Planning Board

DATE: 20th January 2016 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 20th January 2016 Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Planning Board - 20th January 2016

Item Page Application Ward/Site Automatically Case Number Raised for Officer Discussion? Y/N DM01 4 2014/1453/OTS Court Hotel Lodge , N Mr Daniel Emborough, Radstock, BA3 Foster 4SA

Ashwick, Chilcompton And Stratton DM02 9 2015/2183/OTA Land North West Of, North N Mr Daniel Town Lane, North Wootton, Foster Somerset

Croscombe And Pilton DM03 14 2015/1431/OTS 6 Frome Road, Rode, N Mr James Frome, BA11 6PW U'Dell

Rode And Norton St Philip DM04 23 2015/2137/FUL The Mill House, Millbatch N Mrs Kelly Close, Meare, Glastonbury, Pritchard Somerset, BA6 9GT

Moor DM05 28 2015/1824/VRC Unit 2 Whitebridge Farm , N Mrs Kelly Glastonbury Road, Meare, Pritchard Glastonbury, BA6 9SZ

Moor DM06 35 2015/2486/FUL Caravan 13 And14, N Mrs Kelly Fourways Park, Gales Pritchard Drove, Wick, Glastonbury, Somerset, BA6 8JX

Glastonbury St Edmonds DM07 39 2015/2528/FUL Rookery Farm, Roemead N Mrs Anna Road, Binegar, Wells, Clark Somerset, BA3 4UL

St Cuthbert Out North DM08 46 2015/2331/HSE 42A West Shepton, N Mrs Lorna Shepton Mallet, Somerset, Elstob BA4 5UD

Shepton West DM09 49 2015/2214/CLE Skateboard Park , West N Mr Carlton Shepton Recreation Langford Ground, Old Wells Road, Shepton Mallet, Somerset

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 2

Shepton West DM10 52 2015/2340/FUL Skate Park, Old Wells N Mr Carlton Road, Shepton Mallet, Langford Somerset, BA4 5XN

Shepton West

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 3

Agenda Item No. DM01

Case Officer Mr Daniel Foster

Site Court Hotel Lodge Emborough Radstock BA3 4SA

Application Number 2014/1453/OTS

Date Received 19th July 2014

Applicant/ Mr & Mrs A Lamb Organisation The Court Hotel

Application Type Outline - Some Matters Reserved

Proposal Erection of two detached dwellings in grounds of The Court Hotel (amended description reducing the scheme from five to two dwellings).

Ward Ashwick, Chilcompton And Stratton

Parish Chilcompton Parish Council

This application is referred to Planning Board at the request of the Ward Members and following consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Planning Board.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to land at the Court Hotel, Emborough.

The application seeks outline planning permission with all matters reserved for subsequent approval, save for the means of access. The application relates to the residential development of the site comprising two detached dwellings.

Planning permission has been granted separately for the conversion of the adjacent hotel buildings into six dwellings.

Procedural note

The application, as originally submitted, referred to the erection of five dwellings, however during the life of the application the applicant has reduced this to the erection of two dwellings (indicative plots 1 & 2 remain and plots 3, 4 and 5 have been omitted from the scheme). Given the application is made in outline with only access to be considered at this stage, and that the proposed numbers have been reduced (i.e. from five to two dwellings), it is not considered that any party would be prejudiced by not re-consulting on the changes made.

Summary of parish comments, any objections or conflict with the recommendation

Chilcompton Parish Council

Recommend approval, no objections

Tree Officer (Summary)

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 4

The proposed new build units 1 and 2 to the west of the site do not pose a direct threat to the high category trees shown for retention (with appropriate tree protection measures applied).

Relevant planning history

 2014/1454 Conversion of hotel and outbuildings to 6No. residential dwellings, approved January 2015.

The remaining planning history dating back to 1974 relates to various planning permissions for alterations and changes to the hotel, the most recent being:

 2010/2810 Outline application for the erection of a detached building to form five holiday lets, approved 2011

Summary of all planning policies 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:

Development Plan - Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP2 (Housing), CP4 (rural communities), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP4 (Mendip’s Landscapes), DP5 (Biodiversity and Ecological Networks), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards), DP14 (housing Mix), DP16 (Open Space and Green Infrastructure), DP19 (Development Contributions)

Policies WCS1 (waste prevention) and WCS2 (recycling and re-use) of the Somerset Waste Core Strategy (adopted February 2013)

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle

The application site lies entirely outside of the development limits of any settlement and in the countryside, where policy CP1 states that any proposed development will be strictly controlled and will only be permitted where it benefits economic activity or extends the range of facilities available to the local communities.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 5

Core Policy 1 (CP1) of the Local Plan Part 1 says that, to enable the most sustainable pattern of growth for Mendip District, the majority of development will be directed to towards the five principal settlements (Frome, Shepton Mallet, Wells, Glastonbury and Street).

Core Policy 2 (CP2) states that the delivery of new housing will be secured from three sources (a) Infill, conversions and redevelopments within Development Limits defined on the Proposals Map, (b) Strategic Sites identified on the Key Diagrams for each town associated with Core Policies 6-10 and (c) other allocations of land for housing and, where appropriate, mixed use development, outside of Development Limits through the Site Allocations process. The application proposals do not therefore accord with the approach set out for the delivery of housing contained within CP2 (a), (b) or (c).

The application site is some distance from the nearest settlement it being circa 650 metres west of the nearest point of the development limit of the village of Chilcompton.

In pulling these points together the application site lies entirely outside, and some distance away from, the Development Limits and in the countryside, where development is strictly controlled in accordance with CP1.

As such the principle of new build, open market dwellings in this location is considered unacceptable insofar as it does not accord with the settlement strategy & policy for the provision of new houses.

There is no housing land shortfall reason to be set against the effects of the proposal (though even if there was this site is remote from any settlement and is fundamentally contrary to the objectives of sustainable development). Therefore there is an ‘in principle’ objection to development of this site in open countryside outside of the Development Limits.

Transport sustainability

NPPF is quite clear that promoting sustainable transport is part of securing sustainable development, at paragraph 29 it states that: ‘Transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives.’ and at paragraph 17 the NPPF sets out the Core Planning Principles which include that planning should, inter alia, ‘actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable’.

The site is outside of any settlement. The nearest facilities that might meet some of the resident’s day-to-day needs are in Chilcompton proper, it being circa 1.4 km along the B3139 to the nearest convenience store for example. This is some considerable distance, particularly bearing in mind that there are long lengths of the B3139 with no footways and where the posted speed limit is 40 mph, a journey along this road walking or cycling is likely to be uninviting for most people, particularly after dark or in poor weather or for those with children or who are less mobile.

The residential development of the site proposed would foster the growth in the need to travel contrary to the objectives set out Framework, which aims to minimise the need to travel. The site is not considered a sustainable location in transport terms and alone warrants a reason for refusal.

Character and appearance of the area

Whilst emphasising the economic and social benefits of development, including new housing, the NPPF makes it clear that the planning system also has an environmental role. To achieve sustainable development, the economic, social and environmental roles of the planning system should not be undertaken in isolation, as they are mutually dependent.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 6

In defining the environmental role of the planning system, Paragraph 7 of the NPPF emphasises the need to protect and enhance the natural and built environment. The core planning principles set out in Paragraph 17 include the need to take account of the different roles and character of different areas, recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and to conserve and enhance the natural environment.

The application site comprises the grounds of the hotel, it is shown the proposed site plan (notwithstanding the outline nature of the application) that the two dwellings would be constructed on the parking area of the hotel with access derived via the existing entrance onto the B3139.

Notwithstanding the scattering of houses along the B3139 and the presence of the hotel itself, the general context of the site is a rural one, outside of the village proper and in the countryside.

The proposal would have an adverse visual impact in the character and appearance of the area hereabouts as the site would become more urbanised as a result of consolidating the built-up, residential appearance of the land outside of the village proper.

The proposal is unjustified in this respect insofar as it does not accord with the Council’s spatial strategy and notwithstanding any landscaping the application proposals would result in the unjustified visual intrusion of housing into the countryside from the village’s current established envelope. This does not amount to a sustainable form of development. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 places a duty on Amenity

The layout, scale and appearance of the dwellings is not before the Council at this stage though the closest neighbour likely to feel the greatest, of any, impact is Whitchurch Bungalow to the west of the site. However, taking into account the illustrative layout and size of the site it is considered that a suitable layout in respect of the nearest neighbours can be achieved to provide adequate amenity.

Highways

The means of access is proposed via the existing access onto the B3139. The County Highway Authority has considered the scheme and whilst they had initial concerns, they have offered no objections in principle to the highway implications of the development for two dwellings bearing in mind the historic traffic generation associated with the operation of the hotel.

Trees

There is a group of trees to the north of the hotel adjacent to the existing car park area that contribute significantly to the character of the area, as too do other scattered trees on the site. They are large mature and semi-mature specimens.

Indeed, the applicant’s own arboricultual assessment advises that: ‘The tree component within the site boundary is of exceptional quality overall’.

The trees on-site are not currently protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The Council’s Tree Officer advises that broadly speaking, the proposals could be achieved with suitable tree protection measures, including arboricultural supervision from a suitably qualified professional.

If planning permission were to be granted it would also be important to ensure that the two new dwellings, notwithstanding that layout is a reserved matter, are constructed in broad

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 7 conformity with the submitted layout drawing (ie on the car park) to avoid unacceptable conflict with the trees.

