Planning Board

DATE: 17th July 2019 NOTES:

1. Items may be taken out of order and therefore we are unable to advise the time at which an item will be considered.

2. Applications can be determined in any manner notwithstanding the recommendation being made

3. Councillors who have a query about anything on the agenda are requested to inspect the file and talk to the case officer prior to the meeting.

4. Any members of the public wishing to make late additional representations should do so in writing or contact their Ward Councillors prior to the meeting. Please give a day’s notice if you wish to inspect a file if this is possible.

5. Letters of representation referred to in these reports together with any other background papers may be inspected at any time prior to the Meeting and these papers will be available at the Meeting.

6. For the purposes of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, unless otherwise stated against a particular report , ‘background papers’ in accordance with section 100D will always include the case officer’s written report and any letters or memoranda of representation received.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Planning Board - 17th July 2019

Item Page Application Number Ward/Site Case Officer DM01 3 2018/2626/REM Land North Of The A371 Ms Nikki And West Of Wells, White Wells, Somerset

St Cuthbert Out North DM02 25 2019/0719/HSE Capella , Ashcott Road, Hayley Meare, Glastonbury, BA6 Broadbent 9ST

Moor DM03 28 2019/0763/HSE Valley House , Ham Hayley Street, Baltonsborough, Broadbent Glastonbury, BA6 8PU

Butleigh And Baltonsborough

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 2

Agenda Item No. DM01

Case Officer Ms Nikki White

Site Land North Of The A371 And West Of Wells Wells Somerset

Application Number 2018/2626/REM

Date Received 26th October 2018

Applicant/ C/o Agent Organisation

Application Type Reserved Matters Application

Proposal Application for approval of reserved matters following outline approval 2014/1522/OTS for the construction of up to 220 dwellings (C3), open space and drainage infrastructure, formation of new means of vehicular access on A371 and associated highway works, and associated infrastructure. Matters of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale to be determined. Additional information received 19.12.2018

Ward St Cuthbert Out North

Parish St Cuthbert Out Parish Council

Referral to Ward Member/Chair and Vice Chair:

Although a Board referral has not been triggered, due to the scale of this application, it is referred to the ward member and the Chair and Vice Chair of Planning Board.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints:

The application relates to land to the west of Wells, north of the A371.

Outline application 2014/1522/OTS was permitted at appeal on 19.04.2016 for up to 220 new dwellings, open space and drainage infrastructure, formation of new means of vehicular access on A371 and associated highway works, and associated infrastructure. All matters were reserved except access.

Outline permission includes a signed S106 agreement including affordable housing, travel plan, new pedestrian crossing on the A371, public open space provision and extension of the footpath along the A371 to serve the application site.

This application relates to reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. 220 dwellings and associated development are proposed.

Procedural note:

This application has been subject to 2 rounds of public consultation, following the submission of additional information in December 2018.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 3

Some other amendments have been submitted through the life of the application which have not been subject to separate consultation processes due to the nature of changes proposed. This includes amended plans for plots 59-60, to show reduced building heights from 3 storeys to 2.5 storeys. Although neighbours are still concerned with building heights in this case, the amended plans have been submitted to try to address concerns and shown a reduction in height rather than an increase. Comments received outside the formal consultation process have nonetheless been considered to date.

Relevant History:

 2014/1522/OTS – Outline application (all matters reserved except access) for the construction of up to 220 dwellings (C3), open space and drainage infrastructure, formation of new means of vehicular access on A371 and associated highway works, and associated infrastructure – allowed at appeal - 19.04.2016

 2019/0626/APP – Application to discharge conditions 8 (landscaping), 10 (Habitat Creation), 11 (Wildlife Management), 14 (Badger mitigation strategy), 15 (Reptile Mitigation strategy), 16 (road construction and kerb type layout), 22 (Contamination mitigation), 24(details of bat and bird boxes) and 25 (construction management plan) from 2014/1522/OTS – pending consideration

 2019/0568/FOOT - Application for the diversion of Public Right of Way (WS 10/54) in association with Planning Permission Ref: 2014/1522/OTS – pending consideration

Summary of Ward Councillor comments, Town/Parish Council comments, representations and consultee comments:

Comments are summarised for brevity.

Ward Member: No comments received

St Cuthbert Out Parish Council: Support.

Councillors requested:  Need for GP Surgery / village hall  Links to footpaths should be for multi-users (not steps)  Design and materials should complement locality  Renewable energy technologies should be incorporated  Hedges should be retained and maintained – wildlife corridors  Alternative access required  S106 changes - to account for changes since it was agreed; travel vouchers exchanged for direct contributions to buses

Wells City Council: Support subject to consideration of the following:

 Affordable housing must remain at 40%.  Fully supports comments from St Cuthbert Out Parish Council.  Wells City Council should be part of the discussions on s.278 agreements. Up-dated required since 2014 outline - mitigation of additional traffic at Elm Close / A371 junction.  Additional pedestrian crossing needed.  Lack of information regarding landscaping.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 4

Land Drainage: Following submission of additional information, no objection subject to conditions.

Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA): No objection subject to conditions

 System surcharging in the 1 in 30 year acceptable.  Climate change - should be 40%. As this is what the developer has been working to throughout, unreasonable to ask for a change at this stage – not general stance, in this case only.  Plan showing the different roles and responsibilities around access requirements (i.e. easements etc.) and maintenance going forward should be provided.

Somerset Drainage Board: No objections following submission of additional information.

Environment Agency: No objections

 Development is taking place outside of Flood Zones 2 and 3 as per the outline planning condition.  Request developer provide the model output files to update the flood map for the site.

Bristol Water: No objections

 10" and 3" diameter main within the site boundary which could be affected by the proposed development.  Applicant must discuss for proposals directly with Bristol Water.

Natural England: No comments - refer to standing advice and in house ecology specialists

Tree Officer: No objection subject to conditions to agree method statement for tree retention.

Ecology: No objection

 General support for landscape plan, although some more areas of trees and scrub could be created.

Contaminated Land: Comments only

 Application does not mention contamination. Assume that pre-commencement condition 22 will be addressed in a separate application.

Housing Enabling Officer: No objection

 Affordable housing provision policy compliant and in line with outline application.  Clustering and layout of affordable units acceptable - sufficiently integrated across the development as well as reflecting the relevant tenure split.

Public Rights of Way (PROW): No objection subject condition and informative

 There is a PROW that runs through the site (public footpath WS 10/54) and a PROW that abuts the site (public footpath WS 17/55).  Proposal will obstruct the footpath WS 10/54 so a diversion order should be applied for.  Planning permission does not entitle developer to obstruct a public right of way.  A Grampian-style condition will be required in this respect with regard to timing.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 5

 Welcome proposed links to the cycle path to the north for pedestrians and where possible these links should be made accessible for cyclists.

Sport England: No specific comments

Highways Authority:

Proposes creation of links:  Footpath links to south not within site boundary.  The two-proposed links to the north, (to the shared facilities on the former disused railway line) not within site boundary. Steps shown. Should be a shared facility for pedestrians and cyclists.  No information on emergency access vehicular controls for Wheeler Grove.

Internal roads:  Unclear if internal roads would be raised  Consideration of calming mechanisms required  Visibility splays need careful consideration, including the visibility near driveways close to trees etc.  Shared facilities for pedestrians and cyclists should be of sufficient width to allow segregation of users.

