Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutions.

Apologies were received from Councillors Councillors Helen Kay and Adam Boyden. Councillor Shane Collins substituted for Helen Kay and Councillor Heather Shearer for Adam Boyden.

The minutes from the previous meeting dated 1 August 2023 will be available to review at the next Planning Committee to be held on 3 October 2023.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 01.08.23 will be considered at the next meeting of the Planning Committee.

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 )

Councillor Martin Lovell declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Planning Applications 2023/0540/FUL and 2023/0541/LBC as he was a trustee of the Alfred Gillett Trust and said he would leave the meeting for the duration of the debate and vote on these applications.

He also declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest in Planning Applications 2021/2805/FUL and 2023/0338/FUL as he was a member of the Shepton Mallet Town Council’s Town Development and Planning Committee at the time these were considered by them. He said he did not consider himself pre-determined in either of these applications and would take part in the discussion and vote.

Councillor Bente Height declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest in planning application 2023/0338/FUL due to being on Shepton Mallet Town Council when it was discussed by them. At the time she was not on the Planning Committee for Somerset Council. She stated 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.

There were none.

Before the next agenda item, Councillor Susannah Hart left the meeting due to feeling unwell.

To consider applications 2023/0540/FUL & 2023/0541/LBC - The Grange, Farm Road, Street, Somerset.

Part demolition and replacement of existing buildings with a new two-storey building to connect the Grange and the Barn and alterations to existing buildings and landscaping across the site to create a new museum with a cafe and shop, whilst retaining offices and archive storage.

2023/0540/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0540/FUL be APPROVED contrary to Officer’s recommendation as the harm to the reduction of the listed wall would not outweigh the benefits of the scheme. Delegation was made to Planning Officers to negotiate details of the café extractor with the applicants and delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 6 in favour, 5 against

2023/0541/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0541/FUL be APPROVED contrary to Officer’s recommendation as the harm to the reduction of the listed wall would not outweigh the benefits of the scheme. Delegation was made to Planning Officers to negotiate details of the café extractor with the applicants and delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 8 in favour, 3 against

Application for part demolition and replacement of existing buildings with a new two-storey building to connect the Grange and the Barn and alterations to existing buildings and landscaping across the site to create a new museum with a cafe and shop, whilst retaining offices and archive storage.

The Officer’s Report stated that these applications had been referred to the Planning Committee as the Officer’s Recommendation for refusal was contrary to that of the Parish Council and Divisional Member.

The Report continued that the site had vehicular access via a private road off Farm Road and lay to the north and west of Clarks Village retail outlet with pedestrian entrances to the retail outlet and associated car park. Beyond the car park, to the north was the A39 main road and to the east of the site was a close of residential properties. The site was within in the development limits of Street.

The Divisional Member fully supported the applications and Street Parish Council had recommended approval. No comments were made by local residents. The Highway Authority had initially objected to the application as had the Local Flood Authority. Both objected due to lack of information. The Conservation Team had objected to the application and there were comments from The Georgian Group, The Victorian Society and The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings for the LBC (Listed Building Consent) application only.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said that with regards to Planning Application 2023/0540/FUL the Recommendation was for refusal for two reasons:

• The loss of existing fabric resulting from the reduction in the courtyard wall and potential impact of the extraction system (due to a lack of information) for the café would fail to preserve and enhance the grade II listed host building, The Grange, and thus result in less than substantial harm to this heritage asset. Furthermore, no clear and convincing justification for this work had been provided and it was not considered that there were any public benefits arising from the development that would sufficiently outweigh the harm that had been

identified. Additionally, the extract equipment had the potential to be out of character and appearance of the local area.

• In the absence of proof of access rights to the highway the application would be unacceptable in highway terms due to a lack of access and insufficient parking arrangements, which would have a knock-on effect for adverse impacts on highway safety.

Additionally, the Recommendation for the Listed Building Consent application 2023/0541/LBC was also for refusal as the proposal would result in “less than substantial harm” to the significance of The Grange and that it was considered that the harm the development would have on the significance of the Listing Building was not justified.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. She also reported some updating on the application that had occurred since the Report had been published.

There were a number of speakers in support of the applications who  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

To consider Planning Application 2021/2805/FUL – Multi-User Path, Shepton Mallet, Somerset.