Ecology

Similar to the tree issues set out above subject to the two proposed dwellings being on the former car park, as indicated, and having regard to the submitted ecology report, it is considered that the scheme would not have an unacceptable impact on known or likely ecological features.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

It is recommended that planning permission be refused.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The development does not accord with the objectives of Policies CP1 and CP2 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I with regards to strictly controlling development outside the Development Limits and the approach to the delivery of housing. The proposal would cause harm to the character and appearance of the countryside by virtue of having an unjustified urbanising effect on the countryside's intrinsic character here. As such, the development would be contrary to policies CP1, CP2, DP1 and DP4 of the adopted Mendip District Local Plan 2006 - 2029 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. The development does not accord with the objectives of policies CP1 and CP2 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I with regards to strictly controlling development outside the Development Limits and the approach to the delivery of housing. The proposal would foster the growth in the need to travel given its location and accessibility to services and facilities, including the absence of street-lighting and footways on nearby roads leading into the village proper. The development fails to accord with the objectives of Policies CP1 and DP9 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part I and the National Planning Policy Framework.

List of Advices

1. This decision relates to drawings 2014/COURT/01, STS/676-1, STS/676-2 and Sketch Tree Location Plan validated 23rd July 2014 and drawing 2014/COURT/02A received 18th February 2015.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council works in a positive and pro-active way with Applicants and looks for solutions to enable the grant of planning permission. However, in this case the proposal is not sustainable development for the reasons set out and the Council was unable to identify a way of securing a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Landscapes), DP5 (Biodiversity and Ecological Networks), DP7 (Design and Amenity),

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 8

Agenda Item No. DM02

Case Officer Mr Daniel Foster

Site Land North West Of North Town Lane North Wootton Somerset

Application Number 2015/2183/OTA

Date Received 16th September 2015

Applicant/ Mr R Croker Organisation

Application Type Outline - All Matters Reserved

Proposal Application for outline planning permission (all matters reserved) for the erection of 1 number detached dwelling and garage.

Ward Croscombe And Pilton

Parish North Wootton Parish Council  2014) This application is referred to Planning Board following consultation with the Ward Member, who in this instance is also the Chairman of the Board.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to a site at Land North West of North Town Lane, North Wootton.

The application seeks outline planning permission with all matters reserved for subsequent approval for the erection of one detached dwelling and garage.

Summary of parish comments, any objections or conflict with the recommendation

North Wootton Parish Council

Recommend approval provided secondary access from the building plot and curtilage to Tanyard Lane is prevented by condition or S106 agreement. Access to North Town Lane is acceptable but two accesses to the plot would not be. North Town Lane would not cause much disturbance to neighbours. Tanyard Lane would cause disturbance.

Refusal recommended if second access to the building plot cannot be prevented by condition or S106 agreement. The owner’s land is only suitable for one dwelling. Two have been refused when applied for previously. It is realised that the owner will still need to have access from Tanyard Lane to the area of his land outside the building plot but if possible the access restriction as above should also prevent any access for residential purposes whether for the present building plot or elsewhere on the owner’s land.

Highway Authority

No objection.

Representations

1 received raising the following points (summarised):

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 9

 We would like to record that, as direct neighbours to the site, we have no objections to the proposals, assuming that they remain as stated in the current planning application.

Relevant planning history

 2013/1215 Erection of dwelling and garage, approved November 2013  2012/2946 Erection of two dwellings and double garages, refused May 2013  2012/2945 Erection of a dwelling with double garage, refused May 2013

Summary of all planning policies 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:

Development Plan: Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP2 (Housing), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP4 (Mendip’s Landscapes), DP5 (biodiversity), DP6 (Bat Protection), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards)

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013) North Wootton Village Design Statement (April 2011)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle

The site is located outside of development limits where development is strictly controlled in accordance with CP1 of the adopted Local Plan (2014) which states that in such locations development will only be permitted where it benefits economic activity or extends the range of facilities available to the local communities.

In light of the Council’s strategy for the delivery of sustainable development and housing set out in CP1 and CP2 the principle of a new dwelling in this location would normally be unacceptable, unless there was a specific justification.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Development Plan the application site benefits from an extant planning permission for the erection of a detached dwelling granted under planning permission reference 2013/0652.

At the time that this planning permission was granted this site lay within the development limits of North Wootton defined by the Mendip District Local Plan (2002) and whilst North Wootton no longer has a development limit (ie it is neither a Primary or Secondary village) in

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 10 the newly adopted 2014 Local Plan this planning history is a material planning consideration of significant weight.

In the context of the extant planning permission here it is considered that the principle of a dwelling is already established and the acceptability of the current scheme turns on the merits of the proposed revisions to the approved development.

Impact on the character of the area

The planning history for this site is of particular relevance. It is material to note that planning application 2012/2945 for the erection of a dwelling with double garage was refused in May 2013; the application was made in outline with all matters reserved for subsequent approval. The current application is essentially a duplicate of the application refused in May 2013.

The refusal reason for application 2012/2945 read as follows:

‘The development by reason of its siting in an elevated position in this prominent location near the junction of Stocks Lane and Northtown Lane, North Wootton and the impact of opening up the site to provide the necessary visibility splays for access does not relate satisfactorily to its surroundings. It is therefore harmful to the character and appearance of the street scene and the area. The adverse impact of this development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of a dwelling in this location. The development is therefore contrary to Saved Policy Q1 of Mendip District Local Plan, 2002 and the design and sustainable principles of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2012.

As set out in the refusal reason above a key adverse impact of the development was recorded as being the impact of opening up of the site to provide access, and associated visibility splays, onto Northtown Lane – it was considered that this was harmful to the character and appearance of the area. Furthermore, application 2012/2946 for the erection of two dwellings on this site was also refused in May 2013 for the same duplicate reason for refusal as set out above as it also included the opening up an access onto Northtown Lane.

The subsequently approved development for this site (2013/1215) avoided this impact by utilising the existing access track that runs NW from the site and onto Tanyard Lane thus negating the need to form a new access onto Northtown Lane.

In summary therefore the current application is fundamentally a replica of the scheme put forward, and refused, under reference 2012/2945. Whilst there is a new Development Plan since the previous application was determined in 2013 this does not fundamentally change the policy context of the scheme with regards to the impact on the character and appearance of the area, nor, more importantly has the physical character of the site changed significantly.

The case officer’s assessment from 2013 is therefore duplicated below. The case officer stated (in italics):

‘This area of North Wootton is characterised by a group of housing which generally face the road. The housing here is surrounded on all sides by four roads which include Tanyard Lane, Northtown Lane and Stocks Lane. There are few open spaces in this square of housing but one of the most visually prominent is the open areas near the junction of Stocks Lane and Northtown Lane. The land here is higher than road level and it has a natural stone retaining wall on Stocks Lane which curves around into Northtown Lane where the wall meets hedging.

This is an outline application with all matters reserved so there are no details of the design, but an indicative drawing has been provided to show the access arrangements and siting of the dwelling in the plot. The dwelling is shown roughly in the middle of the plot with the

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 11 access from Northtown Lane near the existing access for the property to the north east (Lacey Close).

North Wootton’s Village Design Statement (VDS), April 2011 recognises open spaces as a positive contribution to the village’s character. Whilst this site is not specifically designated as open space it is considered that the fields open nature, in its elevated position close to the junction of two roads, contributes positively to the character of this part of the village.

Page 18 of the VDS says;

“New development should not adversely intrude on existing views. The overall scale of the village is rural and uncluttered with houses often facing onto fields. Developments should retain sense of space in the setting of the house, garden and open area.” (VDS page 18)

Saved Policy Q1 states that development will be permitted where its design (this includes its siting) relates satisfactorily to its surrounding in terms of the impact of the scheme on urban design and the landscape. Emerging policies DP1 and DP7 talk about new development being of a layout appropriate to it context and contributing positively to maintenance and enhancement of local identity and distinctiveness.

The Highway Authority has requested a visibility slay of 2m back from the carriageway edge extending 8m to the north of the access and 15m to the south with no obstruction to visibility over 900mm. This will involve taking out hedging and some of the wall.

The impact of opening up the site to provide the necessary visibility and the sight of the dwelling and its drive in this elevated position will significantly and demonstrably harm the character of this part of North Wootton and the street scene.

National Planning Policy Framework, 2012 (NPPF) says that there are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental and these roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. A dwelling will bring some limited economic benefits whilst it is being constructed and will provide a social role in provision of housing, but in this instance the siting of a dwelling in this location does not protect the character of this environment.

It is considered that the adverse impacts of this development on the character and appearance of the area would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of a single, open-market dwelling in this location.’

Since the adverse impact of opening up a new access onto Northtown Lane has not materially changed since 2013 having regard to the decision made under reference 2012/2945 it would be inconsistent to now find the development, including the new access onto Northtown Lane, acceptable.

In pulling these points together it is considered that this still warrants a reason for refusal as there has been no significant material changes in circumstance that would warrant a departure from the previous decision.

Amenity

All matters including the scale, layout, appearance and landscaping of the site are reserved for subsequent approval. Again, there have been no significant material changes in circumstance since the determination of application 2012/2945 and consequently the case officer assessment taken at that time is also duplicated below;

‘This field is on higher land than the property to the north east (Lacey Close). Although the proposed dwelling would be on higher land than the houses on the north west and south

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 12 west, it is considered that a dwelling could be accommodated on this site without detriment to their amenity.’

It is therefore considered that the proposal would be acceptable in terms of amenity to nearby properties.

Highway Safety

The County Highway Authority consistent with the earlier decisions on this site (2012/2945 and 2012/2946), raise no objections to the scheme subject to various conditions related to providing a safe access into the site. On the basis of the advice of the Council’s technical expert in respect of these matters it is considered that the scheme is acceptable with regards to highway safety matters.

It is noted with regards to matters of consistency that the Parish Council previously recommended refusal to application 2012/2945 but now consider the scheme is acceptable subject to caveats regarding not using the existing entrance onto Tanyard Lane. The existing access track onto Tanyard Lane is not included in the current application site (red line) and it would be possible to impose a condition, where it would meet the six ‘tests’ set out in the Planning Practice Guidance, to prevent a further access point being made from the application site and onto Tanyard Lane.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

It is recommended that planning permission be refused consistent with earlier decisions on this site.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The development by reason of the impact of opening up the site to provide access and the necessary visibility splays does not relate satisfactorily to its surroundings in this prominent location near the junction of Stocks Lane and Northtown Lane, North Wootton and is therefore harmful to the character and appearance of the street scene and the area. The development is therefore contrary to Policies DP1, DP4 and DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014) and the design principles (Chapter 7) of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2012.