Details for adoption / highways legal agreement:  Commuted sums for structures (such as steps, retaining walls, attenuation tanks etc.) to be assessed by the County Council’s structural.  Trees and planted areas proposed for adoption will need to be assessed by the councils Landscape designers and will attract a commuted sum for future maintenance.

Emergency access:  No objection to proposed emergency access off the end of Wheeler Close.  If this access were to be put forward for highway adoption the proposed bollards and construction detail would be audited for suitability.

Drainage:  Acknowledge receipt of Technical Note 1 (Drainage Scheme Technical Note)  No objection to surface water drainage strategy explained in technical note but would make the following observations:

1. Additional road gullies will be required along the northern channel line of the A371 to collect surface water run-off from the existing carriageway upstream of the proposed new access junction. It is also likely that the existing highway carrier drain will be encountered during the site frontage works and allowance should be made within the design to temporarily or permanently lower, protect or divert this, and any other, existing service present. The location, depth and condition of all existing services fronting the development should be established as part of the highway design process. 2. The designer will need to consider the means by which maintenance vehicles and plant can access the attenuation ponds from the estate roads within the development.

Parking:  Revised Parking Schedule - whilst there is a short fall of parking spaces based on the requirement of SCC parking strategy of 17no allocated spaces for the proposed dwellings this is acceptable in this instance given that the site requirement for visitor parking is 39 spaces and 45no are to be provided.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 6

Environmental Protection: Comments only

 Application does not mention the lighting scheme. Assume lighting scheme and condition 25, submission of a Construction Management Plan and Method statement, will be addressed in a separate application.  Recommend condition to secure a construction management plan

Designing Out Crime Officer: No objection subject to comments

 Please widen the footpath entrance to match width of the footpath behind hedgerow  Bollards to restrict unauthorised use at entrance to site near unit 64  Bollards on footpath that leads off road access between units 90/165

The Strawberry Lined East [cycle and pedestrian group]: Neutral

 Links to footpaths to avoid steps and be accessible to all  Additional footpaths

Wells Civic Society: Objection

 Insufficient renewable energy  Design – heights adjacent to existing development  Arb - impact on protected Ash tree, loss of hedgerows

Local Representations:

Comments have been received via two public consultation processes (22.11.2018 – 13.12.19 and 21.12.18-11.1.19) and some comments have been received outside of consultation periods. The applicant has submitted various amended plans through the life of the application, and not all have been subject to additional consultation processes due to the scale and nature of the development and the amendments proposed. The Council has met its obligations in relation to publication and consultation.

Objections:

19 neighbour objections have been received. Some neighbours have commented on more than one occasion. Objections are summarised below:

 Principle - no need for more housing in Wells, no policy basis  Inadequate local facilities  Flooding – flooding history on site and nearby, inadequate drainage proposed, inadequate storm water infrastructure  Highways safety – road capacity, parking, emergency access inappropriate/not adequately controlled, footpaths should link to leisure centre, footpath links to existing footpaths should avoid steps  Ecological harm  Design – scale, position, height should be limited to 2 storeys, design amendments required, crime assessment needed, layout accessibility, play space to meet relevant standards, boundary treatments and maintenance, buffer between existing and proposed houses would reduce impact / could provide allotments, heritage harm

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 7

 Amenity – overlooking, overbearing, loss of light, noise, security, construction times, light pollution from houses and cars, wind tunnelling, mess  Landscaping / trees – inadequate information submitted, should be assessed by a landscape architect, unclear/misleading/erroneous information submitted; LPA should impose robust conditions, harm to protected tree and pressure to prune, redesign/repositioning required to preserve protected tree, any lost protected tree should be replaced, loss of hedgerow  Process – plan inconsistencies/changes to house types, Board decision requested

Comments received as part of the objections which are not material planning considerations are summarised below:

 Loss of view  House prices  More bungalows instead  Reduced profits for house builders

Neutral comments:

1 neutral neighbour comment has been received as summarised below:

 Impact on environment /AONB  Impact on ecology

Full details of all consultation responses can be found on the Council’s website www.mendip.gov.uk

Summary of all planning policies and legislation relevant to the proposal:

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 places a duty on local planning authorities to determine proposals in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The following development plan policies and material considerations are relevant to this application:

The Council’s Development Plan comprises:

 Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014)  Somerset Waste Core Strategy

The following policies of the Local Plan Part 1 are relevant to the determination of this application:

 CP1 – Mendip Spatial Strategy  CP2 – Supporting the Provision of New Housing  CP10 – Wells City Strategy  DP1 – Local Identity and Distinctiveness  DP3 – Heritage Conservation  DP4 – Mendip’s Landscapes  DP5 – Biodiversity and Ecological Networks  DP6 – Bat Protection  DP7 – Design and Amenity of New Development  DP8 – Environmental Protection

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 8

 DP9 – Transport Impact of New Development  DP10 – Parking Standards  DP11 – Affordable Housing  DP14 – Housing Mix and Type  DP16 –Open Space and Green Infrastructure  DP19 – Development Contributions  DP23 – Managing Flood Risk

Other possible Relevant Considerations (without limitation):

 National Planning Policy Framework  National Planning Practice Guidance  The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)  Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Notes issued by Historic England  Wells Conservation Area Appraisal (2011)

Assessment of relevant issues:

Principle of the Use:

Local Plan part 1 policy CP10 includes a housing allocation of Land West of Wells, which is separated from neighbouring Haybridge via a green gap. This allocation is divided into 2 areas known as Southern Development Area and Northern Development Area. The Northern Development Area has planning permission for 203 houses (2017/0022/FUL) and development is largely complete. The application site relates to the Southern Development Area.

Outline planning permission has been granted under application reference 2014/1522/OTS therefore the principle of residential development has been established at this site. This reserved matters application is needed to gain approval of the details that were reserved at the initial outline stage.

Design of the Development and Impact on the Street Scene and Surrounding Area:

The application site is located to on the western edge of Wells, to the north of the A371. The current site is made up of a number of agricultural fields.

Residential development to the east of the application site is characterised by modern suburban cul-de-sacs of semi-detached and detached houses and bungalows with gardens, grass verges and both off and on street parking. The material palette in Wood Close and Wheeler Grove includes recon stone and double Roman tiles. Residential development to the east of Charter Way includes a modern designed estate with some distinct character features including mono pitch roofs. Housing is largely constructed with red brick and generally 1 and 2 storeys in height.

Wells leisure centre is located to the north east of the application site, separated by playing fields/public open space.

A Public Right of Way runs along the north of the site, a former railway line.

New development is being implement by David Wilson Homes to the north of the railway line. This includes 203no. 2-2½ storey homes. The material palette broadly reflects the palette proposed as part of the current application.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 9

Haybridge is situated to the west of the application site. This small settlement would be separated from housing development by open space. Haybridge includes 2 storey red brick terraced houses and two storey rendered housing. A collection of employment uses is located to the east of the site, including St Cuthbert’s Mill with distinct red brick chimney.

