Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutions.

Apologies were received from Councillors Habib Farbahi, Dixie Darch and Ross Henley.

To approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

Resolved that the minutes of the Planning Committee - West held on 17 October 2023 be confirmed as a correct record subject to the following amendment:

Minute 52 – the last sentence before the resolution:

 ‘On being put to the vote the proposal was carried by 7 in favour, 0 against and 2 abstentions.’

be amended to read:

‘On being put to the vote the proposal was carried by 7 in favour, 2 against and 0 abstentions.’

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 )

The following Councillors declared an interest in the following applications:

48/21/0008 – Councillor Cavill declared that he considered that he was pre-determined on this application and therefore he would make his comments then leave the committee during the consideration of this application.

27/21/0009 – Councillor Wren declared a Non-registrable Interest as the applicant was related to a close friend of his as they were members of the same parish council together. He would abstain from voting on the application.

3/16/23/005 – Councillor Woods declared that although she knew the applicant many years ago, she had not seen them for at least 2 years. She had not made any comment and was keeping an open mind on the application. She therefore felt that she was not pre-determined.

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 day, date, year – usually Weds before.

There were no questions from members of the public.

To consider an application for the erection of 1 No. detached dwelling with detached garage and associated works at the walled gardens at Nigella, Church Hill, West Monkton.

Resolved:

That planning application 48/21/0008 for the erection of 1 No. detached dwelling with detached garage and associated works at Nigella, Church Hill, West Monkton be GRANTED permission subject to a suitable phosphate mitigation solution being secured via a S106 agreement and the conditions as detailed in the Agenda report (condition 9 amended as per the Officer’s presentation).

(voting: 6 in favour, 1 against, 2 abstentions)

The Planning Officer informed the committee with the aid of a presentation that this application was for a detached new dwelling sited within the walled garden of Nigella and was situated just within the conservation area for West Monkton. The committee were informed that if the application was approved, the resolution would need to be amended for a S106 Agreement to be secured in respect of phosphate credits to ensure the development was nutrient neutral. It was also noted that Condition 9 relating to permitted development rights would need a small amendment as the reference to the General Permitted Development Order 1995 should read 2015.

The committee were addressed by the adjoining neighbour who made the following comments:

There was already another outline permission located within the garden of the same property. The proposal was 6 metres from their property and was outside of the established development boundary. It would lead to an adverse impact on their property from overlooking. Also, the proposed access along the shared driveway was in his ownership and access will be refused.

The agent then spoke on the application and his points included the application was within the development boundary, the proposal addressed the conservation area, access was not a planning issue and there were no adverse impacts on privacy, light or amenity of the neighbours.

The Division Member then made his comments before leaving the committee. He stated that he considered that the size of building would not fit into the landscape and would have an adverse impact on the area and that the neighbour would be overshadowed.

In response to comments made by the neighbour and the agent, the Legal Officer confirmed that the ownership of the access was not a material planning issue.

The Planning Officer, in response to questions and comments from the members of the committee confirmed that the other site for which there was outline permission had been taken into account when this application was being assessed. The garden wall was not listed and only a pedestrian access was being made within the wall. In respect of the windows within the roof, they would be obscured to stop any overlooking of the neighbours which has been conditioned; also there were conditions on ecological matters and for the protection of a tree within the garden.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Sully and seconded by Councillor Wakefield that the application be approved subject to the recommended conditions in the Planning Officer’s report and with the amendment to Condition 9 and subject to the prior completion of a S106 agreement to ensure the development was nutrient neutral.

Resolved:

That planning application 48/21/0008 for the erection of 1 No. detached dwelling with detached garage and associated works at Nigella, Church Hill, West Monkton be GRANTED permission subject to a suitable phosphate mitigation solution being secured via a S106 agreement and to the recommended conditions as detailed in the Agenda report (with Condition 9 amended as per the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To consider the removal of dutch barn and conversion of agricultural building into 1 No. single storey dwelling at the barn located to the west of Manor Farm, Oake.

Resolved:

That planning application 27/21/0009 for the removal of Dutch barn and conversion of agricultural building into 1 No. single storey dwelling at the barn located to the west of Manor Farm, Oake be delegated to officers in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of Planning Committee West to APPROVE subject to the decision being first advertised as a departure from development plan policy and necessary planning conditions being imposed, including:

·         a requirement to remove the existing Dutch barn.

·         the securing of a suitable phosphate mitigation solution.

(voting: 8 in favour, 1 against, 1 abstention)

The Planning Officer with the aid of a powerpoint presentation informed the committee that some unauthorised works had taken place to the barn with these being the roof raised and replaced. It was proposed that the application should be refused for 3 reasons as detailed within the officer`s report, including that the proposal was in an unsuitable location and failed to comply with requirements of Policy DM2 of the Taunton Deane Core Strategy.