Construction of a multi-user path along disused railway from Hamwood Viaduct through Windsor Hill tunnel and across Bath Road Viaduct to link to Shepton Mallet.

2021/2805/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2021/2805/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 10 in favour, 1 abstention

Application for Construction of a multi-user path along disused railway from Hamwood Viaduct through Windsor Hill tunnel and across Bath Road Viaduct to link to Shepton Mallet.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee by the Vice Chair of the Committee as there was a great deal of interest in the application and a number of objections to the scheme.

The application sought permission for a multi-user path along the former Somerset and Dorset Railway. The section of path, 2.4km long, will go over the Ham Wood viaduct, through the Windsor Hill tunnel, across Forum Lane and over the Bath Road viaduct to meet the A37 (Kilver Street Hill). The construction of the path will unlock further land either side and is a key component of the wider ‘Somerset Circle’ project.

Shepton Mallet Town Council was in support of the application as were many local groups and organisations. There had been 109 comments of support from local residents and 28 comments of objection. Comments in support included:

·       Form an essential part of the ‘Somerset Circle’.

·       Be a valuable amenity asset for residents and visitors.

·       Improve mental and physical health.

·       Encourage sustainable travel.

·       Restore and repurpose derelict heritage assets (viaducts and tunnels).

·       Be sensitive to biodiversity.

·       Boost the local economy through tourism.

·       Provide a soft surface, which is preferred by runners, walkers and dogs (it is also cheaper so more deliverable).

Comments in objection included:

·       Application is not inclusive for all – it discriminates against equestrians and disabled users (so is not a multi-user path).

·       Equestrians should not be forced to dismount on the viaducts or subjected to a trial basis through the tunnels

·       The path should not be segregated, and equestrians should not be forced onto a separate grass verge on the side of the path.

·       The surface should be made of a resilient, weatherproof material suitable for horses as well as wheelchairs and prams (a dust surface is unsuitable).

·       The central seating / viewing platforms on the viaduct will push users to the outside which is dangerous.

·       Signage should encourage safe passing and harmony amongst users.

In conclusion the Officer’s Report said that the scheme would help deliver the wider ‘Somerset Circle’ project and is supported by policy DP18 (Safeguarding Corridors for Sustainable Travel) in the Local Plan. In terms of benefits, the project offered access to the countryside for a range of users, including horse riders, cyclists and pedestrians. Whilst there would be some landscape impact through the loss of trees, this harm is not considered to be significant given the context of the site and the surrounding built form. Overall, the development was sustainable development, and the application was therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

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

There was one speaker in support of the application. She spoke on behalf of Shepton Mallet Town council and said they strongly supported the scheme and it would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

To consider Planning Application 2023/0338/FUL – Land at Paul Street, Shepton Mallet, Somerset.

Change of use of land from agriculture to use class E (f) and erection of Nursery and Pre-School building and associated access and parking.

2023/0338/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0338/FUL be APPROVED contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as a departure, as the benefits of the scheme outweighed the harms to the conservation area. Delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 9 in favour, 2 against

Application for the Change of use of land from agriculture to use class E (f) and erection of Nursery and Pre-School building and associated access and parking.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the recommendation was for refusal but there had been overwhelming support including from the Town Council and Division Councillor.

The application related to land to the north of the A361 (Paul Street) situated within the development limits of Shepton Mallet but within part of a larger area designated as Open Area of Local Significance under policy DP2 of the Local Plan.

The site had boundaries with an Open Area of Local Significance to the east and north and predominantly residential properties to the south. The application site was also situated within the Shepton Mallet Conservation Area, an Area of High Archaeological Potential and within the Somerset Levels and Moors Ramsar Catchment.

Shepton Mallet Town Council supported the application as had Somerset Education. The Conversation Officer objected due to less than substantial harm to the heritage asset (Shepton Mallet Conservation Area). There had been 8 letters of objection for reasons such as poor design and the impact on wildlife and the conservation area. There had also been 10 letters of support to the proposal to relocate and continue the nursery school use.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report said that although the proposed development would not adversely affect amenity, highway or pedestrian safety, and would modestly benefit local economy, it recognised that the current nursery was still operating and was meeting the existing demand and therefore the proposal would provide little public benefit. The harms identified to loss of a part of an OALS (Open Area of Local Significance) and the less than significant harm to the character of the Conservation Area carried significant weight and, in this case, outweighed the modest economic benefits brought by the proposed development. The application was recommended for refusal.

