Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutions.

Apologies were received from Councillors Martin Dimery, Helen Kay and Alex Wiltshire. Councillor Shane Collins substituted for Councillor Kay.

After apologies, the meeting was adjourned for 5 minutes due to a technical issue with the sound.

To approve the minutes from the previous meeting held on 3October 2023.

The Committee was asked to consider the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2023.

Councillor Edric Hobbs proposed and Councillor Martin Lovell seconded that they be accepted. These Minutes were taken as a true and accurate record and were approved.

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 none.

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 12 noon on Friday 3 November 2023.

There were none.

To consider an application for the demolition of Nos. 26 and 28 Orchard Vale and development of 54 new homes with open space, landscaping and all associated infrastructure.

That planning application 2022/1427/FUL be REFUSED contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as the site is located in open countryside and is therefore contrary to the District's settlement strategy, as outlined in Policies CP1, CP2 and CP4 of the Mendip District Local Plan. It was considered that the proposal would result in an unsustainable development and the harm of the proposal would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

Votes – 6 in favour, 5 against

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Committee as the recommendation was for approval, thus representing a departure from the existing Local Plan.

The Report continued that it was a cross boundary application with Bath and North East Somerset Council (BANES) and there had been detailed discussions with BANES’ Planning Officers during the course of the application. The main part of the application site was within Somerset Council’s area. However, Nos. 26 and 28 Orchard Vale (3-bed social rent dwellings) was within BANES’ area.

Ston Easton Parish Council had made a number of comments on the application including the following:

• Contribution to Clapton Village Hall requested.
• Consideration should be given to investing into the adjacent community hall to support social objectives.
• Request consideration of connecting the village of Clapton to mains drainage via the new development. New drainage system could be left ready should mains drainage be installed in Clapton at a future date.
• Surface water management arrangements are important.

There had been 32 objections from local residents for reasons including the following:

• Insufficient public enhancement.
• Insufficient affordable housing.
• Principle of development - unsustainable development; lack of local jobs; pressure

on services; insufficient local services; contrary to BANES planning strategy; would

set a harmful precedent; not respecting the outcome of the JR; JR ruled there

should be no development on this site; there is no duty for BANES to cooperate

with the access.

• Harm to neighbouring amenity.
• Ecological harm including protected species.

There were no objections from any of the statutory or other consultees, subject to various conditions and the provision of a S106 agreement. However, BANES Council did have various objections and stated:

“Permitting the proposed development site would be contrary to the adopted B&NES

Development Plan, worsening the imbalance between jobs and homes and resulting

in unsustainable levels of out commuting for work. Furthermore, the proposed

development would add cumulative impacts on key infrastructure within Westfield

and Midsomer Norton, including highways and, potentially, education. The principle of the proposed development within Somerset is therefore not supported.”

The Officer’s Report advised that the ‘tilted balance’ of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) applied when assessing the application. This policy says that permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole.

The Officer’s Report concluded that the application proposals would deliver simultaneously, economic, social and environmental benefits. The development would generate economic benefits through the construction period. Economic benefits would also be associated with the future spending of occupants of the development in local shops and services and council tax receipts.

Further, the provision of 52 homes (or 50 homes if Plots 6 and 7 are transferred to BANES as affordable units), including 16 affordable units in Somerset, should be given significant weight in the planning balance, particularly in the context of the significant lack of 5-year land supply in the Somerset East  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

To consider an application for a single storey side and rear extension.

That planning application 2023/1735/HSE be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Committee as the applicant was an employee of the Council who had direct involvement with the planning process in the course of their duties.

Frome Town Council had no objections to the application. 

Overall, Officers had concluded that the proposal was acceptable and the application was therefore recommended for approval.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

There were no speakers.

As there was no debate amongst Members, it was proposed by Councillor Adam Boyden and seconded by Councillor Dawn Denton to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

On being put to the vote it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/1735/HSE be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider an application for the extension of residential curtilage to Barn 1 to include change of use of land from agricultural to residential and reorganisation of curtilage to Barn 2 in order to facilitate amended vehicular access to highway.

That planning application 2023/0663/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that the site was situated within the open countryside within an area of high archaeological potential, a bat consultation zone and partly within a high-risk coal consultation zone (historic mining works).

There had been no response from the Parish Council and no objections from the Archaeology and Coal Authority consultees.  Also, no letters of objection from local residents had been received.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said that the proposal was not considered unreasonable, as it would not have an adverse impact on the immediate setting over or above those extensions to curtilage allowed previously, and the proposal would not cause traffic or environmental problems or cause harm the character of the area.

Overall, Officers had concluded that the proposal represented a sustainable form of development and the application was therefore recommended for approval as a departure from the local plan.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

The applicant’s agent then spoke. He made the following points:

·        Application is to increase the size of the residential curtilage

·        It would regularise the access to both Barn 1 and Barn 2 and will ‘square off’ the area and provide a straight boundary for the two properties.

