Baltic Wharf Campsite Update
Comments
-
The appeal is by the CAMC so i assume the planning application was turned down. Many of the objections seem to be based on the site spoiling the view from the bridge etc. and the risk of flooding. There are many in support of it particularly those in the tourist trade. The Clubs response is also good. Fingers crossed it will be passed.
0 -
I did not get the impression the C&MC had appealed. I am no expert on planning jargon but I thought it was the S of S wanting to see all the documentation regarding the propsal and in addition further clarification to tabled questions. He has appointed an inspector to lead the July enquiry and advise with a target decision sceduled for October 2021.
I think everybody who made representation to the Bristol Council planning officer will get an email asking if they want to make further representation.
No doubt all this will incur further costs to the Club.
peedee
0 -
It wasn't reject by Bristol Council but was sent to the S of S for a final decision because of Flood plain and Green belt issues which from what I understood the council could make a decisson on. They could only approve the plan in principle which was what they did. If they had chosen to reject it, it would not have gone to the S of S Did the S of S reject the original application?
peedee
0 -
This from the gov.uk:
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has the power to take over (‘call in’) planning applications rather than letting the local authority decide. The secretary of state will normally only do this if the application conflicts with national policy in important ways, or is nationally significant.
He or she has to take published government policy into account when deciding whether or not to call in a planning application, and when making the decision. If the secretary of state decides to call in a planning application, an inspector is appointed to carry out an inquiry into the proposal. The secretary of state has to take the inspector’s findings into account when making the decision.
He or she has particularly request information on:
a)The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with Government policies for meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change (NPPF Chapter 14);
b)The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with Government policies for protecting Green Belt land (NPPF Chapter 13);
c)The extentto which the proposed development is consistent with Government policies for conserving and enhancing the historic environment (NPPF Chapter 16)
;d)The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with the development plan for the area; and
e)any other matters the Inspector considers relevant.
peedee
0 -
It wasn't reject by Bristol Council but was sent to the S of S for a final decision because of Flood plain and Green belt issues which from what I understood the council could make a decisson on.
Sorry, in my post above this of course should have read the council couldn't make a decission.
peedee
0 -
Thank you for your comments and support. We also wanted to give you an update from the Club. Although the planning application was approved by Bristol City Council's Planning Committee, the application has been called in for decision by the Secretary of State by way of a Public Inquiry. The Inquiry will start on 20th July and we will update you when we have further news and information.
In the meantime, whilst we have had notice to vacate Baltic Wharf, we are exploring the possibility to try and extend our occupation on this site due to delays in the Council's plans to redevelop the site. Again we will keep you updated on any developments with this.5 -
Lockdown boredom led me to look at the reasons and I would imagine the flood zone and the Ashton Court conservation area are sticking points.
It is indeed a change of use but horses in a paddock and related accomodation isn't on the scale of a busy caravan site where proposals to fell trees and add infrastructure is intended.
Anyway I wonder if CAMC will get a longer stay at Baltic Wharf? Thanks Rowena for the update.
0 -
It seems to me that the local council are on board but it is their officers who don't approve of the scheme. Flooding seems to be a major issue despite it being pointed out that the Club regularly evacuates the York site so has a wealth of experience in doing so. There are some issues around whether the road access into the site will cause problems at rush hour, despite the fact this is the time when it is unlikely to have arrivals at the site. I think some trees they want to cut down have tree preservation orders on them although you imagine this could be worked round. I understand there is a footpath that skirts the proposed site and there was concern about the visual impact for walkers!!!!!! There was also an objection from one of the senior council staff to the visual impact of a campsite from the Clifton Suspension Bridge. He obviously has a powerful pair of binoculars!!! The ridiculous thing about all the objections is what are they going to allow the current site to be used for? It is currently an eyesore and that will get worse with time.
David
0 -
The ridiculous thing about all the objections is what are they going to allow the current site to be used for? It is currently an eyesore and that will get worse with time.
I agree and you would think a site visit by the S of S office would resolve most of the reservations.
peedee
0 -
It seems ridiculous that they just let these eyesore develop. Part of their cunning plan?
Years ago the council stopped letting out a football field, well several in different places in town, grass became unkempt and the site a real eyesore, team had to fold. 14 years later on the one I'm thinking of, they rebuilt the delapated changing rooms and re-established the pitch. Others remain neglected or guess what? Built on..........
Wouldn't it be a win win situation if they allowed the activity to continue until everything sorted? Income, facility and a tidy area. Seems so simple to me, but that's why I remain lowly and not in charge 🤣🤣
0 -
I have no say in the decision making but from the time when I first heard of the alternative patch of land which the Club had bought, and saw the outline plan, I thought it was a poor choice of Bristol.
The city deserves a new, well equipped, well landscaped site on the outskirts, close to public transport, and open to all on an international basis. Cities all over Europe have done that with some style.
The Club’s proposal was mean and unambitious - the wrong sort of site in the wrong sort of place - and I can understand those in Bristol who are far from keen to allow it to go ahead.
0 -
ET said:- The Club’s proposal was mean and unambitious - the wrong sort of site in the wrong sort of place - and I can understand those in Bristol who are far from keen to allow it to go ahead.
The objections weren't from the decomcracially elected councillors but more from Council Officers who objected on a technicalities. I think the Council are aware that an easy access campsite near the centre is an asset to Bristol. Unfortunately the Club don't have carte blanche to decide where a campsite will be. I am sure their agents have hunted high and low for a suitable location. Whilst maybe not perfect the proposed site will fulfill a need for those that want to spend a few days visiting Bristol.
David
0 -
It's actually situated on a main route in from Gordano Services on the M5, so it's quite a busy road at certain times of the day or year. The site adjoins Bedminster Cricket Club and this is also used as an overflow car park when there's a match on at Ashton Gate . It can be a very busy area with the addition of the big festivals at Ashton Court, just over the road from the site. I think CAMC looked at around 50 possible sites (the info is all on the planning portal.)
The flooding issue concerns the huge tides on the Bristol Channel, the Avon at this point is tidal so different issues to York or Tewkesbury. However I think floods are a very rare event in this area.
0 -
Lived in that area between 1997 & 2014, crossed the swing bridge many times each week in all conditions and never witnessed anything beyond fairly minor flooding in the cumberland basin and immediate local area.
0 -
We are pleased to advise that notice to vacate the site has now been extended by 4 months. We are now welcoming arrivals up to and including Sunday 19 September 2021, departing no later than 12noon, 20 September.
0 -
Every little helps, as they say. 👍🏻
0 -
Good news and I have booked for a few nights in July for my last (?) trip to one of my favourite sites - because of the great location.
0 -
You're not wrong there pd. I booked for a few days in September just before this latest closing date and saw that July and August are down to single figures already.
JK
0 -
Just read about road works outside Baltic Wharf site which restricts length of caravans and motor homes anyone experienced this?
0