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

The Committee was then addressed by an objector to the application from the Shepton Mallet Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group His comments included:

• He disagreed that there was “overwhelming support” from the Town Council as the Steering Group, which was a part of the Town Council, had not taken the views of the Steering Group into consideration.
• The site is an area of treen space in an otherwise heavily developed area.;
• The site frames the views of one of the oldest prisons on the country and still contains the Prison’s crypt.
• The site should continue to be protected by its DP2 status as an OALS.

A statement in support of the application from Sarah Love, Service Manager for Education and Childcare Places at Somerset Council was read out by the Chair of the Planning Committee.

There were an additional 3 speakers in support of the application including a Councillor from Shepton Mallet Town Council. They made the following points:

• The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

To consider Planning Application 2023/0959/FUL – Tadhill Farm Cottage, Old Wells Road, Leigh on Mendip, Shepton Mallet, Somerset.

Alteration to an existing access and installation of a new access track (extension to residential curtilage).

2023/0959/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0959/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

Alteration to an existing access and installation of a new access track (extension to residential curtilage)

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee because the proposal represented a change of use of land within the open countryside which could not be supported in policy terms and therefore represented a departure from the development plan.

The Report continued that the application related to scrub land and agricultural land adjacent to Tadhill Farm cottage.

The Parish Council had recommended approval and the ecologist had no objections subject to conditions to ensure the protection of wildlife throughout the construction stage and to ensure the implementation of the proposed new hedgerow.

There had been no comments from local residents.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report stated that whilst the development was contrary to Planning Policies C1 and CP4, which restricted development in the open countryside, there were material considerations which justified a departure from the constraints of these policies, and where, as in this case, the benefits of the development outweighed the harm. The development was therefore recommended for approval.

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

The applicant spoke briefly to the Committee. He said he aimed to create a safe entrance to the farm which would improve safety for the children. There would be a small change of use for a small area of land which would improve its appearance. He pointed out that the Parish Council had recommended approval.

There were no comments or debate among the Committee Members and it was proposed by Councillor Heather Shearer and seconded by Councillor Alex Wiltshire to approve the application in accordance with the Officer Recommendation set out in the Report. On being put to the vote it was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0959/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

To consider Planning Application 2022/2076/OUT - Land At 373487 154309, Tyning Hill to Faulkland, Faulkland, Radstock, Somerset.

Outline Planning Permission for 5no. residential dwellings with details of access and all other matters reserved.

2022/2076/OUT RESOLVED

That planning application 2022/2076/OUT be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 8 in favour, 3 against, 1 abstention

Outline Planning Permission for 5no. residential dwellings with details of access and all other matters reserved.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the application site lay outside any development limits and the recommendation was for approval as a departure from the development plan.

The Report continued that the application sought outline planning permission for the principal of developing the site for 5 residential dwellings with all matters reserved, except for access. The application included an indicative site layout suggesting 3 x 4-bedroom detached dwellings and 2 x 3-bedroom detached dwellings, each with its own detached garage. Access was proposed to the five dwellings from the Greenway via four driveways. Two dwellings would have a shared driveway.

The Parish Council had recommended refusal for the following reasons:

·       Highway is unsuitable for additional traffic resulting in safety concerns

·       The junction of Tyning Hill and the A366 has poor visibility and high speeds

·       Visual impact on the existing properties

There were no objections from Environmental Protection Agency, Highways, Ecology, or the Tree Officer. However, Land Drainage had objected due to insufficient details regarding infiltration testing. There had also been 2 letters of objection from local residents and 1 neutral letter raising various points.

In conclusion, the Officer’s Report stated that whilst it was acknowledged that the development would be beyond the edge of the village, the application site could not be described as being in isolated open countryside. As the Council did not have a five-year housing land supply, the tilted balance of the NPPF applies – the houses would make a modest contribution to the housing in the district, there would be limited economic benefit during the construction period and the new residents may use local services and facilities. Any impacts arising from the application were not considered significant and would not outweigh the benefits. The recommendation was therefore for approval.