List of Advices

1. This decision relates to drawings 2015/CROKER/01/01 validated 16th September 2015.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council works in a positive and pro-active way with Applicants and looks for solutions to enable the grant of planning permission. However, in this case the proposal is not sustainable development for the reasons set out and the Council was unable to identify a way of securing a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 13

Agenda Item No. DM03

Case Officer Mr James U'Dell

Site 6 Frome Road Rode Frome BA11 6PW

Application Number 2015/1431/OTS

Date Received 23rd June 2015

Applicant/ Mr & Mrs E Boyce Organisation

Application Type Outline - Some Matters Reserved

Proposal Redevelopment to replace existing dwelling and garage with 5no. new dwellings and associated garages. REVISED 12/11/2015 - 'Layout' removed so scheme now proposes Outline application with just 'Access and Scale' as Reserved Matters.

Ward Rode And Norton St Philip

Parish Rode Parish Council

This application is referred to the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning Board as the Ward Member for Rode and Norton St Philip raises issues that are contrary to the case officer’s recommendation to approve outline planning permission with associated conditions.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

This outline application relates to 6 Frome Road, Rode and proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and garage and replacement with 5 dwellings and garages.

The application is for outline permission with all matters reserved aside from access and scale. The plans show the layout of the site and the appearance of the dwellings however these are indicative (not under consideration). The scale of the dwellings (2 storey) is under consideration.

Matters of layout, appearance and landscaping are reserved matters. These details will follow in a subsequent reserved matters application in the event that outline permission is granted.

The mix of the units is not under consideration within this application as layout is a reserved matter. However the agent has confirmed that the reserved matters scheme will address the mix of housing required under Policy DP14 of the Mendip District Local Plan.

Amended plans have been received during the application process which shows the levels of visibility at the access points, as requested by the County Highways Officer. The plans give an indication of how the site could be laid out, however layout is a reserved matter and not under consideration.

Summary of parish comments, any objections or conflict with the recommendation

Rode Parish Council

Recommend refusal of this application for the following reasons:-

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 14

 Under the adopted Mendip Local Plan, Rode has already fulfilled its obligation for development until 2029;

 It doesn't meet the expressed need (as shown in village surveys) for smaller dwellings for those villagers who want to downsize or for young people who wish to stay in the village;

 The A361 around this area is an accident black spot. Highways are looking into ways of improving the area. More traffic trying to join the A361 would compound the problem;

 The proposed development is near two other new developments - Planning permission has been granted for 44 houses at Church Farm and also permission for 2 houses at the Church Row development;

 The development will obstruct a public footpath;

 The pedestrian access would be very challenging to those on foot. There is no continuous footway on that side of the road or directly opposite. This would cut of the new residents from the main village unless they used their vehicles;

 As it is a small development (10 or fewer dwellings), there is no requirement for affordable housing.

Highway Authority

Thank you for these revised plans and a more detailed description of the site, its layout and proposed solutions with regard to parking and site access.

These proposals are deemed acceptable and meet the recognised requirements. As such these aspects of the planning application conditions will be easily achieved and passed.

Contaminated Land Officer (MDC)

Due to the potential former quarry on site and subsequent infill it would be advised to keep a watching brief for potential hotspots of contamination and assess for visual/olfactory evidence of contamination during any groundworks.

If any unforeseen contamination is found during excavations Environmental Health must be notified immediately. This may include obvious visual or olfactory residues, asbestos including asbestos containing materials such as roofing, buried drums, drains, interceptors, additional fuel storage tanks or any other unexpected hazards that may be discovered during site works.

Applicants are advised to read the MDC guidance document 'Pre-Submission Guidance for Residential End-Use'.

NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

Public Rights of Way Officer (SCC)

I can confirm that there is a public right of way (PROW) recorded on the Definitive Map which crosses the area of the proposed development at the present time (footpath FR 13/18). I have attached a plan showing the footpaths for your information.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 15

The current proposal will obstruct the footpath. The proposal either needs to be revised to prevent any obstruction or a diversion order applied for. The applicant must apply to the Local Planning Authority for a diversion order.

The County Council do not object to the proposal subject to the applicant being informed that the grant of planning permission does not entitle them to obstruct a public right of way. Please include an informative note on the permission, if granted.

County Archaeologist

No objection.

Ministry of Defence (MOD)

No Objection.

Representations

None received.

Relevant planning history

None directly relevant.

Summary of planning policies:

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:

Development Plan

The following policies of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029, Part 1: Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014):

CP1: Spatial Strategy CP2: Housing CP4: Sustaining Rural Communities

DP1: Local Identity and Distinctiveness DP3: Heritage Conservation DP7: Design and Amenity DP8: Environmental Protection DP9: Transport Impact of New Development DP10: Parking Standards DP18: Safeguarding Corridors for Sustainable Travel

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Somerset County Council Standing Advice, 2015 Somerset County Council Parking Strategy, 2012

Consideration of Issues:

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 16

Principle

Significant weight is afforded to the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029, Part 1: Strategies and Policies, which was formally adopted on the 15th December 2014.

The site is located within the Development Limits of Rode, which is identified as a Primary Village under Policy CP1 of the Mendip District Local Plan. Rode has a target housing requirement of 65 dwellings and this has been exceeded.

The housing numbers put forward under Policy CP2 are treated as a ‘minima’ and do not represent an absolute cap on housing numbers since many further units may come forward on appropriate sites in order for the Council to demonstrate a continuous 5 year supply of housing within the District. The emphasis of Policy CP1 is to secure development within development limits and under part 3 states:

“In identifying land for development the Local Plan’s emphasis is on maximising the re-use of appropriate previously developed sites and other sites within existing settlement limits as defined on the Proposals Map, and then at the most sustainable locations on the edge of the identified settlements. Any proposed development outside the development limits will be strictly controlled and will only be permitted where it benefits economic activity or extends the range of facilities available to the local communities”.

The site is contained within the development limits of the village and proposes a modest number of dwellings. The site is previously developed as it currently houses one a single dwelling.

The Parish Council have objected on the basis that there is a local need for smaller family sized units. However, a reserved matters application will address the layout and mix of the site and under Policy DP14 there is a requirement to provide a greater proportion of 2 and 3 bedroom units, which could be secured. As such the development has the potential to meet an identified local need in addition to adding to the growing requirements for housing supply.

Bearing in mind the steer of Policy CP1 and CP2 of the Local Plan, the principle of the development is considered to be acceptable and is therefore supported.

Scale

An indication of the scale of the dwellings is provided upon the indicative street-scene, drawing number 13127.01-B. The two-storey scale of the dwellings is considered to be acceptable as this reflects the dominant scale of dwellings found within this locality.

The existing dwelling is a single storey bungalow, however having two storey dwellings will provide a more efficient use of the site and respect the character of development found along Frome Road. As such the proposed scale is considered to be acceptable. The detailed appearance of the dwellings will be considered under a reserved matters application.

There are several listed buildings located on the opposite side of the road, including numbers 13 (Bell Inn), 17 and 19 Frome Road. The LPA is happy that a development could be satisfactorily designed to respect the setting of these listed buildings. The impact of the development to the setting of these listed buildings will be considered in full under the reserved matters application where layout, landscaping and appearance will be considered.

Appearance

The appearance of the dwellings is a reserved matter. The indicative street-scene drawing does however give an indication of the potential design of the dwellings, which picks up on

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 17 the character of development found within this locality. The LPA are confident that a well designed development can be successfully designed and secured on site through the reserved matters application.

Landscaping

The matter of landscaping is reserved for future consideration under a reserved matters application.

The LPA is confident that a hard and soft landscaping scheme can be successfully designed and secured on site through the reserved matters application. The scheme would look to retain an important tree within the site, as indicated on the plans. However it is up to the developer to demonstrate, by way of an arboricultural impact assessment, that the retention of the tree can be secured and that the development will not put it under threat of removal or damage. The relevant arboricultural impact assessment will be secured under the reserved matters application, where layout and landscaping will be considered.

Neighbour Amenity

The LPA is satisfied that the dwellings could be accommodated within the site without causing adverse harm to the amenities of neighbours. The indicative layout shows that the site could accommodate five dwellings without causing adverse harm to existing or future residential amenities.

Neighbours would have the opportunity to comment on the Reserved Matters application at the appropriate stage. It should be noted that no objections have been raised by local residents/ neighbours.

Access & Parking

The County Highways Officer raises no objections to the proposal and suggests that the conditions that he has recommended for attachment can easily be achieved.

The development includes two points of access, which are existing points of access, as shown on the proposed site plan. The level of visibility required in both directions is 60 metres measured 2.4 metres back from the carriageway edge. The access in the north- western part of the site has a 5 metre width and has visibility splays measuring a minimum of 2.4 x 60m to the north-east and 2.4 x 70m to the south-west. The access within the south- western part of the site has a 4.1 metre width and has visibility splays measuring a minimum of 2.4 x 88m to the south-west and 2.4 x 75m to the north-east.

The access details are considered to be acceptable and it is considered that the development will not prejudice highway or pedestrian safety as the relevant visibility splays required can be achieved in both directions, in fact they extend beyond the 60 metres required.

The LPA consider that the site can accommodate the required levels of parking provision to accord with the County Parking Strategy. The details of the layout of the site shown on the plans is indicative, however it gives a good idea of how the layout could come forward. The plans show that a 2 metre wide footpath could be provided.

The LPA consider that the development will not prejudice highway or pedestrian safety.

Public Rights of Way

Objections have been raised that suggest a Public Right of Way (footpath) will be obstructed by the development. The Council’s geographical mapping system indicates that the position

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 18 of the footpath is outside of the site, running adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. This position of the footpath has been confirmed by a site visit by the case officer where it is clear that the footpath does not run through the site. Regardless of this matter, the layout of the site is a Reserved Matter and is not under consideration here. However the LPA consider that the footpath will not be obstructed by the development.