There were 2 speakers in support of the application plus the applicant who stated that the roof had been raised at the same time it was replaced to allow modern machinery to get into the building. There had been no objections from the Parish Council or neighbours and there were other dwellings in the area so would not be an isolated dwelling in the countryside.

During discussions, the committee members requested confirmation of the following:

The application was not assessed under Class Q status as works to raise the roof had already taken place and would need planning permission. This was a material consideration.

The site was outside the Development Boundary but a number of committee members did not consider it to be isolated as there were other dwellings in the vicinity and it was a short walk to the church, school and golf club.

It was proposed by Councillor Sully to approve the application and this was seconded by Councillor Ellis, as whilst the proposal would be a departure from the development plan, they considered that:

       i.          The site was in a sustainable location

     ii.          The site enjoys nearby facilities

   iii.          The removal of the existing Dutch Barn would improve the visual amenity of the locality

    iv.          The site was surrounded by dwellings on three sides

      v.          There were no objections from the Highways Authority

    vi.          The proposal  would bring the building back into gainful use;

  vii.          And that on balance, the benefits of the proposal outweighed the harms.

Resolved:

That planning application 27/21/0009 for the removal of Dutch barn and conversion of agricultural building into 1 No. single storey dwelling at the barn located to the west of Manor Farm, Oake be delegated to officers in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of Planning Committee West to APPROVE subject to the decision being first advertised as a departure from development plan policy and necessary planning conditions being imposed, including:

·        a requirement to remove the existing Dutch barn.

·        the securing of a suitable phosphate mitigation solution.

(voting: 8 in favour, 1 against, 1 abstention)

Erection of 4 No. dwellings and associated development at Byways, 19 Church Lane, Bicknoller, TA4 4EL

Resolved:

That planning application 3/01/23/005 for the Erection of 4 No. dwellings and associated development at Byways, 19 Church Lane, Bicknoller, TA4 4EL be GRANTED permission subject to the conditions listed in the Agenda report.

(voting: 9 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

The committee were informed by the Planning Officer with the aid of a presentation that, if granted, the application would take the number of new dwellings  to the limit for Bicknoller within the current local plan period. The site was within the settlement boundary of Bicknoller, was not considered to have a significant impact upon the visual or residential amenity of the area and was considered to comply with local plan policy. It was therefore recommended for conditional approval.

The agent spoke on the application confirming that the previous refusal reasons had been addressed, the design had been amended, there were no objections on highways or landscape officers and there was a need for the houses and were in a sustainable location.

One committee member expressed some concern that the proposal on a narrow road with a blind corner and that there had been flooding on the site. However, it was confirmed by the Planning Officer that the site was not in a flood zone and the highway Authority had no objection.

Councillor Pugsley proposed to move the recommendation for approval as detailed within the report and Councillor Ellis seconded the proposal.

Resolved:

That planning application 3/01/23/005 for the erection of 4 No. dwellings and associated development at Byways, 19 Church Lane, Bicknoller, TA4 4EL be GRANTED permission subject to the conditions listed in the Agenda report.

(voting: 9 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

To consider an application for the change of use of land for a period of 3 years to allow the siting of caravans to accommodate Hinkley Point workers with the erection of an ablutions block.

Resolved:

That planning application 3/16/23/005 for the Change of use of land for a period of 3 years to allow the siting of caravans to accommodate Hinkley Point workers with the erection of an ablutions block at Land at Moorhouse Farm, Moorhouse Lane, Holford, TA5 1SP be GRANTED permission subject to the

conditions listed in the Agenda report.

(voting: unanimous in favour)

The Planning Officer updated the committee, with the aid of a powerpoint presentation stating that the proposal was for a temporary period of 3 years, that the highways officer had confirmed that the access was satisfactory and that those living at the site who worked for EDF would be required to use the bus which stopped outside the site.  The Landscape Officer had objected to the proposal as they considered that there would be an adverse impact on the setting of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. However it was considered that, with the other caravans on site and Hinkley Point itself, the impact would be negligible.

The applicant who spoke to the committee confirmed that the proposal was for mobile caravans rather than static vans , the bus stop was directly at the site entrance, that the site would be screened by trees and hedges and there would be no additional lights on site to disturb wildlife.

The Chair made it clear to committee members that the application was for a temporary permission and the potential for future tourism use after 3 years was not a material consideration.

Councillor Woods proposed to move the recommendation for approval as detailed within the report and Councillor Pugsley seconded the proposal.

Resolved:

That planning application 3/16/23/005 for the Change of use of land for a period of 3 years to allow the siting of caravans to accommodate Hinkley Point workers with the erection of an ablutions block at Land at Moorhouse Farm, Moorhouse Lane, Holford, TA5 1SP be GRANTED permission subject to the

conditions listed in the Agenda report.

(voting: unanimous in favour)

There are no appeal decisions to be reported this month.

The committee were informed that there were no appeal decisions this month.