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

There were no one registered to speak about the application so the Chair opened up the debate to the Committee Members. The comments included:

• The houses were too large and were not in keeping with the village.
• The replacement hedgerow would take many years to establish so will affect the bat run.
• The scheme was outside the development area.
• Individual access for 3 of the 5 dwellings seemed too much.
• There would be overshadowing of the houses behind the application site.
• Preference would be for smaller, social housing on the site.

In response to Members comments, the Highways Officer stated that in this scenario with a small number of dwellings, the access arrangements were in keeping and were a feasible solution.

The Legal Advisor reminded Members about the tilted balance and that the scheme being outside the development limit was not a sustainable reason for refusal on its own.

Councillor Edric Hopps proposed to refuse, against the Officer’s Recommendation for reasons of overshadowing of the neighbouring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

To consider Planning Application 2023/0693/FUL – Ivy Cottage, Quarry Lane, Leigh on Mendip, Shepton Mallet, Somerset.

Creation of new access and driveway.

2023/0693/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0693/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 7 in favour, 4 against, 1 abstention

Application for the creation of new access and driveway.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as it was a departure from the Local Plan and the Officer’s Recommendation was for approval, whereas the Parish Council had raised objections.

The Report continued that the application site was a section of an agricultural field with existing field access on an unclassified road. It was outside of designated development limits and fell within the Mells Valley Special Area of Conservation (SAC), a Bat Consultation Zone, a SSSI Impact Risk Zone and a Coal Development Low Risk Area. Additionally, the site was close to Halecombe Quarry and Barn Close Quarry and hence was within the mineral safeguarding area in the Somerset Minerals Plan (2015).

The Parish Council had objected to the application for the following reasons:

·       Proposed materials and street lighting results in a suburbanising impact on the character of the area.

·       Impact on the landscape character given excessive excavation works required.

·       Loss of historic wall.

·       The fields proposed for the access were highlighted as making a positive contribution to the setting of the Grade I listed church in the appeal for 2020/1877/OTS.

·       The existing access was previously found acceptable under 2017/3266/PAA.

·       Highways safety concerns.

·       The barn conversion can be accommodated without this harm using the existing access.

The Highways Development Officer had raised not objections to the proposal, however there had been 4 letters of objection. Some of the reasons given were:

·       Impact on landscape - urbanisation

·       A formal roadway would include lighting which is not acceptable in this rural area

·       Loss of hedge, trees and wall

·       Impact on the setting of the listed building

·       Inspector highlighted the importance of the rural nature of this field on the setting of the church in their determination of 2020/1877/OTS

There were also 5 letters of support received. Some of the reasons given were:

·       Will take pressure of the existing access

·       Relocation of the 30mph limit is welcome

·       Existing access gets obstructed during school drop off and pick up times

·       Safer for school children

·       Increased visibility

In conclusion, the Officer’s report stated that whilst it was acknowledged that the development would be beyond the edge of the village and therefore would represent a departure from local plan, it was only proposed in association with the proposal for 3 terraced dwellings (ref: 2023/1084/FUL). The proposed use was not considered to have a detrimental impact on the adjoining land uses, landscape and visual impact, impact on heritage assets and/or highway safety. Therefore, on balance the application represented a sustainable form of development and was 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 addressed by the Chair of the Leigh-on-Mendip Parish Council. She made a number of points including:

• Concerned that proper consideration had not been given to access.
• There would be a roadway into an agricultural field.
• The proposal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

To consider Planning Application 2023/1084/FUL – Land at 369311 147357, Quarry Lane, Leigh On Mendip, Shepton Mallet, Somerset.

Demolition of existing barn to form terrace of 3no. single storey dwellings.

2023/1084/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/1084/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 7 in favour, 4 against, 1 abstention

Demolition of existing barn to form terrace of 3no. single storey dwellings.

This was presented before agenda item 10.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee as it was a departure from the Local Plan and the Officer’s Recommendation was for approval, whereas the Parish Council had recommended refusal of the application.

The Report continued that the application was part retrospective as a section of the barn had already been demolished and new build construction had commenced.