Affordable Housing

The Parish Council have correctly pointed out that the development will not generate the requirement for providing affordable housing. This is because the proposal includes less than 7 dwellings and the site area is less than 0.25 hectares.

Archaeology

The Historic Environment Officer at Somerset County Council has raised no objections in regard to the impact of the development to archaeology.

Flooding

The site is not located within a flood zone and surface water run-off will be controlled through appropriate landscaping, which will be secured by the LPA under the Reserved Matters application.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 so an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is not required.

Conclusion

On the basis of the above assessment it is considered that there are no adverse impacts that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of granting outline planning permission. As such it is recommended that outline planning permission be APPROVED with associated conditions.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal accords with the Council's settlement strategy for the location of new development as the site is located within the development limits of Rode. A two storey scale for the dwellings is considered to be acceptable, subject to the detailed appearance to be approved under the reserved matters application.

It is considered that the development could be designed to safeguard the setting of Listed Building/s under the reserved matters application.

It is considered that the appearance/ design, scale and layout of the development could be designed to safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents and adjoining land users under a reserved matters application.

The development will not prejudice highway or pedestrian safety as the means of access meet the required safety standards and will ensure the free flow of traffic on the highway.

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 20th January 2016 Page 19

CP1: Spatial Strategy, CP2: Housing, CP4: Sustaining Rural Communities, DP1: Local Identity and Distinctiveness, DP3: Heritage Conservation, DP7: Design and Amenity, DP8: Environmental Protection, DP9: Transport Impact of New Development, DP10: Parking Standards and DP18: Safeguarding Corridors for Sustainable Travel of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029, Part 1: Strategies and Policies, adopted 15th December 2014.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2012 Planning Practice Guidance (PPG), 2012 The Countywide Parking Strategy, 2013 County Highways Standing Advice, 2015

Conditions

1. The development hereby approved shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the latest. Reason: As required by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3. Approval of the details of the a) Layout; b) Appearance and c) Landscaping of the site (hereinafter called 'the reserved matters') shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: This is an outline permission and these matters have been reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority, and as required by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

4. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in full accordance with drawing numbers: 13127.01-B and 13127.02 received on 21st October 2015 in regard to the access details only. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

5. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 3 above shall include details of: (a) the provision to be made for the garaging and parking of vehicles within the site. (b) the space to be provided for the loading, unloading and turning of vehicles within the site. (c) arboricultural impact assessment and tree protection plan to accord with BS:5837- 2012 (d) surface water drainage strategy (e) parking strategy and management arrangements for any unallocated parking spaces (f) ecological mitigation and/or enhancement measures (g) refuse and recycling details (h) hard and soft landscaping details including an implementation and management strategy (i) any information relevant to the adopted validation requirements for such an application Reason: This is outline permission and these matters require detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 20

6. The housing mix for the development, to be secured under the reserved matters application, must accord with the requirements of Policy DP14 of the Mendip District Local Plan. Reason: This is an outline permission and these matters require detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority in order to secure an appropriate mix of dwelling types and sizes to meet Local and District Wide needs.

7. There shall be no obstruction to visibility greater than 600 millimetres above adjoining road level in advance of lines drawn 2.4 metres back from the carriageway edge on the centre line of each access and extending to points to the edge of the carriageway 60m either side of the relevant access. Such visibility shall be fully provided before the development hereby permitted is brought into use and shall thereafter be maintained and retained at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

8. The gradient of the proposed access shall not be steeper than 1 in 10. Once constructed the access shall thereafter be maintained in that condition at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

9. Any entrance gates erected shall be hung to open inwards, shall be set back a minimum distance of 5 metres from the carriageway edge and shall thereafter be maintained in that condition at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

10. The first 5 metres of each access, measured 5 metres back from the carriageway edge, shall be properly consolidated and surfaced (not loose stone or gravel) in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority under the reserved matters application. Once constructed both accesses shall be maintained and retained in that condition at all times thereafter. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

List of Advices

1. 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.

2. Your attention is drawn to the condition/s in the above permission, some of which require(s) the submission and approval of certain information PRIOR to the commencement of certain activities (e.g. development, use or occupation). Failure to comply with these conditions may render the development unauthorised and liable to enforcement action. Please note that there is a fee for the council's consideration of details submitted pursuant to a condition on a planning permission. The fee is £97 per request (or £28 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. You should allow up to eight weeks for these condition/s to be discharged, following the submission of details to the Local Planning Authority. If the Local Planning Authority fails to give a decision

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 21

within this time or should it refuse approval of the submitted details then the applicant is entitled to lodge an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN, tel. 0117 372 6372, www.planning- inspectorate.gov.uk

3. The Planning Authority is required to erect a Site Notice on or near the site to advertise development proposals which are submitted. Could you please ensure that any remaining Notice(s) in respect of this decision are immediately removed from the site and suitably disposed of. Your co operation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

4. The applicant is advised that consent does not permit the Public Right of Way on/adjacent to the site to be blocked, obstructed or diverted. If there are any queries in respect of public rights of way, please contact Somerset County Council (tel: 0845 3459155 or email@ [email protected]).

5. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way with the Applicant and has negotiated amendments to the application to enable the grant of planning permission.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 22

Agenda Item No. DM04

Case Officer Mrs Kelly Pritchard

Site The Mill House Millbatch Close Meare Glastonbury Somerset

Application Number 2015/2137/FUL

Date Received 8th September 2015

Applicant/ Mr Jon Baker Organisation

Application Type Full Application

Proposal Change of use of part of an agricultural paddock to domestic curtilage and the construction of a new detached double garage.

Ward Moor

Parish Meare Parish Council

The application is referred to Planning Board following consultation with the ward member, Chair and Vice Chair

Description of site, proposal and constraints:

The application relates to land to the rear of some newly built houses at the rear of The Mill House, Millbatch Close, Meare.

The application seeks planning permission for the change of use of part of an agricultural paddock to domestic curtilage and the construction of a new detached double garage.

The site is located outside the settlement limits.

Summary of any objections or conflict with the recommendation:

Meare Parish Council

At a site meeting with the owner, Mr Baker at 59 St. Mary's Road, Mr Baker admitted to the 8 councillors present that if the application to turn the agricultural land (pony paddock) into domestic curtilage is successful then he will be building a house on the land. The land in question encroaches into agricultural land and is outside the development limit. Mr Baker has had 2 refused appeals in 2015 at this site. The land is next door to a working factory which uses an air extractor on health and safety grounds and this would be in hearing range to the proposed development site. Mr Baker stated that he needs these garages to store his vintage vehicles in but he lives in Bristol, not Meare.

Highways

Standing Advice.

Environmental Protection

No objections.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 23

Archaeologist

The site lies in an area where Medieval settlement remains may occur. These may be damaged or destroyed by the development. For this reason I recommend that the applicant be required to provide archaeological monitoring of the development and a report on any discoveries made as indicated in the National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 141). This should be secured by the use of model condition 55 attached to any permission granted: "No development hereby approved shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the local planning authority."

Representations

1 letter of objection from Middleton Engineering, summarised below;

 We consider this an attempt to encroach into agricultural land with the objective of converting it to domestic curtilage.  There is no need for a garage to house the classic cars of the owner of Millbatch Farm who does not live there.

Relevant planning history:

 2012/0655 – erection of a storage shed and enlargement of tractor turning head. Approved 03.07.12  2014/0186 – erection of a dwelling, refused on 04.06.15. Appeal Dismissed  2015/2138 – sound attenuation bund to reduce noise emanating from a factory adjacent, refused 02.11.15

Summary of planning policies:

Development Plan Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP3 (Heritage Conservation), DP4 (Mendip’s Landscapes), DP5 (Biodiversity and Ecological Networks), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards)

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle of development and character and appearance of the area

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 24

The location of this site is to the south of a housing development which was granted at appeal outside the settlement limits. The site forms part of a paddock which incorporates the land immediately behind the new houses and the existing storage shed and tractor turning head.

A dwelling was recently refused (2014/0186) even further south of the application site. In the recent appeal decision for that application (APP/Q3305/W/15/3003444) the Inspector commented that a dwelling in this location would not harm the character or appearance of the area given the context of the site.

In light of the Inspector’s comments although the site is located outside the settlement limits where development is strictly controlled, it would be difficult to justify an in principle reason for refusal or that it would result in encroachment harming the countryside.

Impact to residential amenities

The new garage and extended domestic garden would serve plot 1 and that garden would take the existing agricultural storage shed into its curtilage. Although it will be behind plots 2 and 3 this is not considered to harm neighbour amenity subject to satisfactory boundary treatments which safeguard privacy and suitable conditions which restrict permitted development on the site.

As such the proposal is not considered to harm neighbour amenity.

Highways Impact

The development is not considered to detrimentally impact on highway safety.

Archaeology

The archaeologist has requested an archaeological condition should planning permission be given. As such it is considered that the development will not result in harm to archaeological remains.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion:

Whilst the site is outside the development limits where development is strictly controlled, in light of the Inspector’s comments on the previous appeal decision, on balance, the proposed change of use of the land and the erection of a garage is not considered to harm the character or appearance of the area.

Recommendation

Conditional Approval

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. Although the site is located outside the development limit where development is strictly controlled, a recent appeal decision (APP/Q3305/W/15/3003444) on this site has been a material considerations that weigh in favour of the grant of permission.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 25

The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout would be in keeping with its surroundings.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. 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:- CP1 (principle of development), DP1 (local identity), DP3 (heritage), DP4 (Mendip's Landscapes), DP5 (biodiversity), DP7 (design and amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection), DP9 (transport), DP10 (parking), of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006- 2029 (Part 1 Strategies and Policies - adopted 15th December 2014) National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing number 15/2. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. The development hereby approved shall be carried out using external facing materials as specified on the submitted application form. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

4. No works (other than those required to comply with this condition) shall be undertaken on site unless a programme of archaeological work, including excavations, has been implemented in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: This pre-commencement condition must be a pre-commencement condition because any archaeological remains and features must be adequately investigated and recorded before there is any ground disturbance during construction.

