The Bradley Stoke Journal

Work on the construction of a new MS Therapy Centre on a site between Bradley Stoke Way and Wheatfield Drive finally got underway this week after years of funding crises and planning wrangles.

The first planning application for the centre was made in September 2001 but this was not approved until June 2007, subject to a clause that required access to the site be from Bradley Stoke Way only.

Funding issues then meant that little happened until a revised planning application was submitted in June 2009. This was followed in February 2010 by a further application for the construction of a respite centre on the same site.

The 2010 application caused controversy because it altered the proposed access for the site to be from Wheatfield Drive rather than Bradley Stoke Way. South Gloucestershire Councilllors refused permission for the change in access arrangements but their decision was overturned by the Planning Inspectorate in August 2010.

The BBC announced on 13th May this year that construction of the MS Therapy Centre would start “by the end of May” and the media were subsequently notified that a ceremonial first sod-cutting would take place on Tuesday 31st May.

However, the ceremony was cancelled a few days later, with the centre’s PR agency saying the event had “been postponed due to unforeseen circumstances relating to a last minute administrative issue, which is due to be resolved within the next 2 or 3 weeks.”

Read more about the start of construction at the Wheatfield Drive site »

A charity looking to build an MS therapy centre and respite care facility on land adjacent to Wheatfield Primary School has won its appeal against South Gloucestershire Council’s (SGC’s) decision to refuse planning permission.

Permission to build the therapy centre was granted in November 2009, subject to a condition that the site be accessed exclusively from Bradley Stoke Way – following scores of objections from residents of Wheatfield Drive who feared that the alternative of allowing access via their street would worsen already-existing traffic issues in their neighbourhood.

But when the charity later submitted plans for a respite care facility on another part of the site, the proposed access switched to Wheatfield Drive because, it was said, fibre optic cables had been discovered running immediately beneath the line of the proposed access road off Bradley Stoke Way.

A BBC article at the time said it would cost an astonishing £1 million to move the cables, which the charity said it couldn’t afford.

SGC failed to issue a decision on the revised access plans within the stipulated eight-week period, leading to the application being referred to the Planning Inspectorate.

Despite the referral, Councillors on SGC’s Development Contol (West) Committee went on to consider the application and finally voted to reject it in late June. That decision was made against the advice of the Council’s officers, who had concluded that the access proposals were:

“safe … and would not result in a material impact upon highway safety and amenity.”

Bradley Stoke Town Council’s Planning Committee had previously voted unanimously to reject the application and residents’ concerns were supported by local MP Jack Lopresti.

In the decision report published yesterday, the Inspector says:

Overall, I conclude … that vehicle movements associated with the proposed development would not unacceptably affect the safety and convenience of road users in the area and would not unacceptably affect the living conditions of residents in the surrounding area.

Read on to find out how the Inspector justifies the appeal decision »

South Gloucestershire Council’s (SGC’s) Development Contol (West) Committee has rejected an application by the developers of a proposed new MS therapy centre in Bradley Stoke to allow access to the site from Wheatfield Drive.

In making the decision, members of the Committee (which includes two Bradley Stoke Councillors) ignored a recommendation from planning officers that the application should be approved since:

“… the proposed access from Wheatfield Drive is safe … and would not result in a material impact upon highway safety and amenity.”

Permission to build the centre was granted in November 2009, with a condition that the site, behind Wheatfield Primary School, be accessed exclusively from Bradley Stoke Way.

The developers of the centre later caused uproar amongst local residents when they submitted revised plans showing access from a cul-de-sac in Wheatfield Drive.

According to a recent BBC website article, the Moonstone Appeal says it was forced to make the U-turn after fibre optic cables were discovered running immediately beneath the line of the proposed access road off Bradley Stoke Way.

The BBC article said it would cost an astonishing £1 million to move the cables, which the charity says it cannot afford.

SGC failed to issue a decision on the revised access plans, leading to the application being referred to the Planning Inspectorate, which is expected to issue a ruling at the end of July.