Leigh-on-Mendip Parish Council had recommended refusal for the following reasons:

·       Within the mineral safeguarding area for nearby quarries

·       Unsustainable location

·       Impact on the setting of the Grade I listed church

·       Impact on the landscape character of the area

·       Proximity to Mells Valley Special Area of Conservation and impact on bats

·       Highway safety concerns from increase in traffic

There had been one letter of objection from local residents and two letters in support. The following objections were raised by the Parochial Church Council:

·       Not a conversion as the original barn isn't being reused

·       No longer retains the character of the original barn

·       The application site is within the minerals safeguarding distance of Halecombe Quarry and objections were raised by Minerals and Waste Policy on a similar application nearby

·       Barn was previously found to be suitable for conversion as per the structural survey submitted with the Class Q application, why was this not fulfilled?

·       Impact on the setting of the Grade I Listed church

In conclusion, the Officer’s report stated that whilst it was acknowledged that the development would be beyond the edge of the village and therefore would represent a departure from local plan, it could not be described as being in isolated open countryside.

As the Council did not have a five-year housing land supply, the tilted balance of the NPPF would apply – the houses would make a modest contribution to the housing in the district, there would be limited economic benefit during the construction period and the new residents may use local services and facilities.

As the assessment of the application had not identified any harm in terms of landscape and visual impact, impact on the heritage asset or any highway safety concerns, any impacts arising from the application were not considered significant and would not outweigh the benefits. The recommendation was therefore for approval.

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

The Committee was addressed by the Chair of the Leigh-on-Mendip Parish Council. She made a number of points including:

• The village is not sustainable
• The original application for a barn conversion was refused, so why is this recommended for approval?
• It is now a new build rather than a conversion which a planning inspector said he would not support. The barn should be recognised.
• Impact on the setting of the Grade 1 listed church.
• There is no need for additional housing within the village as there are still properties on the market.

Next  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

To consider Planning Application 2023/0516/ADV - Land On The South Side Of Station Approach, Frome. Somerset.

Erection of 1 No.48 Sheet Externally Illuminated Paper and Paste Advertising Display.

2023/0516/ADV RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0516/ADV be REFUSED contrary to Officer’s recommendation due to the impact of the scheme on highway safety and visual amenity.

Votes – 6 in favour, 5 against, 1 abstention

Application for the Erection of 1 No.48 Sheet Externally Illuminated Paper and Paste Advertising Display.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of the Divisional Member. The Chair decided that the application should go to the Committee, due to the amount of public interest and concerns raised by the local Members.

The Report continued that the proposal sought advertisement consent to erect a 6m x 3m illuminated paper and paste advertising display. A previous application had been approved that allowed a digital board to be erected. This proposal was for a revised scheme following residents’ concerns regarding the digital board.

The Divisional Member objected to the revised scheme due to amenity, effect on the Conservation Area and highway safety. Frome Town Council appreciated the steps that the applicant had taken after listened to residents’ concerns and had no objection to the revised proposal of a paper and paste display. However, Frome Civic Society objected to the “gigantic, intrusive advertising board “for the following reasons:

• Vehicle, cyclist and pedestrian safety.
• Harm to the character of the Conservation area which extends along the oppositive side of the road.

There had been 5 letters of opposition from local residents for reasons of being detrimental to the character of the area, a distraction to highways users and an unnecessary use of energy.

After assessing the application, the Officer recommended approval with the standard advertisement conditions.

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

The Committee was addressed by a local resident who opposed the application. He made the following points:

• There had been a lot of public opposition to the digital billboard that had been approved by Mendip District Council in January 2023 due to safety and amenity concerns.
• This revised design would likely be vandalised and would become an eyesore and the first thing visitors to Frome would see when arriving by train.
• The billboard would be a distraction to road users and therefore the number of accidents would rise.
• The large billboard was not in keeping with the area which is currently trees and small directional signage.
• Encouraged Members to refuse the application based on the objections from a vast majority of Frome residents.

Divisional Member Shane Collins then spoke to the Committee. He opposed the application and made the following points:

• The location of the billboard would spoil the visual amenity of the entry point to Frome.
• The size of the billboard was far too large and inappropriate for its location.
• The unnecessary illumination would use too much valuable energy.
• The billboard is designed to attract attention therefore it is a danger to road users.

In the debate which followed, Members made the following points:

• Why is the billboard needed in that position?
• It may get vandalized and become an eyesore.
• Even if Members refused this application, the previous digital application had already been approved.
• The digital application had been approved by Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.