5. Notwithstanding the details submitted the development hereby approved shall not be occupied until a hard landscape scheme has been implemented in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the positions for new boundary treatments including the material and heights. The approved boundary treatments shall thereafter remain in that form. Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and in the interests of amenity.

6. 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 buildings shall be erected within the curtilage hereby approved and shown outlined in red on drawing number 15/2, other than those expressly authorised by this permission, without the granting of express planning permission from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the living conditions of the occupiers of plots 1, 2 and 3 immediately to the north of the application site.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 26

List of Advices

1. 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.

2. Your attention is drawn to the condition/s in the above permission, some of which require(s) the submission and approval of certain information PRIOR to the commencement of certain activities (e.g. development, use or occupation). Failure to comply with these conditions may render the development unauthorised and liable to enforcement action. Please note that there is a fee for the council's consideration of details submitted pursuant to a condition on a planning permission. The fee is £97 per request (or £28 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. You should allow up to eight weeks for these condition/s to be discharged, following the submission of details to the Local Planning Authority. If the Local Planning Authority fails to give a decision within this time or should it refuse approval of the submitted details then the applicant is entitled to lodge an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN, tel. 0117 372 6372, www.planning- inspectorate.gov.uk

3. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission.

4. Where a Planning Permission, Listed Building Consent, Certificate of Lawful Development or Prior Approval has been issued, approval may also be required under the Building Regulation Legislation before any work is commenced, and throughout the building process. Mendip District Council's Building Control Department works in tandem with our Development Management team to offer a number of helpful and efficient services that can be accessed via our website http://www.mendip.gov.uk/buildingcontrol, by email at [email protected], or by telephoning 01749 341248 or 01749 341209. Our Building Control team includes chartered surveyors, fire and building engineers and support staff that are available for free pre-application discussions and/or site meetings, to plan and facilitate a streamlined pathway to the completion and final sign-off of all projects.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 27

Agenda Item No. DM05

Case Officer Mrs Kelly Pritchard

Site Unit 2 Whitebridge Farm Glastonbury Road Meare Glastonbury BA6 9SZ

Application Number 2015/1824/VRC

Date Received 3rd August 2015

Applicant/ Mr Edwin King Organisation

Application Type Variation or Removal of Conditions

Proposal Application for variation of conditions 2, 3 and 4 (to permit part of building to be used for B8 Storage Use) following grant of planning permission 2014/0547. (amended description)

Ward Moor

Parish Sharpham Parish Council

The application is referred to Planning Board following consultation with the ward member, Chair and Vice Chair

Description of site, proposal and constraints:

The application relates to Whitebridge Farm, Glastonbury Road, Meare. The site is located outside the settlement limits and Flood Zone 3b.

The application seeks a variation of conditions 2, 3 and 4 of planning permission 2014/0547 (to permit part of building to be used for B8 Storage Use, or B1 light industrial use or B2 industrial use as limited in condition 3 of 2014/0547).

Summary of any objections or conflict with the recommendation:

Meare Parish Council

Recommend refusal of permission. The application site is not suitable for B8 Use (Storage/ distribution). This application will foster growth in the need to travel and it will be impossible to control extra vehicle movements to and from this site, therefore this application does not comply with Policy S1 of the Mendip District Local Plan. The access to the site is a shared access with the residential property Whitebridge Farm and Mendip District Council has a duty of care towards the residents of Whitebridge Farm. The Parish Meeting would like to ask if we were misled by the original planning application as the applicant asked for an increase in size of 120 sqm space to incorporate administration offices reception and staff welfare facilities. The applicant is now applying to use this granted extra space for B8 Use and the building is yet to be finished. Sharpham Parish Meeting

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 28

B8 classification is not acceptable in this situation and therefore we recommend refusal of permission.

Highways

Standing advice.

Representations

1 letter of objection making the following comments:

 The creation of separate units for more than 1 business to operate from the site will cause further loss of amenity to our home. The noise mitigation survey and traffic survey for this site, was for its use as a single business site by RES. Traffic for the sites single occupancy is already exceeding the numbers referred to in the survey, and further increases for storage or distribution use would have a detrimental impact on our property. The Mendip DC local plan policy S1 states that any development should not foster the need to travel, and this proposal clearly does not adhere this.

 The block plan supporting the application does not show any additional storage, and as the marked space is already being fully utilised how would this be accommodated. Would all new storage be contained within the building? If storage was to be outside on the stoned area, this could be within 1 meter of our boundary and would increase the noise and visual impact.

Relevant planning history:

 067982/003 – Application for a lawful existing use for use of site as industrial, general engineering, storage and retail sales – A1, B1, B2 and B8 was refused 18.07.07

An appeal was dismissed on 04.01.12 against an enforcement notice which alleged the change of use of the land from agriculture to a mixed use of engineering and storage and retail peat sales.

 2012/1033 – retrospective change of use of land and buildings to B2 use, approved 23.08.13

 2014/0547 – erection of a replacement B2 workshop with ancillary office accommodation and alteration to existing access, approved 24/07/14

Summary of planning policies:

Development Plan of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (Supporting Business Development and Growth), CP4 (Sustaining Rural Communities), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP4 (Mendip’s Landscapes), DP5 (Biodiversity and Ecological Networks), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards), DP23 (Managing Flood Risk)

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 29

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle of development

This site has an established use as B2. The building burnt down and was given planning permission to be rebuilt with a slightly larger footprint than the original building.

This application proposes to sub divide the unit into a second unit (unit 2) which will be an independent lettable unit. It will occupy 136 square metres of the overall 544 square metres. As such the application proposes to amend the conditions of the previous permission to allow this subdivision with the 136 square metres to be restricted to any purpose within use class B1 (light industrial) or B8 (storage) use or the B2 use as limited by condition 3 of 2014/0547.

Policy CP4 of MDLP supports proposals for development of the rural economy. The floor area proposed to become Unit 2 is modest in size and is not considered to be materially worse than the existing use on the site especially given the existing controls by means of conditions which have been imposed. Given this policy and the planning history it is considered that the development is acceptable in principle.

Effect on the character of the area

The application does not propose any external alterations to the existing building. The objector has referred to the impact of possible outside storage on the character and appearance of the area, however the existing use is authorised for outside storage and any storage associated with unit 2 is not considered to harm the character or appearance of the area over and above what the site already has consent for.

Impact to residential amenities

The previous conditions were very restrictive to the applicant’s activities (RES Ltd mechanical engineers) within Class B2 and restricted the site to those activities or Class B1 and for no other purpose within B2 or B8.

Other conditions were imposed restricting industrial operations outside the building, hours of deliveries, activity associated with the development which are audible from the curtilage of the nearest residential property, external lighting, extensions and a landscaping condition.

These restrictive conditions can be re-imposed and amended to accommodate the new smaller units use.

The neighbour is concerned about the noise implications for any outside storage however, outside storage was shown between the building and the neighbours property on the north eastern side of the building on the previous application and was approved in that form with no restrictive condition other than condition 6 of planning consent 2014/0547/FUL which states;

“Activity associated with the development hereby approved which are audible from the curtilage of the nearest residential property, with the exception of deliveries to or from the site, shall be carried only between the hours of 07:00 and 18:00 Monday to Friday

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 30

(inclusive), 07:00 and 14:00 on Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of minimising the effect of noise from the development on the occupiers of nearby properties in the interests of neighbour amenity having regard to Saved Policies Q1/Q12 of Mendip District Local Plan, adopted December 2002.”

This condition along with the previous conditions but amended to accommodated the new unit within the existing building are considered sufficient to safeguard neighbour amenity.

Highways Impact

The visibility at the site entrance is below the required standard. However, it is considered that the proposed modest floor space given to either B1 or B8 use is unlikely to generate significant increased traffic. Taking this in account along with the existing use and the historic uses of the site and that there is adequate parking and turning provision on site, on balance the development is considered acceptable in highway safety terms.

Flood Risk

The building and its impact on flood risk was considered as part of the planning history, the proposed amendment to the use is not considered to increase flood risk to people or property.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

Given the modest floor area of the proposed unit 2 which will be used for B1 or B8 use or B2 industrial use as limited in condition 3 of 2014/0547, the variation of the conditions of the previous approval are considered acceptable and therefore conditional approval is recommended.

Recommendation

Conditional Approval.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal accords with the Council's settlement strategy for the location of new development. The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout would be in keeping with its surroundings. 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. 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:- CP1, CP3 and CP4 (principle of development), DP1 (local identity), DP5 (biodiversity), DP7 (design and amenity), DP9 (transport), DP10 (parking), DP23 (Managing Flood Risk) of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029 (Part 1 Strategies and Policies - adopted 15th December 2014) National Planning Policy Framework

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 31

Planning Practice Guidance The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers PL3497/1, PL3497/2, PL3497/3 received 03.08.15 and (drawing number PL3291/3 detailing landscaping, Noise Impact Assessment by Ambient Acoustics Ltd dated 20.03.12, the schedules describing operations submitted as part of application 2014/0547/FUL). Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) Unit 1 as shown on drawing numbers PL3497/2 and PL3497/3 received 03.08.15 shall be used only for the purposes specified in the description of the property details contained within the noise impact assessment by Ambient Acoustics Ltd dated 20.03.12 and submitted as part of application 2014/0547/FUL or Class B1 and for no other purpose in Class B2 or B8 of the schedule to that Order, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The approved use only has been found to be acceptable in this location and other uses within the same use class may require further detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), Unit 1 as shown on drawing numbers PL3497/2 and PL3497/3 received 03.08.15 hereby approved shall not be used other than for the uses described in the noise impact assessment by Ambient Acoustics Ltd and the Schedules describing operations, tools and equipment used dated 20.03.12 and submitted as part of application 2014/0547/FUL, or for any other use within Class B1. Reason: The approved use or a use within Class B1 has been found to be acceptable in this location although other uses may require further detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), Unit 2 as shown on drawing numbers PL3497/2 and PL3497/3 received 03.08.15 hereby approved shall not be used other than for Class B8 (storage), or for any other use within Class B1 or the use as permitted by condition 3 and for no other purpose in Class B2 of the schedule to the Order, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The approved use or a use within Class B1 has been found to be acceptable in this location although other uses may require further detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority.