Access off the A371 has been permitted at outline stage, and includes extended pedestrian footpath, cycleway and crossing point. Agreement of these details has been formalised in the outline s106 agreement. The applicant is also progressing a separate legal agreement with the Highway Authority for access to the A371 and adoption of the internal estates roads. An emergency access point to Wheeler Grove has also been agreed at outline stage, with details submitted as part of this reserved matters application (further discussed as part of highways assessment below).

The proposed residential units would be positioned to the east of the site - running from the A371 to the south and adjacent to the former railway/PROW to the north; and would sit next to Wood Close, Wheeler Grove and the leisure centre to the east. A spine road is proposed to run in a north/south direction with various cul-de-sacs running off this. The proposed dwellings include a mixture of detached, semis and terraced houses as well as flats. Housing on the south of the site is proposed to be set back from but facing the A371. The proposed development comprises a range of flats and houses which are 2 storey, 2 ½ storey and 3 storeys in height. They would be a mix of detached, semi-detached, terraced and flatted properties. The elevations show a mix of brick, render and reconstituted stone.

There would be some variety and interest to the street-scene within the proposed development achieved through the use of a mix of materials, scale and elevation treatments. The scale of the development is also considered to be acceptable being predominantly 2 storey and 2 ½ storey dwellings, with some 3 storey buildings generally set further within the site, which would sit acceptably in the context of the site including the 203 dwellings approved at the neighbouring site which allows for a similar material palette and scaling.

It is considered that as a whole the development would respond satisfactorily to the varied character of the area and the surrounding context.

Boundary treatments are made up of faced brickwork walling with recon stone copping and timber fencing. Boundary treatment heights are 1800mm. In the context of the development the boundary treatments as proposed are considered acceptable.

The Designing Out Crime Officer has suggested widened footpaths and bollards in some locations. Footpath widths have been widened through the life of the application. Whilst no bollards are proposed, it is not considered reasonable to refuse the application on this issue.

The proposal by reason of its design, siting, scale, massing, layout and materials is acceptable and contributes and responds to the local context and maintains the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The proposal accords with policy DP1 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014) and part 12 of the NPPF.

Landscape and Views:

The site is identified in the Landscape Assessment of Mendip District (1997) as being within the Wookey principle character area and the Polsham Lodge Hills sub character area, where the features include steep hillocks, pasture and occasional arable, varied, irregular field patterns and scattered farmsteads.

The Inspector for Local Plan part I made the following statement in relation to landscape:

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 10

‘88. In landscape terms I share the Council’s view that, taken as a whole, the land to the west of Wells has the greatest potential for development. The land is relatively low lying and contained by higher land to the north and south and by a pattern of thick hedgerows and trees. That said the development of this area will have some adverse effect on the landscape when seen, for example, from higher ground to the north but the site relates well to the existing urban edge and with the substantial area of green space proposed on its western and southern sides, it would not compromise the appearance of any approaches to the City. This together with the fact that there is no noticeable visual connection between this land and the historic core of the city means that its development need not compromise the tourist potential of Wells.’

Condition 10 of the outline permission requires 6.7ha of species rich meadows. The reserved matters application shows a substantial green gap proposed as public open space. This would retain separation of the built edge of Wells from Haybridge and provide accessible open space for residents within and adjoining the application site. This also respects the foraging patterns of protected bat species and reflects the developable parts of the site bearing in mind the location of the flood zone. This is considered acceptable by the SCC Ecologist and Drainage Engineers.

The proposed landscaping to support the housing element of the scheme is simple but is considered to be in-keeping with the approach taken elsewhere in the adjoining area. A condition is recommended in relation to landscape implementation and retention. Requirements for a management company is set out in the legal agreement and includes maintenance.

The details set out in this reserved matters application accord with the parameter plans agreed at outline stage. The form, height, siting and details are all considered acceptable in terms of landscape impact. Whilst is it acknowledged the proposed development would have a landscape impact, in light of the policy framework, the extant outline permission and the impacts of this development as proposed, the application is considered acceptable in this regard.

Impact on Residential Amenity:

It is acknowledged that the residential development of the site would have some impact on the amenity of the occupiers of those properties closest to the application site in respect of changing their existing outlook and environment which they currently enjoy. However any impact has to be viewed in the context of the already permitted, and extant outline permission.

The proposed houses on the southern border of the application site are set back from the road with adequate verge and garden areas. Plots adjacent to the northern boundary would be set back from the PROW.

Distances from houses to the north are adequate to confirm there is no significant harm to neighbour amenity. Proposed dwellings on plots to the north east would be adequately set off the boundary abutting the playing fields associated with the leisure centre.

It is understood there is concern from some residents of Wheeler Grove and Wood Close in particular that proposed development on the eastern boundary would result in harm to neighbouring amenity. Concerns include overbearing including by way of proposed heights, overshadowing and overlooking.

Proposed houses along the eastern boundary of the site are largely 2 storey in height. Proposals for plots 59-60 have been amended through the life of the application from 3 storey to 2½ houses. Although these houses would sit adjacent to existing bungalows, considering the distance from the existing bungalows and the design and orientation of the proposed development, this relationship

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 11 is considered acceptable including in terms of impact on the character of the area and impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers. Although neighbours are still concerned with building heights the impact on residential amenity is considered acceptable.

Plots 61-64 are set off the overall boundary and way from houses on Wheeler Grove with rear gardens and parking. Due to the orientation and design of the proposed dwellings, the relationship between existing occupants is considered acceptable.

2 storey flats are proposed on the eastern site boundary at plots 43-44 which would sit next to the garden of 25a Wheeler Grove, an infill bungalow with roof accommodation set close to the application boundary. Although two storey, they would not face the application site. Side windows are proposed to serve bathrooms and it is recommended a condition is attached to any planning permission to ensure these remain opaque glazed.

The proposed house at plot 49 is also proposed in a position sideways to neighbouring housing which reduces the overlooking impact between properties. However, there is a reasonable gap between the two and on balance the development as proposed is considered acceptable. Removal of permitted development rights for additional windows is recommended, so this could be considered in detail and subject to neighbour consultation.

Other proposed dwellings on the eastern boundary would generally back on to existing development at Wheeler Grove and Wood Close, being separated by gardens. Given the distances between properties, siting, scale, height and design details (including window locations) the application is considered acceptable in this regard.

Within the proposed development itself, due to the siting, design and overall layout it is considered that the inter relationship between future occupants and their residential amenity is acceptable. Plot distances and windows are adequately designed in this regard.

Neighbouring occupiers have raised concerns regarding disruption and disturbance during the construction process. A degree of disruption is to be expected from any construction project and outline planning permission has already been granted for this scheme. In this regard condition 25 of the outline permission requires the submission and agreement of a construction management plan, which has already been submitted by the applicant under application reference 2019/0626/APP. This includes reasonable construction hours and access to the site.

Given the design, scale, massing and siting of the proposed development the proposal would not cause significant harm to the residential amenity of existing neighbouring occupiers and would provide an acceptable level of residential amenity to future occupiers of the development. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with policy DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014) and part 12 of the NPPF.

Assessment of Highway Issues:

Outline permission includes a signed S106 agreement including travel plan, a new uncontrolled pedestrian crossing on the A371 and extension of the footpath along the A371 to serve the application site. The applicant has submitted technical details to Somerset County Council including the crossing point, footpath extension and estate road adoption. As these details have been agreed at outline stage and are required under a signed legal agreement, they are not queried further as part of the reserved matters application assessment.

