A significant plan to build up to 795 homes adjacent to the M5 motorway in Cam has been approved by a planning inspector following an appeal by Persimmon Homes.
The developer had appealed against Stroud District Council’s (SDC) failure to make a timely decision on their proposal to develop over 96 acres of farmland located west of the A4135 Draycott. The site stretches between the existing Shell petrol station and Jubilee Playing Field, gently sloping north/northwest.
Earlier this year, the hybrid planning application was presented to the council’s development control committee. Councillors unanimously voted to recommend granting permission, aligning with the advice of council officers. However, the council had not formally determined the application, prompting Persimmon Homes to pursue an appeal.
READ MORE: George Skivington Details Gloucester Rugby’s Strategic Coaching Reshuffle
READ MORE: Live: M5 Blocked in Gloucestershire Following Crash, Traffic Delays Reported
A key issue during the process was disagreement over how more than £4.35 million in financial contributions for infrastructure—covering transport, education, libraries, police, and health services—would be secured. The debate centered on whether funds would be obtained through a section 106 agreement or through bids for Stroud District Council’s Community Infrastructure Levy.
Inspector Andrew McGlone acknowledged genuine concerns from Gloucestershire County Council, the NHS, and local GPs about securing these funds to mitigate the development’s impact. Nonetheless, he emphasized it was their responsibility to apply for the necessary monies through SDC’s environment committee.
In his ruling, McGlone highlighted a five-year housing shortfall of 1,461 homes within the Stroud district. Although the development would not fully remedy this gap—since some dwellings from the outline part of the application are not expected to be completed within five years—the proposal projected a delivery rate of approximately 60 homes per year, contributing meaningfully to meeting housing needs.
Ultimately, the inspector permitted the appeal despite conflicts with the local development plan, concluding that other material considerations warranted approval.