A PUBLIC inquiry into a proposed 188-home development in Berkeley has started.

Representatives of Stroud District Council have defended their decision to refuse planning permission last year after the move was appealed by developers Charles Church Developments Ltd.

Hosted at the council’s Ebley Mill offices, the inquiry began on Tuesday and is expected to conclude next week.

Amongst the members of the public who expressed a desire to raise their objections at the inquiry was Charles Berkeley, who operates Berkeley Castle.

A key reason for planning permission being rejected was due to its proximity to the proposed site.

The plans were turned down in June last year by the council's development control committee on the grounds that the development would “lessen the legibility of the inter-relationship of the castle” to the town and wider landscape and that the site was “highly conspicuous” and would negatively impact the landscape setting of the town.

Representatives of the council will defend the decision at the inquiry whilst the developers are seeking for the decision to be overturned and permission granted.

Charles Banner, representing Charles Church Developments, said that there was a “national imperative” to boost the country’s housing supply.

“There is a range of important public benefits from this development,” he said. “As you may have seen there is a national imperative to boost housing supply.

“Significant weight should be given to this [development] to ensure that the council’s housing supply is futureproof.

“This will also bring much-needed footfall to the town’s businesses.”
However, Sasha Blackmore, who is representing Stroud District Council throughout the inquiry, said that the council had a housing surplus.

“The appellant suggests there is a 172-unit shortfall. There is not,” she said.

“Starkly the council’s figures, in contrast, show a surplus of 858.”

Later in her opening remarks, Ms Blackmore added: “The benefits of the scheme are relatively limited; they do not outweigh the clear harm to the landscape and heritage impacts and they do not amount to sustainable development.

“This is a development which harms the quality of the countryside, harms the quality of the settlement and harms listed heritage assets, including the Grade I castle.”

Mr Berkeley was due to share his views with the inquiry yesterday afternoon, followed by objectors and supporters this morning. The inquiry is expected to finish next week with a decision from the inspector coming later this year.