The proposed access has also been agreed at outline stage. The Highway Authority did not object to the proposed access off the A371, and the appeal Inspector agreed with this approach.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 12

The Highways Authority has made various comments on the proposed internal layout, links to existing footpaths and parking numbers.

In relation to internal parking layout, traffic calming measures are suggested on the main straight spine road for highway safety reasons. The applicant is in discussions with the highway authority in relation to the legal agreement for road adoption. This includes detailed discussion on traffic calming, footpaths and visibility splays. Following the submission of various additional information the reserved matters application is considered acceptable in relation to access, footpaths and internal layout.

Links to existing footpaths to the north and south of the site have been confirmed to be within public ownership therefore a grampian condition is proposed to ensure footpaths will link up. Revised plans have been submitted to remove steps from these linkages.

Following the submission of revised parking information, the highways authority has confirmed that parking is acceptable.

When issuing outline planning permission, the Inspector confirmed access onto Wheeler Grove was to be used for emergencies only. Condition 17 of the outline permission requires the submission and agreement of the mechanisms to control this access as an emergency only. This is an important issue for officers and neighbours within Wheeler Grove, who would not welcome a standard access through Wheeler Grove, a quiet cul-de-sac. Whilst it was not strictly necessary as part of this reserved matters application, details have been submitted (plan 8948-SK-02 P01) showing a footway across the boundary of the site and 4 bollards to prevent cars using the emergency access. The bollards are proposed to be padlocked, which could be cut by the emergency services if necessary. The highway authority has confirmed this arrangement is acceptable. And this can now be dealt with formally through an application to discharge outline condition 17.

Whilst some comments have requested alterative access arrangements, as access has been agreed at outline stage it is not reasonable to revisit this element of the scheme at reserved matters stage.

Similarly, any requested alterations to the legal agreement set out at outline stage cannot be reasonably revisited at reserved matters stage. This includes alterations to the travel plan and requests for additional contributions.

Any request for town/city councils to be informed in discussions regarding the legal agreement for the internal road adoption should be taken directly to Somerset County Council.

The means of access and parking arrangements are acceptable and maintain highway safety standards. The proposal accords with policies DP9 and DP10 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014) and part 9 of the NPPF.

Drainage:

The application site includes land within flood zones 1 and 3. Flood zone 3 areas are proposed to be used for public open space, with new housing proposed on flood zone 1. 2no attenuation ponds are proposed.

Following extensive discussions with the applicants regarding drainage, and the submission of significant additional technical information, there are no remaining objections from the Drainage Engineer, Lead Local Flood Authority or Drainage Board.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 13

In relation to storm infrastructure, statutory consultees have reviewed this issue in detail and are satisfied with the details submitted and it is not therefore considered reasonable to refuse the application on this issue.

2 conditions are recommended including retention of maintenance buffers around watercourses; and compliance with technical drainage documents as well as notification of commencement of works to allow drainage inspections.

There remains outstanding technical information regarding Basin 2. In order to progress with determining this application, this information is recommended to be required via condition. This has been agreed with the Drainage Engineer.

As such, the application is now considered acceptable in drainage terms, subject to the inclusion of the suggested conditions.

Affordable Housing and Housing Mix:

DP11 of the adopted Local Plan requires that 30% of the total number of new homes be provided in affordable tenures, this was secured via a legal agreement at the outline stage.

Part 5 of the NPPF explains that local planning authorities should plan for a mix of housing based on current and future demographic trends, market trends and the needs of different groups in the community. Local Plan Policy DP14 is considered broadly consistent with this approach. It states that proposals for residential development will be required to provide an appropriate mix of dwelling types and sizes.

There are 88 affordable units proposed which would be 22 x 1 bed, 29 x 2 bed, 32 x 3 bed and 5 x 4 bed with an overall combined mix (affordable and market units) of 22 x 1 bed units, 38 x 2 bed units, 104 x 3 bed units, 52 x 4 bed units and 4 x 5 bed units.

The Housing Enabling Officer raises no objections to the scheme in respect of the mix and layout of the affordable units. It is considered that the proposed development would provide a suitable mix of dwellings of an appropriate variety in size, type and tenure to accord with DP14 of the adopted Local Plan and the NPPF.

Environmental Protection:

Officers in Environmental Protection have not objected to the application.

The submission and agreement of lighting details is required as part of outline permission condition 12. Lighting details have not yet been submitted by the applicant, and would be required to be agreed prior to any works starting on site. It is acknowledged that lighting is an important issue for consideration, but it is not considered necessary to duplicate this condition at reserved matters stage, so this issue will be considered in detail as part of a separate application process.

The requirement for the submission and agreement of a construction management plan is set out in condition 25 of the outline permission. Details have been submitted as part of a separate condition discharge application (ref: 2019/0626/APP) which is currently under consideration. Again, this issue is considered important but not necessary to duplicate at reserved matters stage.

Contaminated Land:

Condition 22 of the outline permission requires the applicant to agree a land contamination strategy prior to works on site. This information has been submitted as part of conditions

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 14 discharge application 2019/0626/APP. This reserved matters application is therefore considered acceptable in terms of land contamination.

Trees:

The application site includes hedgerows and trees on the field boundaries. The application submission includes a Tree Schedule and Tree Constraints Plan. The Public Open Space plans submitted show retained trees and hedgerows and replacement planting throughout the site. Plans submitted are considered acceptable in relation to compliance with the outline permission, character of the area, arboricultural policies and ecology. A condition it recommended for tree protection methodologies to be agreed to protected retained trees and hedgerows prior to commencement of works.

Outside the application site there is 1no formally protected tree relevant to this application, an ash tree in the rear garden of 35 Wheeler Grove (TPO ref: M1071). This is considered by the applicant’s arboriculture specialist to be of low arboricultural quality and therefore a category C tree, which nonetheless makes a positive contribution to the street scene. There are various other established trees outside but close to the site boundary which the council would seek to be retained, particularly on the eastern boundary of the site. This is of particular importance regarding works associated with plots 58, 59, 60, 61, 162, 187, 202 and 218. A further condition is recommended requiring the submission and agreement of methodologies to retain these trees which are outside the applicant’s control/ownership near the boundary, which make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area and should be retained.

The Tree Officer has reviewed the application and outlined no objections subject to the inclusion of conditions.

A further compliance condition to ensure any agreed planted which dies within the first 5 years would be replaced is not necessary as this is covered by the outline conditions.

With regards to hedgerow, it is noted that some hedgerows were cut by the developer in the early part of 2019. It is understood this work took place outside the bird nesting season, and was to facilitate access point and visibility splays already permitted at outline stage. The submitted application shows retained hedgerow and replacement planting which is considered satisfactory.

A neighbour comment has requested that further landscaping conditions are attached to any reserved matters application. Outline condition 8 relates to landscaping and is being considered as part of application 2019/0626/APP, so it is not considered reasonable or necessary to impose any further landscaping conditions at reserved matters.

Ecology:

The application site is currently greenfield and in close proximity to various ecological designations including close proximity to a European designated site (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites); close proximity to the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC and Mendip Woodlands SAC1; proximity to Ebbor Gorge National Nature Reserve; and proximity to Wookey Hole and Ebbor Gorge (SSSI).