The Moonstone Appeal then submitted a duplicate planning application to SGC, in the hope that it might yield a decision before the Inspectorate was able to make a ruling on the first application.

Read how Councillors voted to reject the applications despite advice to the contrary from Council officials »

Councillors on South Gloucestershire’s (SGC’s) Development Control (West) Committee are to visit the site of a proposed MS therapy centre off Wheatfield Drive on Friday morning (11th June).

The site visit, scheduled for 9:45am, has been arranged after Bradley Stoke SGC Councillor Brian Hopkinson “called in” the planning application “in order to allow members to consider the highway safety issues”.

Residents of Wheatfield Road and the Governors of Wheatfield Primary School were angered when applicants Perpetual Legacy, acting on behalf of the Moonstone Appeal,  submitted revised plans that would see the site accessed from Wheatfield Drive rather than Bradley Stoke Way (as previously approved).

The application now being considered by the Committee is a duplicate of another submitted earlier in the year. That earlier application is currently being assessed by the Government’s Planning Inspectorate after SGC failed to make a decision on it within the legally required time frame.

Bradley Stoke Town Council’s Planning Committee has unanimously objected to both the previous and current applications on the grounds that:

“The proposed access to the site via Wheatfield Road will lead to an unacceptable increase in traffic movement through this, already congested residential area, which will be detrimental to highway safety, and have a negative impact on surrounding residents.”

Read on for details of objections raised by local residents »

A controversial planning application for the construction of a respite care centre on land off Wheatfield Drive has gone to appeal after South Gloucestershire Council (SGC) failed to determine the case within the required eight week period.

The application, registered with SGC on 26th February, angered local residents and Town Councillors because it altered access arrangements established in an earlier application for an MS therapy centre on the same site.

That earlier application, decided in November 2009, stated that access to the site would be from Bradley Stoke Way rather than Wheatfield Drive.

The applicant, Perpetual Legacy acting on behalf of the Moonstone Appeal, now says that the presence of an underground oil pipleine running along the edge of Bradley Stoke Way makes access from that side of the site “unviable”.

The u-turn resulted in 23 objections being lodged against the latest application, including one from Bradley Stoke Town Council saying that access from Wheatfield Drive would “result in an unacceptable increase in traffic movement through this already congested area”.

With SGC failing to make a decision on the case by its target date of 23rd April, the applicant has now submitted an appeal (on 30th April) to the Planning Inspectorate on the grounds of “non determination”.

It has urged the Inspectorate to make a decision within its nominal 16-week timescale so that planning approval, if granted, can be obtained by September, which it says is a condition of grant funding.

Read on for a statement from Bradley Stoke Councillors on SGC »

Plans for an MS therapy centre and an associated respite care centre on land between Wheatfield Drive and Bradley Stoke Way have attracted more than twenty consultation replies from individuals and organisations concerned about the proposed vehicular access arrangements for the two facilities.

An earlier planning application for the MS therapy centre stated that access would be off Bradley Stoke Way but when a second application for a respite care centre on the same site was registered in February, it was proposed that the two facilities be accessed instead from Wheatfield Drive.

In the latest application, the Moonstone Appeal says that the presence of an oil pipeline running along the north-eastern boundary of the site  makes it too expensive to construct a new access road off Bradley Stoke Way.

The new plans show both facilities being accessed from the end of a cul-de-sac in Wheatfield Drive, which has angered local residents, who say that the road is unsuited for extra traffic, particularly during the opening and closing times of Wheatfield Primary School.

A total of 23 residents and Councillors have lodged replies to the planning consultation. The Governors and Travel Plan Committee of Wheatfield Primary School have also submitted comments. All these responses call on the District Council to reject the latest application, predominantly on the grounds of traffic issues.

Bradley Stoke Town Council has also objected to the plans, saying:

The proposed access to the site via Wheatfield Road will lead to an unacceptable increase in traffic movement through this, already congested residential area, which will be detrimental to highway safety, and have a negative impact on surrounding residents.

South Gloucestershire Council has set a target date of 21st April for making a decision on the plans, although this might be delayed should the matter be “called in” by Councillors.