6. No industrial operation shall be carried out outside of the building hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of minimising the effect of noise from the development on the occupiers of nearby properties in the interests of neighbour amenity.

7. Activities associated with the development hereby approved which are audible from the curtilage of the nearest residential property, with the exception of deliveries to or

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 32

from the site, shall be carried only between the hours of 07:00 and 18:00 Monday to Friday (inclusive), 07:00 and 14:00 on Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of minimising the effect of noise from the development on the occupiers of nearby properties in the interests of neighbour amenity.

8. There shall be no deliveries to or from the site outside of the hours of 0700 hours and 1800 hours Monday to Saturday and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents.

9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) there shall be no enlargement or external alteration to any building hereby approved or any external fixed plant or machinery installed without the granting of express planning permission from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, the amenity of neighbours and character of the area.

10. There shall be no external lighting of the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development in the landscape, the amenity of neighbours.

11. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until all landscape works have been carried out in accordance with the approved details shown on drawing PL3291/3 submitted as part of application 2014/0547/FUL. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season either with the same tree/plant as has previously been approved, or with other trees or plants of a species and size that have first been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and in the interests of preserving the living conditions of nearby residents.

List of Advices

1. 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.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission.

3. Where a Planning Permission, Listed Building Consent, Certificate of Lawful Development or Prior Approval has been issued, approval may also be required under the Building Regulation Legislation before any work is commenced, and throughout the building process. Mendip District Council's Building Control Department works in tandem with our Development Management team to offer a number of helpful and efficient services that can be accessed via our website http://www.mendip.gov.uk/buildingcontrol, by email at [email protected], or by telephoning 01749 341248 or 01749 341209. Our Building Control team includes chartered surveyors, fire and building engineers and support staff that are available

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 33

for free pre-application discussions and/or site meetings, to plan and facilitate a streamlined pathway to the completion and final sign-off of all projects.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 34

Agenda Item No. DM06

Case Officer Mrs Kelly Pritchard

Site Caravan 13 And14 Fourways Park Gales Drove Wick Glastonbury

Application Number 2015/2486/FUL

Date Received 14th October 2015

Applicant/ Ms L Smith Organisation

Application Type Full Application

Proposal Gate/entrance and associated fences.

Ward Glastonbury St Edmonds

Parish Glastonbury Town Council

The application is referred to Planning Board following consultation with the ward member, Chair and Vice Chair

Description of site, proposal and constraints:

The application relates to caravan 13 & 14, Fourways Park, Gales Drive/Wick, Glastonbury.

The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a new vehicle gated entrance to the two plots and erection of associated fences.

Summary of any objections or conflict with the recommendation

Glastonbury Town Council

Recommend Refusal

The committee is concerned that the entrance is not a safe access on this double bend. The committee would like to see adequate landscaping to reduce the further urbanisation of the site. Could the committee draw the planning dept. attention to the lack of adequate provision of travellers sites and the importance of retaining these sites for the original purpose they were intended for.

Highways

Standing Advice Applies. The Road Record plan denoting the highway limit shows that the works appear to be encroaching on the highway.

Relevant planning history

 111424/005 – Six additional pitches for occupation by gypsies, approved – Feb 2008.  2010/2035 – Erection of a day room, approved 20.10.10  2011/2432 – Cladding of caravan in brick refused 13.12.11

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 35

Summary of planning policies

Development Plan Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP4 (Mendip’s Landscapes), DP5 (Biodiversity and Ecological Networks), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards)

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013)

Assessment of relevant issues:

Effect on the character of the area

This site is an established site for the accommodation of gypsies. The site has several plots with vehicle access through the site from the north. The two southern most plots, 13 and 14 would like to gain separate vehicle access to the south, blocking their existing access to their plot from the north. The other remaining plots would continue to use the access to the north. In doing this the development would also involve the erection of a 1.8m high close boarded fence between 13 and 14 and along the road frontage onto Brindham Lane, behind the existing planting, at the south end of the gypsy site. It is proposed to add additional planting along this frontage and introduce 1.8m high electronic gates that open inwards.

The fencing along the road frontage is uncharacteristic of this rural lane however, the proposal does include additional planting in front of the fence which would assist in softening this.

The development is not considered harmful to the character or appearance of the area.

Impact to residential amenities

This is an established gypsy site with the nearest neighbour being Orchard House to the east. The access point will be some distance from the boundary with that neighbour.

It is considered that the development will not harm neighbour amenity.

Highways Impact

The Highway Authority has referred us to standing advice and commented that some of the works proposed may encroach onto highway land. This is not entirely clear but it is up to the developer to make sure that they have the necessary consent from the Highway Authority and a note will be put onto any consent to point this out.

This is an unclassified lane where the site is close to a double bend. Whilst the lane has a 60mph speed limit, it is unlikely that traffic would be travelling at this speed given the narrowness of the road and the bends. It is considered that the traffic movements associated with two residential plots would not be significant. Therefore given the

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 36 narrowness of the lane and the speeds of traffic using it the development is not considered to be detrimental to highway safety. However, the existing northern entrance to the plots should be blocked so as to prevent other plots utilising this access. The gates should open inwards to avoid obstruction to the highway. On balance the development is considered acceptable in highway safety terms.

Given the geometry of the road, and on balance the development is considered acceptable subject to conditions.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Recommendation

Conditional Approval.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal accords with the Council's settlement strategy for the location of new development. The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout would be in keeping with its surroundings. 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. 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:- CP1 (principle of development), DP1 (local identity), DP7 (design and amenity), DP9 (transport), DP10 (parking), of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029 (Part 1 Strategies and Policies - adopted 15th December 2014) National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers 2312/1, 2312/2, 2312/3 and the design and access statement. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. Prior to the first use of the access hereby approved, the existing northern access to numbers 13 and 14 Fourways Park shall be permanently stopped up as detailed on the submitted proposed block plan and shall thereafter remain in that form. Reason: To reduce the number of traffic utilising this access, in the interests of highway safety.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 37

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, any gates erected or installed at the vehicular access hereby approved shall be hung to open away from the public highway as shown on the submitted proposed block plan. Reason: To ensure that the gates do not cause an obstruction in the interests of highway safety

5. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until all landscape works have been carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season either with the same tree/plant as has previously been approved, or with other trees or plants of a species and size that have first been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

List of Advices

1. 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.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 38

Agenda Item No. DM07

Case Officer Anna Clark

Site Rookery Farm Roemead Road Binegar Wells Somerset

Application Number 2015/2528/FUL

Date Received 19th October 2015

Applicant/ Mr Tom Killen Organisation Killens LLP

Application Type Full Application

Proposal Change of use of industrial unit (unit 7) to auction room (sui generis). Flexible use throughout the remainder of the site for B1 business use save for cafe (A3) with a maximum floor area of 250 sq.m and retail (A1) uses with a maximum floor area of 315 sq.m within the B1 area.

Ward St Cuthbert Out North

Parish St Cuthbert Out Parish Council

This application is automatically referred to Planning Board as the applicant is an elected Member.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to Rookery Farm, Roemead Road, Binegar.

The site has not been a working farm for years and comprises a cluster of 10 commercial and industrial buildings units of varying sizes that have been converted from farm buildings

The current uses on the site include a range of business units (within use class B1); units with an element of A1 retail (Pet Grooming and Antique Sales); Farm Shop (A1); Restaurant/ Café (A3); Auction rooms (sui generis) and a General Industrial Unit (B2).

Planning permission was granted in September 2015 (2015/0502/FUL) to regularise the current planning uses, in particular the use of unit 7 for B2 (general industrial use) and give a degree of flexibility to the remainder of the site, B1, A1 and A3, to allow the permitted uses to change across units as tenants come and go. A restriction was imposed to limit the floor areas within use class A1 and A3 to maintain a degree of control.

Unit 9 – the Mendip Auction Rooms was not part of this application as it had already gained planning approval in September 2011 (2011/2367).

Due to the current occupiers of unit 7 vacating, the current application seeks planning permission to allow the auction rooms to relocate into unit 7 and retain a link through to part of their existing unit 9. The application would also enable the remainder of unit 9 to be available for flexible B1, A1 and A3 use along with the remainder of the units on site which obtain approval for this arrangement under the previous permission (2015/0502/FUL).

The scheme would allow the auction rooms business to continue to grow and bring all its operations under one roof.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 39

Summary of Consultation Responses

St Cuthbert (Out) Parish Council

Recommend Approval

MDC, Planning Policy

The proposal does not raise any major policy issues, and should therefore be supported in accordance with Core Policies 1, 3 and 4 and the NPPF.

Local Highway Authority (SCC Highways)

Standing Advice applies.

MDC Environmental Protection

No objections - EP has never received any complaints concerning the operation of the Auction Rooms on the existing site. The proposed use of unit 7 as an auction / sales room would have little or no additional impact on the Farm house.

Whilst the previous permission (2011/2367) for the auction rooms restricted the hours of use, at that time EP were concerned with noise from car movements across the site. With the use of the car park further away from the Farm House the hours restriction is not now necessary.

Representations

2 letters of support have been received on the grounds that the larger auction rooms will:  make doing business with the auction rooms easier and more comfortable  help bring more business to the rural business complex  have local employment benefits  not impact on the area

1 letter of objection has also been received, written on behalf of the neighbours at Rookery Farm Bungalow. They do not have any objection to the change of use of the building to an auction room, but have concerns about the increase in traffic using the site, associated parking issues and the noise that this may bring due to the intensification of the use.