The appeal Inspector applied various conditions at outline stage, including landscaping (8), habitat creation (10), wildlife management plan (11), lighting (12), bird nesting (13), badger sett survey (14) and reptiles (15).

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 15

The applicant has sought to discharge some of these conditions already as part of application 2019/0626/APP including landscaping (8), habitat creation (10), wildlife management plan (11), badger sett survey (14) and reptiles (15). These details are currently being considered.

The SCC Ecologist has not raised any objections to this reserved matters application, which includes extensive landscaping to the west of the site, and the application is considered acceptable in this regard.

Other Matters:

St Cuthbert Out Parish, Wells City Council and various neighbours have referred to potential alterations to planning obligations and limited capacity of existing facilities. Whilst these issues are understood, it is concluded that there is no scope to renegotiate the planning obligations agreed at outline stage. Similarly, it is not considered reasonable for the Council to require alternative access arrangements when this has been agreed by an Inspector at outline stage.

The applicant has applied to discharge conditions 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 22, 24 and 25 under application ref 2019/0626/APP. Outline condition 12 (lighting) and 17 (emergency access) remain outstanding, and are required to be submitted under the outline permission prior to any works on site. These conditions are not duplicated as part of the reserved matters. No other conditions on the outline permission are recommended to be duplicated (e.g. materials samples).

Environmental Impact Assessment:

This application has been screened and is not considered to require an Environmental Statement under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.

Conclusion:

The application site benefits from extant outline permission, and this reserved matters application relates to the details of the development. The application is considered acceptable including in relation to the impact on the character of the area, landscape, amenity, highways and parking, ecology, drainage, trees, environmental protection and contaminated land.

Recommendation: APPROVE

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The site benefits from an extant outline planning permission under application reference 2014/1522/OTS. This application seeks permission for reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout, would safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents and adjoining land users. The means of access and parking arrangements meet the required safety standards and will ensure the free flow of traffic on the highway. All practical measures for the conservation of energy have been included in the design, layout and siting of the proposal. The proposal makes adequate arrangements for the protection of biodiversity.

The proposal has been tested against the following Development Plan policies. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, and subject to the conditions below, the proposal is acceptable:-

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 16

 CP1 - Mendip Spatial Strategy  CP2 - Supporting the Provision of New Housing  CP10 - Wells City Strategy  DP1 - Local Identity and Distinctiveness  DP3 - Heritage Conservation  DP4 - Mendip's Landscapes  DP5 - Biodiversity and Ecological Networks  DP6 - Bat Protection  DP7 - Design and Amenity of New Development  DP8 - Environmental Protection  DP9 - Transport Impact of New Development  DP10 - Parking Standards  DP11 - Affordable Housing  DP14 - Housing Mix and Type  DP16 -Open Space and Green Infrastructure  DP19 - Development Contributions  DP23 - Managing Flood Risk  National Planning Policy Framework  National Planning Practice Guidance  The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)  Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Notes issued by Historic England  Wells Conservation Area Appraisal (2011)

Conditions

1. Plans List (Compliance) This decision relates to the following documents/drawings:

Full Site: PL-01 SITE LOCATION PLAN Planning Layout 26262 PL-03Q - 27.06.19 26262 PL-06A Storey Heights Plan 27.03.19 26262 PL-05d Materials Layout 27.06.19 26262 SE-01b Site Sections, 26262 SS-01a Street Scenes, 26262 SS-02b Street Scenes - 27.06.19

Trees / Landscape: 9356 TCP 01 Tree Constraints Plan - 19.12.18 BRL-PL210c PUBLIC OPEN SPACE LOCATION PLAN - 27.06.19 26262_BRL-PL211C Public Open Space Planting Plan (Sheet 1) - 27.06.19 26262_BRL-PL212_Public Open Space Planting Plan (Sheet 2) - 27.06.19 BRL-PL212 B PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLANTING PLAN SHEET 2 - 26.03.19 TREE SCHEDULE - 09.11.18 26262_BRL-PL200_Planting Plan (Reference Sheet 1), 26262_BRL-PL201 Planting Plan (Reference Sheet 2), 26262_BRL-PL202 26262_BRL-PL202_Planting Plan (Sheet 1), 26262_BRL-PL203_Planting Plan (Sheet 2), 26262_BRL-PL204_Planting Plan (Sheet 3), 26262_BRL-PL205_Planting Plan (Sheet 4), 26262_BRL-PL206_Planting Plan (Sheet 5), 26262_BRL-PL207_Planting Plan (Sheet 6), 26262_BRL-PL208_Planting Plan (Sheet 7), 26262_BRL-PL209_Planting Plan (Sheet 8)

Drainage: POND 1 MAINTENANCE QUESTIONNAIRE, POND 2 MAINTENANCE - 07.06.2019

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 17

8948-GA-01 C, 8948-GA-02 D, 8948-GA-03 C, GENERAL ARRANGEMENT 8948-GA-02 (DRAINAGE) - 19.12.18 8948-CP-01-P01 Catchment Plan - 28.02.19 8948-GA-05 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT WHOLE SITE - 28.02.19 8948-GA-04C - GENERAL ARRANGEMENT SHEET 4 - 07.06.2019 8948-D-03-P01 FLOW CONTROL DETAILS - 07.06.2019 8948-D-04-P01 FLOOD EXCEEDENCE PLAN - 07.06.2019 21469 43-01C IDB MAINTENANCE ACCESS - 07.06.2019 DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS, SURFACE WATER DESIGN - 14.11.2018 ATTENUATION BASIN 1 SURFACE WATER DESIGN, ATTENUATION BASIN 2 SURFACE WATER DESIGN - 19.12.18 DRAINAGE TECHNICAL NOTE, SURFACE WATER NETWORK 1, SURFACE WATER NETWORK 2 - 28.02.19 MAINTENANCE REGIME - 07.06.19

Highways: 26262 PL-10d Areas of Adoption - 27.06.2019 8948-GA-157 P01 EMERGENCY ACCESS ARRANGEMENT 05.04.19

Other: HT-BIN-CYCLE-01 BIN AND CYCLE STORE PLANS HT-GAR-01 SINGLE GARAGE - EAVES FRONT, HT-GAR-02 Double Garage - Eaves Front, HT-GAR-03A SINGLE GARAGE - GABLE FRONT, HT-GAR-04 Double Owner Garage - Hipped, HT-GAR-05 Single Owner Garage - Hipped, HT-GAR-06 Double Owner Garage - Hipped - 25.10.2018 DET-01 BOUNDARY TREATMENTS - 07.11.2018 8948-GA-06-P01 PLANNING SLAB LEVELS - 28.02.19