·        A new native hedgerow and trees would be planted, giving significant gains in structural biodiversity.

·        There were no objections from neighbours or the Planning Officers and it has the support of the Parish Council.

As there was no debate amongst Members, it was proposed by Councillor Edric Hobbs and seconded by Councillor Tony Robbins to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

On being put to the vote it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0663/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider an application for the erection of one detatched dwelling.

That planning application 2022/1647/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that this site was located just outside the settlement limits as defined by Mendip District Local Plan Part I. The farmhouse itself was located within the settlement limits, but the land which was the subject of the application was just the other side of the boundary.  The site was within the Somerset Levels and Moors Ramsar Risk Area, an area of high archaeological potential and the farmhouse was a grade II listed building.

Baltonsborough Parish Council had recommended refusal of the application, saying that the council unanimously agreed to recommend refusal due to the site being outside the development limit of the village and due to concerns about drainage and flood issues.

Land Drainage Officers had no objection subject to a condition that the development be carried out in accordance with the Surface Water Drainage Strategy.

The Conservation Officer stated that no substantive harm to the significance of the listed building or its setting was identified.

There had been 1 letter of concern from a local resident due to two windows which would cause overlooking. The windows were subsequently removed from the plans and the objection was withdrawn.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said that, whilst it was recognised that the development would be beyond the settlement limits and would therefore be a departure from the local plan, the site was relatively close to services in Baltonsborough and could not be described as an isolated or unsustainable location. The tilted balance applied due to the lack of a 5-year housing land supply.

Overall, Officers had concluded that any impacts arising from the application scheme would not be significant and would not demonstrably outweigh the benefits delivered. Therefore, the application was recommended for approval.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

There were no speakers.

There was a brief discussion among Members regarding drainage and flooding concerns. The Planning Officer confirmed that the statutory consultees were satisfied and had no concerns in this regard. The Chair commented that he knew the area very well and that he could not recall any serious flooding issues.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Claire Sully and seconded by Councillor Bente Height to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

On being put to the vote it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2022/1647/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider an application for the replacement of an existing barn with a single storey dwelling and detached annexe.

That planning application 2023/0174/REM be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that the site was located outside the settlement limits of the Local Plan and was within the Somerset Levels and Moors Ramsar catchment area. The application sought full permission for the replacement of an existing barn. The site already had prior consent for the conversion of the barn under Prior Approval Class Q which remained extant.

West Pennard Parish Council had recommended approval of the application and there had been no letters of objection from local residents.

The Officer’s Report concluded that the ‘tilted balance’ was engaged due to the lack of a 5-year housing land supply. However, given that the site already benefited from a fallback position in the barn conversion, the new proposal would not result in any additional harm above that already permitted in terms of sustainability, and no material harm had been identified. The application was therefore recommended for approval as a departure from the Development Plan.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

The Committee was then addressed by the applicant, who made the following points:

• With a growing family and working from home the need for additional space has become necessary.
• The layout is designed to make the most of the views.
• The choice of materials is in keeping with the existing barn and improves the aesthetic of the area.
• The application considers environmental factors and include swallow cups, bee bricks, bird houses and solar panels in the design.
• The plan is supported by the Parish Council and there have not been any objections.

In the brief discussion which followed one Member commented that the application was supported by the Parish Council and that there had not been any objections locally to the scheme. Another Member requested clarification on the phosphate mitigation situation. The Planning Officer confirmed that, as the site had prior approval for a Class Q conversion, the application was exempt from providing phosphate mitigation as this was the fallback position.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Claire Sully and seconded by Councillor Adam Boyden to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

On being put to the vote it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/1106/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider an application for the demolition of an outbuilding and erection of 1no 3 bed dwellinghouse.

That planning application 2023/0490/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that the application site was located in the open countryside, outside the development limits of any settlement but within the curtilage of a property known as Gaerleat and was currently occupied by an indoor swimming pool. The application sought full planning permission for the demolition of the swimming pool building and the erection of a single storey dwelling. The access would utilise the existing access track to Gaerleat.

Trudoxhill Parish Council had recommended the decision should be left to the Planning Officers and there had been 1 letter of objection from a local resident for reasons including:

• Inconsistent drawings
• Loss of privacy
• Noise impact
• Lighting impact on amenity and ecology
• Encroachment into the countryside
• Drainage issues

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said although the development would be beyond the settlement limits and would therefore represent a departure from the Local Plan, it was considered to be within walking distance of some key services and not considered to be isolated. As the Council did not have a five-year housing land supply the ‘tilted balance’ of the NPPF would apply. The additional dwelling would make a modest contribution to housing in the district.

Overall, Officers had concluded that any harms arising were not considered significant and did not demonstrably outweigh the benefits. Therefore, on balance, the application was recommended for approval.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

There were no speakers on this application.