Relevant planning history

043399/005 - Conversion of agricultural buildings to offices/ workshops with kennels. Erection of a single garage, cattery and a feed store (Nr footpath w.s.10/39). – Approved with Conditions 05.10.1995

043399/013 - Conversion of barn into farm shop (amended scheme) (Board). – Approved with Conditions 03.07.2006

2010/3093 - Demolition of part of existing kennels and haybarn. Construction of new kennel block and reception/preparation area for kennels, conversion of workshop to additional cafe/meeting space, conversion of part of kennels to workshop and extension to create store. Conversion of existing kennels to form showroom for existing farm machinery supplier and installation of solar panels to roof. – Approved with Conditions 14.02.2011

2011/2367 – Change of use of farm shop to equestrian retail shop and associated workshop with retention of single storey front extension; change of use of reception building to farm

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 40 shop; retention of building for use as sale rooms; extension of hardstanding to create additional car parking. – Approved with Conditions 16.02.2012

2011/3169 - Minor alterations to permission 2010/3093: change to roof line of kennel building; change to doors and windows on elevations of kennel building; changes to elevations of reception/preparation area building (retrospective). – Approved with Conditions 16.02.2012

2015/0502 - The continued use of unit 7 for B2 general industrial use and to regularise planning use to allow B1 business throughout the site, save for cafe (A3) with a maximum floor area of 250sqm and retail (A1) uses with a maximum floor area of 315sqm within the B1 area. (Amended description to allow open A1 up to 250sqm) – Approved with Conditions

Summary of planning policies

Development Plan Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014).

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (Business Development and Growth), CP4 (Sustaining Rural Communities), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection), DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards) DP22 (Reuse and Conversion of Rural Buildings)

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) Somerset County Council Highways Development Control Standing Advice (June 2013) The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle

Rookery Farm is outside of any development limits, in the open countryside where in accordance with Core Policy 1 of the Local Plan development is strictly controlled. However, it does, exceptionally, allow for development in the open countryside in line with the provisions set out in CP4.

CP3 of the local plan supports business development and growth and proposals for economic development will be supported where they accord with the criteria set out within that policy and the principles set out in CP4.

CP4 makes provision for sustaining rural settlements and the wider rural area by supporting proposals for development of the rural economy which enable the expansion or diversification of a business in a manner and of a scale which is appropriate to the location and constraints upon it, or involve the conversion of existing buildings for an economic use as considered under policy DP22. -residential uses where;  The proposed use would not prejudice the use of adjacent land and premises, particularly where such use entails agricultural or other land based operations,

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 41

 The design of the building and associated development required to facilitate its reuse respects its surroundings and does not harm the wider landscape character of the area or have an adverse impact on the transport network  In the case of a traditional building the proposal is sensitive to its fabric and character  The building is of permanent and substantially sound construction and is proposed for re-use and adaptation in a manner which would require major or complete reconstruction  Any bat roost present is incorporated or replaced, and the external vegetative structure supporting is maintained or replaced within the scheme.

This proposal is to allow a sui generis business use in the form of the auction rooms which is already on the wider site, to expand and relocate into a unit currently used by a B2 use.

The permission will also enable the existing B1, A1 and A3 uses across the rest of the site to continue with the flexibility gained through planning permission whilst still maintaining a degree of control in the amount of A1 and A3 uses.

Whilst the proposal is not strictly speaking for conversion of the buildings, as they are already in commercial use, some of the criteria to be applied in policy DP22 are relevant. However, as no new uses are being introduced and no structural changes to the buildings are proposed, the development will not have any additional impact on adjoining uses, on the landscape, on the transport network or on any bats present. Criteria c and d of the policy concern the fabric of any building to be converted and are not relevant here.

National guidance in the NPPF para 28 deals with supporting a prosperous rural economy and suggests promoting a strong rural economy through supporting the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity.

Whilst retail uses would not normally be appropriate in a countryside location by virtue of the sequential test approach, paragraph 25 of the NPPF advises that the sequential approach should not be applied to applications for small scale rural offices or other small scale rural development. Notwithstanding this, the applicant has provided justification for locating the Pet Grooming and Antique sales units at Rookery Farm and this was accepted by the previous permission. The same limitations on A1 and A3 floorspace are also proposed.

National and local planning policy support the re-use of redundant agricultural buildings for economically beneficial uses and the appropriateness of the open A1 and A3 uses in this location have been justified and appropriately restricted. The expansion of the auction rooms and additional flexibility allowed for with the location of the B1, A1 and A3 elements improves the efficiency of the site as businesses come and go and therefore further enhances its economic viability and vitality.

The principle of the development is considered acceptable in accordance with Policies CP1, CP3, CP4 and DP22 of the local plan and the NPPF.

Impact on character and appearance of the area

The proposal would not result in any external alterations other than new windows and a new entrance to unit 7 and a link between units 7 and 9. None of which would have a discernible impact on the visual impact of the units. Nor would the proposal introduce any new businesses to the wider site. The proposal would therefore have no discernible further impact on the character and appearance of the area than the current operations and is in accordance with policies DP1 and 7 in this regard.

Amenity

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 42

No complaints have been raised from the use of unit 7 for B2 use without any restrictions on opening hours, nor the operation of the auction rooms. Whilst the previous permission (2011/2367) for the auction rooms restricted the hours of use, at that time the Council’s Environmental Protection team were concerned with noise from car movements across the site.

The proposed use of unit 7 and the rear part of 9 for the auction rooms would take the use further away from Rookery Farmhouse and other occupiers on site.

The designated parking for the auction rooms would be adjoining the new unit and access would be separate to the other units on the complex.

Despite concerns raised by the objector at Rookery Farm Bungalow, the Council’s Environmental Protection team are satisfied that with the use of the car park further away from the Farm House the hours restriction is not now necessary and the proposed use of unit 7 as an auction / sales room would have little or no additional impact on the farm house.

The impact on the amenity of adjoining residential and business properties is therefore considered acceptable in accordance with policy DP7 and DP8.

Highways

Whilst the Local Highway Authority refer the officer to standing advice for the current application, in considering the previous application (2015/0502/FUL) they were satisfied that the local road network, existing access and parking and turning areas are sufficient, subject to a condition to ensure the retention of the parking and turning areas.

The relocation of the auction rooms to the unit previously used for B2 would not generate any significant traffic increase and the existing access to unit 7 from the main road would provide a dedicated access for the auctions rooms, separate to the rest of the complex. The parking arrangements would remain unchanged from the previous permission other than the provision of additional parking within the compound area of Unit 7. Given the expanse of parking area available it is not considered necessary to require individual spaces to be marked out but a condition is proposed to ensure the parking areas are retained for parking.

It is therefore consider that adequate parking can be accommodated on the site and the proposal would have no adverse highway implications in accordance with policies DP9 and DP10.

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

It is recommended that planning permission be granted for the reasons set out above.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal accords with the Council's settlement strategy for the location of new development. The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout would be in keeping with its surroundings and would safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents and adjoining land users. The means of access and parking arrangements meet the required safety standards

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 43

and will ensure the free flow of traffic on the highway.

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:- Policies CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (Business Development and Growth), CP4 (Sustaining Rural Communities), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards) and DP22 Reuse and Conversion of Rural Buildings of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014). National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers 1745/ 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07 and 08. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) the retail use (use class A1) hereby permitted shall not exceed 315sqm and must be spread across at least 3 units under separate operation, with no single unit being larger than 200sqm. Reason: To prevent an inappropriate scale of retail development in open countryside.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) the cafe/ restaurant use (use class A3) hereby permitted shall not exceed 250sqm. Reason: To prevent an inappropriate scale of town centre (cafe/restaurant) development in open countryside.

5. The parking and turning areas shown on drawing 1745/07 shall be permanently retained, kept free from obstruction and not used other than for the parking and turning of vehicles as shown on the plan. Reason: To ensure that sufficient parking is provided to serve the approved development and ensure vehicles enter and leave the highway in a forward gear in the interests of highway safety.

List of Advices

1. 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.

2. The Planning Authority is required to erect a Site Notice on or near the site to

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 44

advertise development proposals which are submitted. Could you please ensure that any remaining Notice(s) in respect of this decision are immediately removed from the site and suitably disposed of. Your co operation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

3. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission.

4. Where a Planning Permission, Listed Building Consent, Certificate of Lawful Development or Prior Approval has been issued, approval may also be required under the Building Regulation Legislation before any work is commenced, and throughout the building process. Mendip District Council's Building Control Department works in tandem with our Development Management team to offer a number of helpful and efficient services that can be accessed via our website http://www.mendip.gov.uk/buildingcontrol, by email at [email protected], or by telephoning 01749 341248 or 01749 341209. Our Building Control team includes chartered surveyors, fire and building engineers and support staff that are available for free pre-application discussions and/or site meetings, to plan and facilitate a streamlined pathway to the completion and final sign-off of all projects.

Policies CP1 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (Business Development and Growth), CP4 (Sustaining Rural Communities), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP9 (Transport Impact of New Development), DP10 (Parking Standards) and DP22 Reuse and Conversion of Rural Buildings of the Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014).

Material Considerations  National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)  National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)  Somerset County Council Highways Development Control Standing Advice

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 45

Agenda Item No. DM08

Case Officer Mrs Lorna Elstob

Site 42A West Shepton Shepton Mallet Somerset BA4 5UD

Application Number 2015/2331/HSE

Date Received 25th September 2015

Applicant/ Mr Jeffrey Curtis Organisation

Application Type Householder Application

Proposal Alterations to layout to create a two bedroom dwelling with a functional first floor at 42a West Shepton, BA4 5UD.

Ward Shepton West

Parish Shepton Mallet Town Council

The application is referred to Planning Board following consultation with the ward member, Chair and Vice Chair

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to 42a West Shepton, Shepton Mallet.