House Types: Received 28.2.19 HT-BEADNELL-01 PLOTS - 39-40(h), 41-42, 43-44, 45-46(h), 76-77,78-79(h) 28.02.19 HT-CHATSWORTH-01 PLOTS - 13, 14(h), 15, 16(h), 49(h), 50, 106(h),107(h), 108(h) HT-HANBURY-01 PLOTS - 30, 31(h), 32, 33(h), 37, 38(h), 61, 62, 63(h), 64(h), 65, 66(h), 67, 72(h), 73, 74(h), 75, 82(h), 83, 104(h), 105 HT-LEICESTER-01A PLOTS - 80, 81(h) HT-MAYFAIR-01 PLOTS - 70 HT-MAYFAIR-02 PLOTS - 90, 109(h), 110(h) HT-ENGLINGHAM-01 PLOTS - 100(h), 103 HT-MARYLEBONE-01 PLOTS - 98(h), 101(h), 102 HT-MARYLEBONE-02 PLOTS - 85(h), 92(h), 93 HT-HOLBRAN-01 Plot 94 HT-HOLBRAN-02 PLOTS - 86(h), 89, 91, 96(h), 97 HT-ALBEMARLE-01 PLOTS - 87(h), 88, 95(h), 99(h), HT-ALBEMARLE-02 PLOTS - 87(h), 88, 95(h), 99(h)

Received 27.03.19 HT-CHATSWORTH-01A PLOTS - 22, 27, 28(h) HT-ROSEBERRY-02 PLOTS 6(h), 7(h) HT-LUMLEY-01 PLOT 71 HT-LUMLEY-02 Plot 84 HT-LUMLEY-03 Plot 17 HT-LEICESTER-01A PLOTS 34, 35, 36 HT-SANDSEND-01 PLOTS 18(h), 19, 20(h), 21 HT-CHATSWORTH-02 PLOTS 4, 5(h), 8, 9(h)

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 18

HT-HANBURY-01 PLOTS 53, 54(h), 57, 58(h) HT-HANBURY-02 PLOTS 2(h), 3, 10(h), 11 HT-HAT-01A PLOTS 1, 12(h), 26, 29 HT-SUTTON-01 PLOTS 47, 48(h), 51(h), 52 HT-GREYFRIARS-01A PLOTS 68, 69(h) HT-GREYFRIARS-02B PLOTS 24(h), 25, 55(h), 56 HT-ROSEBERRY-01 Plot 23 HT-BEL-01 PLOTS - 185(h), 186 HT-BRAXTON-02 PLOTS - 199, 200(h) HT-BRAXTON-03 PLOTS - 117(h), 118. 119 HT-TRUSDALE-01 PLOT 179 HT-MANFORD-01A PLOT 122(h) HT-MARFORD-01A PLOTS 153, 163(h) HT-MARFORD-02A PLOTS 112, 116, 139 HT-WAYSDALE-01 PLOTS 154, 171(h), HT-WAYSDALE-02 PLOTS - 154, 171(h) HT-WAYSDALE-03 PLOTS 160(h), 165(h), HT-WAYSDALE-04 PLOTS 160(h), 165(h) HT-GOS-01A PLOTS - 126(h), 142(h), 150(h), 151, 157, 158(h), 182(h), 191, 192(h), 193, 194(h), 208(h) HT-STAND-01A PLOT 164 HT-STAND-02A PLOT 140 HT-STAND-03B PLOTS 111(h), 113, 115(h), 123(h), 138, 162 HT-GOS-02A Plot 187 HT-GOS-03A PLOTS 180(h), 181 HT-AMER-01A PLOTS - 120(h), 121. 124(h), 125(h), 166(h), 172 HT-EASE-01A PLOTS - 152(h), 184(h), 201, 207(h) HT-EASE-02A PLOTS 127(h), 141(h), 155, 161(h), 183(h) HT-YEW-01A PLOT 156 HT-BRAXTON-01 PLOTS 188, 189, 190(h), 195, 196(h), 197, 198(h)

Received 27.06.19 HT-SUTTON-02 - plots 59, 60 Persimmon Sutton

Received 01.07.19 HT-AA31-01A PLOTS - 128(h), 129, 131(h), 132, 143(h), 144(h), 145(h), 146, 147(h), 219, 220(h) HT-AA41-01A - 130, 148, 149 TW flats 01.07.19 HT-1+2BedFlat-02 Plots 173-178 HT-1+2BedFlat-01 Plots 209-217 HT-AA23-01A PLOTS - 133(h), 134, 135, 136(h), 137,167(h), 168, 169, 170, 202(h), 203, 204, 205(h), 206

Received 02.07.19 HT-AA23-02A PLOTS - 218 HT-MANFORD-02B PLOTS 114(h), 159(h)

Reason: To define the terms and extent of the permission.

2. Materials (Compliance) The development hereby approved shall be carried out using external facing materials as specified on 26262 PL-05D Materials Layout received 27.06.2019. Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area in accordance with Policy DP3 and DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 19

3. Access, Parking and Turning Areas (Pre-occupation) No occupation of any individual dwelling shall commence until its relevant and necessary access, parking and turning areas have been constructed in accordance with details shown on the approved plans. The vehicular access, parking and turning shall thereafter be kept clear of obstruction and shall not be used other than for the access and parking of vehicles in connection with the development hereby permitted. Reason: To ensure that suitable access, parking and turning areas are provided and thereafter retained in the interests of amenity and highway safety in accordance with Policies DP9 and DP10 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

4. Tree Protection Plan - outside site boundary (Pre-commencement) Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved no development shall commence until an Arboricultural Impact Assessment/Tree Protection Plan and Detailed Arboricultural Method Statement in accordance with BS5837:2012 has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing how all trees and hedgerows are to be retained outside and adjacent to the site boundary. The Detailed Arboricultural Method Statement shall contain full details of the following: -

(a) Timing and phasing of arboricultural works in relation to the approved development (b) Construction exclusion zones (c) Protective barrier fencing (d) Ground protection (e) Service positions (f) Details of any special engineering requirements including 'no dig construction' (g) Pre construction tree works (h) Facilitation pruning (i) Details of the contractor compound, storage, parking and working space for plant and scaffolding during construction (j) Name and contact details of the Arboricultural Contractor(s) and/or Consultant(s) who will be implementing the tree works proposed and overseeing the required "Tree Protection Measures" as shown on the Tree Protection Plan (as approved)

The development shall thereafter be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Detailed Arboricultural Method Statement. Reason: in the interests of protecting the trees/hedges that are important to the setting and green infrastructure of the proposal site, integral to the local landscape on or immediately adjacent the site. This is a condition precedent because it is necessary to understand the drainage scheme in detail prior to any initial construction works which may damage trees which make a positive contribution to the street scene.

5. Tree Protection Plan - within site boundary (Pre-commencement) Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved no development shall commence until an Arboricultural Impact Assessment/Tree Protection Plan and Detailed Arboricultural Method in accordance with BS5837:2012 has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing how all trees and hedgerows are to be retained as shown on approved documents 26262_BRL-PL211C Public Open Space Planting Plan (Sheet 1) and 26262_BRL-PL212_Public Open Space Planting Plan (Sheet 2) received 27.06.19. The Detailed Arboricultural Method Statement shall contain full details of the following: -

(a) Timing and phasing of arboricultural works in relation to the approved development (b) Construction exclusion zones (c) Protective barrier fencing

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 20

(d) Ground protection (e) Service positions (f) Details of any special engineering requirements including 'no dig construction' (g) Pre construction tree works (h) Facilitation pruning (i) Details of the contractor compound, storage, parking and working space for plant and scaffolding during construction (j) Name and contact details of the Arboricultural Contractor(s) and/or Consultant(s) who will be implementing the tree works proposed and overseeing the required "Tree Protection Measures" as shown on the Tree Protection Plan (as approved)

