Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutions.

Apologies were received from Councillor Mike Best.

To approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

The minutes document will be published separately and as a supplement to this agenda.

Resolved that the minutes of the Planning Committee - South held on 26^th March 2024be confirmed as a correct record.

To receive and note any declarations of interests in respect of any matters included on the agenda for consideration at this meeting.

(The other registrable interests of Councillors of Somerset Council, arising from membership of City, Town or Parish Councils and other Local Authorities will automatically be recorded in the minutes: City, Town & Parish Twin Hatters - Somerset Councillors 2023 )

There were no Declarations of Interest.

The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.

For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker.

Requests to speak at the meeting at Public Question Time must be made to the Monitoring Officer in writing or by email to democraticservicesteam@somerset.gov.uk  by 5pm on Tuesday, 16 April 2024.

There were no questions from members of the public.

To consider an S73 application to vary the requirements of Condition 10 of Approval 17/03029/OUT (Inspectorate ref: APP/R3325/W/18/3197690) for the Outline planning application for up to 130 dwellings with public open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage system (SuDS) and vehicular access point from Woodhayes Way, so that (save for works in respect of clearance, laying out and digging works as shown on plan ref 501-403-01-Planning Approval Commencement Works_Sheet 1-Rev C) no development should take place until a scheme for pedestrian improvements (in accordance with points i to iii) or an alternative scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. (The remainder of the condition will remain as previously worded and the section 73 will relate to the Outline application (17/03029/OUT Inspectorate ref: APP/R3325/W/18/3197690) and subsequently approved Reserved Matters Ref: 21/03369/REM in its entirety).

RESOLVED:

That planning application - 23/03015/S73 to vary the requirements of Condition 10 of Approval 17/03029/OUT (Inspectorate ref: APP/R3325/W/18/3197690) for the Outline planning application for up to 130 dwellings with public open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage system (SuDS) and vehicular access point from Woodhayes Way, so that (save for works in respect of clearance, laying out and digging works as shown on plan ref 501-403-01-Planning Approval Commencement Works_Sheet 1-Rev C) no development should take place until a scheme for pedestrian improvements (in accordance with points i to iii) or an alternative scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. (The remainder of the condition will remain as previously worded and the section 73 will relate to the Outline application (17/03029/OUT Inspectorate ref: APP/R3325/W/18/3197690) and subsequently approved Reserved Matters Ref: 21/03369/REM in its entirety) - be REFUSED permission, contrary to the officer recommendation, for the following reason:

1. The proposal would lead to increased congestion within the village, resulting in conflict between larger vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians which would not improve overall pedestrian safety; would fail to secure inclusive, safe and convenient access on foot, cycle, and by public and private transport that addresses the needs for all; and would not maximise the potential for sustainable transport. As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policy TA5 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028) and relevant guidance within the NPPF to promote sustainable transport, in particular paragraphs 115 and 116.

(voting : unanimous)

(During this item the meeting was adjourned to allow the Chairman to seek legal advice regarding the membership of the committee following the publication of a delegated decision by the Monitoring Officer during the meeting.  Following this advice Councillor Steve Ashton left the meeting as he was no longer a member of the committee.  It was also noted that Councillor Jeny Snell was no longer a member of the committee, however she was not present at the meeting).

The Planning Officer introduced the application to the committee with the assistance of a powerpoint presentation. She also provided the following updates:

·         Explained the purpose of the application to vary Condition 10 of the previous outline planning approval to vary submission of the final details required to discharge condition 10, as well as amending the detailed requirements for offsite pedestrian works on the High Street that were previous imposed by the inspector under part (iii) of the condition.

·         Highlighted the application site as approved in 2017 and the original proposed pedestrian improvements and street lighting scheme.

·         Explained that the original design had been found to be unworkable at detailed audit stage and therefore the applicant had continued to work to find suitable alternative.

·         Explained in detail the pedestrian and highway works now proposed. 

·         Additional correspondence had been received from Henstridge Parish Council who confirmed the amended plans did not address previous concerns and therefore they still recommend refusal of the application.

·         33 further letters of objection had also been received, but nothing further had been raised that was not already included within her report.

·         Due to typo error on Condition 1 of the officer’s report the date should read ‘19/05/2022’ and not ‘19/05/2024’.

·         Confirmed that the principle of development had already been established and therefore the key consideration was Highway Safety and whether these proposed changes should be approved.

Five members of the public addressed the committee in objection to the application. Some of their comments included:

·         Questioned the lawfulness of the S73 application to allow the flexibility to grant an extension to the time limit of such an application, therefore was a violation of the planning process and fundamental change to the planning permission and the appeal inspectors decision.

·         Since 2018 the applicant has been trying to fulfil the full pedestrian safety conditions and still none have been found to be acceptable.

·         Do not believe this proposal addresses the concerns previously raised.

• The existing narrow road is already very dangerous, and the proposal does not prevent vehicles from mounting the kerb.
• This new proposal does not provide a safe footway or pavement for pedestrians and poses significant highway safety concerns.
• The scheme would have a negative impact on the existing housing residents on the High Street as vehicles would be unable to service these houses as vehicles would need to park some distance away.
• Do not believe this is an acceptable solution and does not safeguard pedestrian safety and that there is a Human Right to ensure safety for all and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

Members noted the Appeal Decisions.