As there was no debate amongst Members, it was proposed by Councillor Barry Clarke and seconded by Councillor Dawn Denton to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

On being put to the vote it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0490/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider an application for the erection of an annexe/outbuilding with ancillary use to the main house and associated change of use of a parcel of land from agricultural to residential for the siting of the annexe.

That planning application 2023/0897/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s Recommendation.

Votes – 6 in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that the host property was an existing detached dwelling set within the settlement of Trudoxhill with open agricultural land to the east, and neighbouring properties to the north and south. Trudoxhill does not have development limits and as such, in planning terms, the site lay in the open countryside, but was not an isolated location.  The proposal sought a change of use on a 45sqm section of land from agricultural to residential in order to site a single storey ancillarystructure to house a garage, workshop, home office and w/c.

Trudoxhill Parish Council had recommended refusal of the application for the following reasons:

• The site is too close to neighbouring properties
• Proposed building is too large and out of character
• Impact on the setting of the listed building
• Impact on neighbouring residential amenity due to its large scale
• Proposal is on agricultural land which could set a precedent and is contrary to development plans for the village

There had been 4 letters of objection from local residents for reasons including the following:

• Proximity of the annexe to the neighbouring property
• Overbearing impact
• Contrary to policy as it's on agricultural land
• Light and noise pollution

The Conservation Officer had commented that the principle of a single-storey outbuilding was acceptable within the site provided and was of an appropriate design, scale and position, ensuring subservience to the listed building.

In conclusion, the Officer Report said that, whilst it was acknowledged that the development would be outside development limits, it would abut an existing residential property. The proposed use was not considered to have a detrimental impact on the adjoining land uses.

The proposed annexe was shown as being for a garage, home office and workshop, all of which are considered uses ancillary to the main house and would not be capable of independent occupation or use. A condition to ensure that the structure remains ancillary would be applied should the application be approved.

Subject to conditions in regards landscaping, joinery details and sample panels, it was considered by Officers that the proposal would not have a harmful impact on the setting of the listed building.

Overall, Officers had concluded that the proposal represented a sustainable form of development and the application was therefore recommended for approval as a departure the development plan.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

There were no speakers on this application.

In the discussion which followed one Member commented that the location of the proposed annexe was too close to the neighbouring property and that the window of the annexe would overlook it. He also considered the annexe to be too large and was concerned about the loss of agricultural land. He remarked that Trudoxhill Parish Council had objected quite strongly and had genuine concerns.

In response, the Lead Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.

To consider an application for the erection of a dwelling and attached car port and formation of vehicular car access.

That planning application 2023/0574/FUL be APPROVED as a departure from the Development Plan in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan.

The Report continued that the application related to a plot of land at the end of a row of properties in a semi-rural location. Wells Road was made up of a variety of housing styles which included detached, semi-detached, bungalows and two-storey properties. The site had previously housed a mobile home, but this had since been removed and an area of hardstanding has been created. The site was located outside of the development limits, as defined by the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 (December 2014) and was within a Bat Consultation Zone and the Somerset Levels and Moors Ramsar Risk Area.

St Cuthbert Out Parish Council had recommended approval of the application. Natural England stated that regarding the Phosphates issue, the information provided was sufficient to demonstrate that the proposed development could achieve nutrient neutrality and therefore they had no objection to the proposed development.

There had been 1 letter of objection from a local resident for reasons including highway safety issues and the site being outside the development limits. There had also been 1 letter of support.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said that, given the history on the site which includes a refusal for a single storey dwelling on phosphates grounds alone, the principle of residential development had been considered acceptable. Although the new scheme did propose a revised design, it was not considered that the increase in height nor the amended materials, would adversely impact on neighbouring amenity or the character of the area. The applicant had purchased Phosphates Credits to offset any harm resulting from the creation of the new dwelling within the Somerset Ramsar and Moors Risk Area.

Overall, Officers had concluded that, while the site did lie outside development limits, the principle of development was previously considered acceptable and the applicant had overcome the previous reason for refusal. The application was therefore recommended for approval.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

The Committee was then addressed by the applicant’s agent who made the following points:

• Although the site does lie outside the settlement limit and is therefore contrary to planning policy, the previous reason for refusal was due to the release of phosphates.
• The applicant has overcome this reason for refusal by purchasing the necessary credits to mitigate the impact of phosphates.
• The contemporary design is of good quality, which is quite modest, has a low impact and sits nicely within the landscape.
• It has Passivhaus accreditation and very high sustainability credentials.

In the brief discussion which followed, Members made a number of comments including the following:

• The site is within a linear settlement which has a range of styles and designs.
• The windows facing the road may cause light spillage. Could more be located on the other side of the house to counteract this?
• Very pleased it has  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

A report showing decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate between 19 September and 25 October 2023.

Members noted this report.