6. Removal of Permitted Development Rights - No Windows (Compliance) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows, roof lights or openings, other than those shown on the plans hereby approved, shall be formed above ground floor level on plots 43-44, 49 and 64, in the elevation or roofslope at any time unless a further planning permission has been granted. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy in accordance with Policy DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

7. Removal of Permitted Development Rights - Obscure Glazing (Compliance) The proposed side (east) windows on plots 43-44, 49 and 64 shall be glazed with obscure glass. The window/s shall also be non-opening unless the parts of the window/s which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window/s is installed. The window/s shall be permanently retained in accordance with the requirements of this condition. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy in accordance with Policy DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

8. Provision and Storage of Recycling and Waste Containers (Pre-occupation) No occupation of any individual dwelling shall commence until its respective provision for the storage of recycling and waste containers has been made within the site in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity and highway safety having regards to Policies DP3, DP7 and DP9 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

9. Levels and Heights (Pre-commencement) No development shall commence until details, including elevations, of the proposed ridge heights/finished floor levels/eaves heights/slab levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 21

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to clarify the finished height of the development to accord with Policies DP1 and DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014). This is a condition precedent because the ridge heights/finished floor levels/eaves heights/slab levels have the potential to affect the overall appearance of the development in the street scene. Therefore these details need to be agreed before work commences as they could not easily be amended after.

10. Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy (Bespoke Trigger) The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details set out in DRAINAGE TECHNICAL NOTE, SURFACE WATER NETWORK 1, SURFACE WATER NETWORK 2, 8948-CP-01-P01 CATCHMENT PLAN received 28 Feb 2019; and 8948-D-04- P01 FLOOD EXCEEDENCE PLAN, 8948-D-03-P01 FLOW CONTROL DETAILS, MAINTENANCE REGIME received 07.06.2019. Reason: In the interests of providing a satisfactory level of surface water drainage, improving water quality and to prevent flooding in accordance with Policy DP23 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

11. Maintenance Access for Watercourses (Compliance) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved IDB MAINTENANCE ACCESS received 07 Jun 2019 and maintenance access for watercourses shall be retained in perpetuity. Reason: To prevent flooding in accordance with Policy DP23 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

12. Footpath Linkages (Pre Occupation) Flat footpath / cycle path linkages shall be implemented as shown on Layout Plan 26262 PL- 03Q received 27.06.2019. The works shall be carried out prior to occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme agreed in writing with local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that suitable access is provided in accordance with Policy DP9 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

13. Surface Water Drainage System (Bespoke Trigger) No development other than the provision of the site access shall commence until an updated plan for Basin 2 including details of forebay and preferential flow has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of providing a satisfactory level of surface water drainage, improving water quality and to prevent flooding in accordance with Policy DP23 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1: Strategy & Policies 2006-2029 (Adopted 2014).

14. Public Right of Way (Bespoke Trigger) No development hereby approved which shall interfere with or compromise the use of footpath WS 10/54 shall take place until a path diversion order has been made and confirmed, and the diverted route made available to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the public right of way is not compromised.

List of Advices

1. Condition Categories Your attention is drawn to the condition/s in the above permission. The heading of each condition gives an indication of the type of condition and what is required by it. There are 4 broad categories:

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 22

Compliance - The condition specifies matters to which you must comply. These conditions do not require the submission of additional details and do not need to be discharged. Pre-commencement - The condition requires the submission and approval of further information, drawings or details before any work begins on the approved development. The condition will list any specific works which are exempted from this restriction, e.g. ground investigations, remediation works, etc. Pre-occupation - The condition requires the submission and approval of further information, drawings or details before occupation of all or part of the approved development. Bespoke Trigger - The condition contains a bespoke trigger which requires the submission and approval of further information, drawings or details before a specific action occurs.

Please note all conditions should be read fully as these headings are intended as a guide only.

Failure to comply with these conditions may render the development unauthorised and liable to enforcement action. Where approval of further information is required you will need to submit a conditions application and pay the relevant fee, which is #116 per request (or #34 where it relates to a householder application) and made payable to Mendip District Council. The request must be made in writing or using the Standard Application form (available on the council's website www.mendip.gov.uk ). For clarification, the fee relates to each request for the discharge of condition/s and not to each condition itself. There is a no fee for the discharge of conditions on a Listed Building Consent, Conservation Area Consent or Advertisement Consent although if the request concerns condition/s relating to both a planning permission and Listed Building Consent then a fee will be required.

2. In determining this application the Local Planning Authority considers it has complied with the aims of paragraph 38 of the National Planning Framework by working in a positive, creative and pro-active way.

3. In order to discharge conditions relating to the approval of external walling and roofing materials, please ensure that materials are left on site for approval and NOT brought to the Council Offices. When applying for the approval of materials, you must state precisely where on site any samples have been made available for viewing.

4. The responsibility for ensuring compliance with the terms of this approval rests with the person(s) responsible for carrying out the development. The Local Planning Authority uses various means to monitor implementation to ensure that the scheme is built or carried out in strict accordance with the terms of the permission. Failure to adhere to the approved details will render the development unauthorised and vulnerable to enforcement action.

5. Please note that your proposed work may also require Building Regulations approval, which is a separate consent process to the consideration of a planning application. The Council's Building Control team are available to provide Building Regulations advice from pre- application stage to completion of a development and can be contacted on 0300 303 7790. Further details can also be found on their website http://www.sedgemoor.gov.uk/SomersetBCP/

6. The applicant is advised that, prior to works commencing on site, Land Drainage Consent is required under section 23 and 66 of the Land Drainage Act 1991 from the Axe Brue Drainage Board for any construction in, or within, 9m of a watercourse and for the introduction of additional flow into a watercourse in the Board's District.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 23

7. The promoter of works is required to contact Bristol Water directly to discuss requirements in detail prior to commencement of development.

8. Development, insofar as it affects a right of way should not be started, and the right of way should be kept open for public use until the necessary (diversion/stopping up) Order has come into effect. Failure to comply with this request may result in the developer being prosecuted if the path is built on or otherwise interfered with.

9. With regard to condition 10, the applicant should inform the SUDS Inspectors 2 weeks prior to commencement of construction ([email protected]).

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 24

Agenda Item No. DM02

Case Officer Hayley Broadbent

Site Capella Ashcott Road Meare Glastonbury BA6 9ST

Application Number 2019/0719/HSE

Date Received 2nd April 2019

Applicant/ Mr Chris Silman Organisation

Application Type Householder Application

Proposal Erection of a 1m fence on existing stone wall

Ward Moor

Parish Meare Parish Council

Referral to Planning Board following Risk Assessment of a request from the Chair & Vice- Chair to determine application contrary to officer recommendation. Risks identified by Principal Planner.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints:

This application relates to Capella, Ashcott Road, Meare. The application site is situated on the corner of a junction, with the proposed development adjacent to the highway. The site is within an Area of High Archaeological Potential and a development limit.

The proposal is for the erection of a 1 metre high wooden fence on top of an established 1 metre high perimeter wall that surrounds the front of the property.

Relevant History:

There is no relevant planning history which relates to the current proposal.

Summary of Consultation/Representations:

Moor Ward Member: No comments received.

Meare Parish Council: Recommend approval.

SCC Highways: Standing advice applies.

