Agenda item

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 quality of a child’s early learning experience is critical as children will develop most during the first 5 years of their lives.
• The existing buildings are not up to standard and if the application is not approved it may mean the nursery will have to close, thus affecting children, families and staff.
• Closure of the nursery would impact on the local economy.
• Children should be allowed to learn in an environment that will nurture them and expose them to a natural environment.
• The Town Council was aware of the Green Space but there was a need to balance this with the needs of the local community and there are not enough nursery spaces.
• The building is well designed, low level and takes into account the slope of the land.

The final speaker was the applicant’s agent who made the following points:

• There would be an impact on the open space in a conservation area but the scheme attempted to minimise this.
• The site is perfect for the forest scheme ethos of the nursery.
• The benefits of the scheme do outweigh the harms identified.
• If not approved, there will be a loss of jobs and it would be very hard to provide all the childcare required.

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

• Would not want to see the nursery close down.
• The need for early years provision would outweigh the conservation issues.
• There always needs to be a compromise between green spaces and development but we should be looking at urban infill and not building out of town on green spaces.
• The proposed building is modular and has inadequate insulation. There was no sustainability information submitted with the application.
• The longevity of the building is not certain.
• The proposal does not include solar panels. These should be installed if approved.
• It would be a great space for the children to learn but as it would be built on a green space, it would need to be protected for the future.
• Childrens needs should be put first and this amenity is greatly needed.
• The site is overgrown with brambles and it would not be a loss to the town.

The Legal Advisor reminded Members that they must determine the application in accordance with the development plan and consider the planning balance. There were 2 reasons for refusal given by the Planning Officer and Members must consider the harms and whether the benefits of the scheme outweighed the harms. The Planning Officer added that if Members were minded to approve the application, the conditions including sustainable drainage and oil traps would be included in the terms of the approval which should be delegated to Planning Officers, the Chair and the Vice-Chair.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Claire Sully and seconded by Councillor Edric Hobbs to approve the application as a departure, contrary to the Officer’s Recommendation, as the benefits of the scheme outweighed the harms.

On being put to the vote the proposal was carried with 9 votes in favour and 2 against.

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