of Odd Down Park & Ride and west of Phase 1 of the Sulis Down development of 171 homes.
As part of Phase 1, which was permitted in 2019, there was a Section 106 obligation for the developer to provide allotments within the allocated site prior to 50% of the homes being occupied.
The site at Derrymans Field is not in that allocated site, but in the Green Belt, Cotswolds National Landscape and an ecologically sensitive area.
There had been objections from organisations including the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, Bath Preservation Trust, South of Bath Alliance, Cotswolds Landscape Board, and both Combe Hay Parish Council and South Stoke Parish Council. More than 80 objections had also been received from the public, along with one comment of support.
B&NES Council officers had been recommending approval of an allotment area totalling 1,180 square metres, with a timber communal shed, 1,889 square metres of meadow and a 1.8-metre-high security fence.
Planning officer Chris Griggs-Trevarthen told the committee meeting on 17th December that the developer had inquired about a couple of locations within the allocated site, but those had been rejected by the council as they conflicted with areas shown for additional green infrastructure.
He said the developer is in breach of its obligations regarding allotments provision.
Part of the reason for the delay is that there had been an application for all the allotments that would be required for Phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 as part of the proposals for up to 290 homes on land on the South Stoke Plateau, owned by the Hignett Family Trust, which the council refused in 2024 and which were dismissed at appeal in early 2025.
The land had been taken out of the Green Belt 10 years ago for a “mixed-use” development of up to 300 homes.
With 171 homes already built during the first phase of the development, the proposed 290 new properties would have exceeded the 300 figure by more than half.
Three hundred would not have been considered a cap had all other placemaking strategies been met. But the planning inspector did not agree that they had been met, as he warned the scheme would have a harmful effect on the Cotswolds National Landscape.
The joint allotment site would have been immediately to the east of Sulis Manor.
Council planning officers took the view that delivery and certainty of the Derrymans Field scheme would outweigh the potential benefits arising from the co-location of allotments in the future as and when the other phases are approved.
But the application was referred to the planning committee following a call-in request from ward councillor Fiona Gourley (Bathavon South, Liberal Democrat).
She addressed committee members at their meeting on 17th December, saying there had been “a long-drawn out failure of masterplanning and repeated attempts to overdevelop the area”.
She said “inefficient use” of space in Phase 1 had seen the allotments “pushed into Derrymans Field” which remains in the Green Belt and is in Combe Hay parish.
“This decision to put the allotments on Derrymans Field is a quick fix by Vistry who are desperate to get off site.
“It discharges their responsibility and is cheaper for them than having to pay B&NES for a contribution to another allotment site,” she said.
“We know with the closing of the Combe Down allotments that there is a shortage.
“Indeed, residents of Sulis Down are already gardening in the allotments at South Stoke.”
Derrymans Field “is carrying a heavy burden” as not only would it be housing allotments but has newly planted woodland, the soakaway, a fenced-off area of meadow for biodiversity net gain, grassland and insect refuges, Councillor Gourley continued.
“How many roles can one Green Belt field fulfil? This is also on the national landscape so it cannot be dotted with polytunnels, greenhouses and sheds so beloved and valuable to gardeners.”
She added: “Sulis Down Phase 1 residents, who were promised allotments, have been so keen to grow food that they have taken to planting small grow pots on grass verges.
“This had the benefit of increasing the biodiversity and make good use of empty space. I applauded their efforts and was appalled when Vistry insisted on removing them before it hands over the site to the management company.
“Actually, allowing grow pots would have been a really good interim measure and it has certainly been done in other estates I have visited.
“Vistry on the other hand have not looked after the ecological management of the estate. They skimped on topsoil and allowed two of the six main trees in the central grassed area and rows of saplings to die through neglect whilst they were still building remaining houses on the site.”
She said Phase 1 residents did not want to wait for the next phases of development for allotments but there were many well-founded objections and the complex question remained about who would take on responsibility for the allotments.
She said she had been “sitting on the proverbial fence” but felt the allotments should be allowed, with strict conditions.
Committee member Councillor Ian Halsall (Oldfield Park, Liberal Democrat) said: “It’s the last committee before Christmas and we’ve got one item and I do feel we are stretching this out rather. It’s all so very Vicar of Dibley, I am afraid.”
He continued: “I’m speaking as a townie; I’ve got a really large allotment plot at Bloomfield in my ward. I actually think it really enhances the setting of the area.”
He said that even if each plot at Derrymans Field had a shed or a small greenhouse he did not think it would generate any harm to the setting of the national landscape or the fact that it is a nature conservation area and in the Green Belt.
He added: “I know there have been a lot of objections. I do feel however that were based upon the history of the site. Maybe there is some anger and bitterness about how Vistry have undertaken their development.”
Councillor Halsall agreed with Councillor Gourley that Vistry didn’t make efficient use of Phase 1 as part of its masterplan but had been left with the situation where it had no choice but to put the allotments where they were being proposed at Derrymans Field.
He said it would be good if the allotments could be grouped with subsequent phases “but we don’t know when they will happen and it does feel unfair for the existing residents to be denied an area where they can cultivate their own fruit and vegetables”.
On balance, he said he would support the plans.
But Councillor Shaun Hughes (Midsomer Norton North, Independent) criticised the “piecemeal” approach to development.
“It just feels like an expansion of the development site through the back door to me,” he said.
The committee heard that the
nine allotment plots would initially be offered to Phase 1 residents and then to the wider public. There would be mains water supply on site but only one communal shed, which was considered sufficient for the number of allotments.
Through the Section 106 agreement, the allotments would be either transferred at nil cost to the management company, to B&NES Council or a body nominated by the council.
But in refusing the proposals, the committee said the allotments and associated infrastructure, including the communal shed and fencing, would fail to preserve the openness of the Green Belt and would be “inappropriate” development.
The plans would also fail to conserve or enhance the natural beauty of the Cotswolds National Landscape and would harm the Fuller’s Earth Works-Southstoke Complex Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI).