Local Representations: One comment in support of the application.

Summary of all planning policies and legislation relevant to the proposal:

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 places a duty on local planning authorities to determine proposals in accordance with the development plan unless material

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 25 considerations indicate otherwise. The following development plan policies and material considerations are relevant to this application:

The Council’s Development Plan comprises:

 Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014)  Somerset Waste Core Strategy

The following policies of the Local Plan Part 1 are relevant to the determination of this application:

 DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness)  DP7 (Design and Amenity)  DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development)  DP10 (Parking and Access Arrangements)

Other possible Relevant Considerations (without limitation):

 National Planning Policy Framework  National Planning Practice Guidance  The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Officer Assessment:

Impact on the character and appearance of the Streetscene and Surrounding Area:

The existing wall is approximately 1 metre high and is a prominent feature of the streetscene on both aforementioned roads. Established trees are in situ behind the boundary wall and the proposed fence will take the boundary wall to 2 metres in height.

The proposed fencing given its height above pavement level and its position directly adjacent to the public highway is considered to be overbearing and has a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene and the surrounding area. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to Policies DP1 and DP7 of the adopted Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 (2014) and Part 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

For further information - Approval was granted for the construction of 8 dwellings directly opposite the application site on Ashcott Road (ref. 2010/1798). The approved scheme is located on the opposing corner of the junction and includes 900mm high stone walls turning the corner to mirror those at Capella.

Impact on Residential Amenity

The proposed development is not considered to have a harmful impact on residential amenity.

Highways Matters

Despite its prominent position, it is not considered that the proposed extension would adversely affect the public safety of users of the highway.

Recommendation:

REFUSE

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 26

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposed fencing given its height above pavement level and its prominent location on a corner within the village of Meare would have a visually harmful impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene and surrounding area. The proposal therefore is contrary to Policies DP1 and DP7 of the adopted Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 (2014) and Part 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

List of Advices

1. In determining this application the Local Planning Authority considers it has complied with the aims of paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The submitted application has been found to be unacceptable for the stated reasons. The applicant was advised of this, however despite this, the applicant chose not to withdraw the application and having regard to the need to avoid unnecessary delay the Local Planning Authority moved forward and issued its decision.

2. This decision relates to drawings: Site Plan and "Proposed Elevation Drawing" received on 28th April 2019.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 27

Agenda Item No. DM03

Case Officer Hayley Broadbent

Site Valley House Ham Street Baltonsborough Glastonbury BA6 8PU

Application Number 2019/0763/HSE

Date Received 4th April 2019

Applicant/ Mr Robert Vriend Organisation

Application Type Householder Application

Proposal Erection of first floor extension and new covered entrance to roadside elevation and erection of boundary wall.

Ward Butleigh And Baltonsborough

Parish Baltonsborough Parish Council

Referral to Planning Board reason:

Officer recommendation is at odds with the Parish Council comments so following the appropriate referrals the application is being considered at Planning Board.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to Valley house, Ham Street, Baltonsborough.

The application site is an unlisted, cottage-style property, situated on a bend on Ham Street. There are a mixture of property styles along the street, a number similar in terms of character and appearance, with the immediate neighbouring property comprising of a thatched cottage. Valley House is a detached property, constructed of grey stone, with private access and a large, rear garden. Due to its position on a corner, the majority of outside space to the front elevation comprises of a driveway and parking. This application seeks planning permission for the addition of contemporary dormer window and new covered entrance on the front elevation, accompanied by the erection of a boundary wall. The proposed palette of materials for the dormer window and covered entrance include:

Walls – Grey timber cladding Windows – Grey aluminium framed Door – Grey aluminium door. Roof – Roofing membrane

In addition to the external additions, the application proposes internal reconfiguration.

Summary of Consultation Responses

Baltonsborough Parish Council – Approval

Ward Member – No Comments received.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 28

Local Highway Authority (SCC Highways) – Standing Advice Applies.

SCC Historic Environment Service – No objection.

Public Consultation – No comments received.

Relevant planning history

No relevant planning history recorded.

Summary of planning policies:

Policy Context

The Council’s Development Plan comprises:

 Mendip District Local Plan Part I: Strategy and Policies (December 2014)  Somerset Waste Core Strategy

The following policies of the Local Plan Part 1 are relevant to the determination of this application:

 DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness)  DP7 (Design and Amenity)  DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development)  DP10 (Parking and Access Arrangements)

Material Considerations

 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)  National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)  MDC Household Extension Design Guide

Assessment of relevant issues

Impact on character and appearance

The application site is situated in a prominent position along Ham Street, Baltonsborough.

The proposal seeks to erect a contemporary dormer window and covered entrance on the front elevation. Although, the property is unlisted, its character is very much a traditional country cottage in terms of its design and appearance, and in keeping and traditional to the character and appearance of the street scene. Where other properties in the street have been extended, the designs are considered in keeping with their character and appearance.

In terms of the application proposals the size, scale and massing of the proposed extension, coupled with its contemporary design, results in an extension that is considered to be incongruous to the host dwelling. Moreover, the incongruous nature of the proposed design is considered to

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 29 dilute the character and appearance of the original dwelling. Furthermore, the proposed, contemporary design is at odds with character and appearance of the thatched cottage next door.

With regards to the above, the proposal is considered to have a demonstrable, detrimental impact on the existing building, as the design fails to either preserve or enhance its character and appearance.

Furthermore, the proposed dormer window and covered-roof entrance are sited on the front elevation of the property which, with its scale and positioning on a bend in the road, is considered to represent an obtrusive impact on the local street scene. The low perimeter walls (surrounding the dwelling) present an acceptable relationship and buffer between the property and the highway. In assessing the design impacts of planning application proposals policy DP7 refers to the need to consider the relationship between buildings and the roads / spaces that they front. Due to its scale and positioning, the proposed extension at the front of the dwelling is considered to impact negatively upon the relationships between the property and the public realm to the front of it and results in further harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area which is contrary to Policy DP7 of the Local Plan. Overall the proposed extension, due to its proposed size, scale, massing, design and situation in relation to its position on the highway is considered unacceptable and would have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the dwelling itself as well as the visual amenity of surrounding properties and the streetscene which is contrary to the guidance set out within the MDC Household Extension Design Guide and Policies DP1 and DP7 of the Mendip District Council Local Plan (Part 1).

Highways Matters

Despite its prominent position, it is not considered that the proposed extension would adversely affect the public safety of users of the highway.

Conclusion

Overall, having regard to the above, the proposal is considered unacceptable, as it would have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the existing building and to the visual amenity and character of the surrounding street scene.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that planning permission be refused.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposed development, by reason of its design, massing and scale is harmful to the character of the host property (dwelling). Furthermore, its siting, adjacent to the highway, is visually prominent within the street scene and, therefore, would have a harmful impact on the character, visual amenity and appearance of the surrounding area and the adjacent streetscene. On this basis the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies DP1 and DP7 of the adopted Local Plan Part 1 (2014) and Part 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 30

List of Advices

2. This decision relates to drawings: 1202_001; 1202_002; 1202_010; 1202_011; 1202_020; 1202_030; 1202_031; 1202_040; 1202_041; 1202_042; 1202_043, and 1202_050.

Planning Board Report 17th July 2019 Page 31