The application is for alterations to the layout to create a two bedroom dwelling with a functional first floor.

Representations and consutee responses

Parish Council

The Parish Council have recommended approval.

Highways

Standing advice applies. Highways require that sufficient parking is provided for residential properties. The standards provided require that for a 2 bedroom dwelling 2.5 parking spaces are provided. The application fails to provide sufficient parking.

Representations

The neighbours in the adjacent property have objected on the grounds of the perceived loss of light to the hall and landing.

Relevant planning history

There is no recent planning history for this site. The building was originally a shop and was converted to a residential property in 1998.

Summary of all planning policies relevant to the proposal

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 46

Development Plan Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014)

DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP3 Heritage and Conservation, DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection) DP10 (Parking Standards

Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) Somerset County Council Standing Advice (June 2013)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle of development

There is limited space within this plot for householder development to take place.

Effect on the character of the area

The property is located on a main road in to the town centre of Shepton Mallet. The updated design of the building is a significant improvement. The removal of the dormer windows and the balancing of the windows means the design is more in keeping with its surrounding area.

Impact to residential amenities

The adjacent property currently benefits from a large window on its side elevation – this provides natural light for the hall and landing. The proposal would reduce the amount of light available through this window and would alter the outlook to that of a gable end.

Highways Impact

Highways Standing Advice includes the minimum requirement for off street parking spaces for residential properties.

The requirement for a two bedroom property is to provide 2.5 parking spaces, rounded up to 3 spaces. This is not met by the application. There is insufficient space within the boundary to allow for a vehicle to turn and therefore prevent the need for a vehicle to reverse out on to a classified road.

The property is located on a junction of 3 roads, two of which lead to residential estates. The drawings provided of the proposed parking highlight that insufficient parking and turning space is available on the site. This is therefore contrary to DP9 and DP10 of the Mendip District Council Local Plan (adopted Dec 2014).

Environmental Impact Assessment

This development does not fall within the scope of the town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 47

It is recommended that planning permission be refused.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal fails to meet the requirements of Somerset County Council Parking Strategy (September 2013) and Somerset County Council Highways Standing Advice (June 2015). Standing Advice, Appendix 11.6 identifies the requirement to provide 2 parking spaces and 1 visitor parking space for a 2 bedroom property, Appendix 11.7 identifies the space required for a parking space and 11.8 identifies the turning areas required. The proposal is therefore also contrary to DP9 and DP10 of the Mendip District Council Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Dec 2014).

List of Advices

1. This decision relates to drawings 41a/1 and 42a/2 received on 25th September 2015 and "parking 42a W. Shepton" received on 22nd October 2015.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council works in a positive and pro-active way with Applicants and looks for solutions to enable the grant of planning permission. However, in this case the proposal is not sustainable development for the reasons set out and the Council was unable to identify a way of securing a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 48

Agenda Item No. DM09

Case Officer Mr Carlton Langford

Site Skateboard Park West Shepton Recreation Ground Old Wells Road Shepton Mallet Somerset

Application Number 2015/2214/CLE

Date Received 18th September 2015

Applicant/ Shepton Mallet Town Council Organisation

Application Type Certificate of Use Existing

Proposal Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for an existing use to upgrade an existing skate park.

Ward Shepton West

Parish Shepton Mallet Town Council

This application (lawful existing use) has been brought before the Planning Board as the application site comprises land within the Council’s Ownership.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to the existing skate park at the West Shepton Recreational Ground, Shepton Mallet.

The application is applying for a Lawful Development Certificate that the building works associated with the skate park (tarmac hardstanding and ramps) were substantially complete more than 4 years before the date of this application.

Summary of parish comments, any objections or conflict with the recommendation

Parish Council

None received

County Highway Surveyor

Standing advice

Representations

None received.

Relevant planning history

No relevant planning history.

Assessment of relevant issues

Whether the development is lawful

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 49

The essential test for considering applications for a Certificate of Lawfulness for an Existing Development is the “balance of probability”, as opposed to the more stringent “beyond reasonable doubt” test applied in courts.

The burden of proof to support the application rests firmly with the applicant. Section 192 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 states that an authority may grant a Certificate of Lawful Development if it is satisfied with an applicant’s claim. An application should only be refused where an authority has evidence of its own to contradict or undermine the applicant’s version of events.

Evidence submitted

The case put forward by the applicant is that the skate park (that being the building works only) had been in place before 2009.

Evidence has been submitted with the application with the Planning Statement including a statement that the works are lawful as they were permitted development under Schedule 2, Part 12, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, Aerial photograph from 2005.

Evidence has also been submitted in the form of past issues of the Shepton Mallet Journal relating to the chronology of the Shepton Mallet Skate Park, described as the ‘Skate park saga’.

This sets out, in chronological order, the following events:

 August 2002: District councillors give the go-ahead for a skate park at the West Shepton playing fields off Old Wells Road.  September 2003: The skate park project has already secured funding from a variety of different sources but Mendip’s area regeneration officer Guy Braga said the council was unwilling to accept the proposed wood construction of the park’s skateboard ramps. “They have grave concerns about the long-term durability of a wooden structure, and its vulnerability to fire and vandalism” he said.  July 2004: A skate park with wooden ramps is built and opened in West Shepton at a cost of almost £50,000, funded through a variety of sources, donations and grants.  November 2006: Discussions take place about the future maintenance of the facility.  June 2008: Youngsters stand up at a PACT (Partners and Community Together) meeting and appeal for improved facilities at the skate park and an extended BMX track.  September 2011: A report from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents highlights thousands of pounds worth of repairs needed to bring the skate park up to scratch.  November 2011: A series of crisis meetings are held to decide the future of the skate park. Its future hangs in the balance as parts are rotten and deemed unfit by health and safety officials, with some parts already dismantled.  January 2012: Mendip District Council’s cabinet grants a 30-year lease for the skate park at the West Shepton. This means the Friends of Shepton Mallet Recreation can apply for charitable trust status and start fundraising. A bank account is set up, a Facebook page launched and application made to the Big Lottery Fund for help, too.  April 2014: Friends of Shepton Mallet Recreation triumph in its goal to raise £150,000 to give the town a new skate park through grants, fundraising events and collection tins. The group said a new facility should be in place in time for summer.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 50

Analysis of the evidence

The supporting evidence would suggest that the skate park was most likely in place before 2005 with the Shepton Journal suggesting that in July 2004 a skate park with wooden ramps is built and opened in West Shepton at a cost of almost £50,000, funded through a variety of sources, donations and grants.

The evidence submitted by the applicant is considered thorough and sufficient to support the applicant’s case, and furthermore, it would also support a case that the Use (Skate Park) began more than 10 years before the date of this application and there is no planning or enforcement history to contradict the evidence accompanying the application.

It cannot be demonstrated that the development (skate park) was development permitted under Part 12 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as some of the original structures have since been dismantled and removed from the site and there is no way of assessing whether the development conformed with the requirements of part 12v of the Legislation.

However, whether the skate park was permitted development under Part 12 of the General Permitted Development Order is now neither here nor there as it has already been established that a development (Skate Park) took place on the land in July 2004 which is more than 4 years before the date of this application.

It is therefore considered that the applicant has discharged the burden of proof to demonstrate that, on the balance of probabilities, the skate park edged red on the accompanying drawings (Location Plan) has been on site for more than 4 years continuously (2004–2015). As such, the development is considered lawful for planning purposes in accordance with Section 191 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

Conclusion

For the reasons given, it is recommended that a certificate of lawful use be granted.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The applicant has demonstrated that on the balance of probability the use of the land as a skate park and the structures thereon at the West Shepton Recreational Ground, Old Wells Road, Shepton Mallet began more than 4 years before the date of this application and as such, the development is lawful.

List of Advices

1. This decision relates to Supporting Evidence, Location Plan and Drawings SHEP- EXS01.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 51

Agenda Item No. DM10

Case Officer Mr Carlton Langford

Site Skate Park Old Wells Road Shepton Mallet Somerset BA4 5XN

Application Number 2015/2340/FUL

Date Received 28th September 2015

Applicant/ Shepton Mallet Town Council Organisation

Application Type Full Application

Proposal Upgrade of existing skate park

Ward Shepton West

Parish Shepton Mallet Town Council

This application has been brought before the Planning Board for the reason that the land is within the District Council’s ownership.

Description of Site, Proposal and Constraints

The application relates to the Shepton Mallet Skate Park off the Old Wells Road.

The application seeks planning permission for a new replacement skate park. The existing park comprises an area of hardstanding (tarmac) with purpose built ramps attached to the tarmac. The proposal is to remove all the existing ramps and remodel a large section of the tarmac area creating a purpose built concrete skate park.

Summary of parish comments, any objections or conflict with the recommendation

Parish Council

No comments received.

Highway Authority

Standing advice.

Environmental Protection

No objections.

Other Representations

2 letters of general support for the proposed development have been received with 1 letter merely raising questions of drainage and how the existing ramps are to be disposed off.

Relevant planning history

The existing skate park has no formal planning permission as it was most likely considered to be permitted development under Part 12 (Development by Local Authorities) of the Town and Country General Permitted Development Order which allows Local Authorities to undertake works and erect building etc in association which are required in connection with

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 52 the operations administrated by them. There is evidence to suggest that the park was built in 2004 and added to over the years.

Summary of planning policies

Development Plan Mendip District Local Plan Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014).

CP1 (Spatial Strategy), DP1 (Local Identity and Distinctiveness), DP7 (Design and Amenity), DP8 (Environmental Protection),

Material Considerations National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

Assessment of relevant issues

Principle

Whilst no formal permission exists for the skate park, by virtue of it being on the land since at least 2004, the lawful existing use of the land to accommodate a skate park is well established with the site support the skate park use and no other use for an excess of 10 years.

The proposed park will not extend outside the limits of the existing skate park and will ensure the retention of an existing recreational open space.

As such, the proposed development is acceptable in principle.

Design and appearance

The proposed new skate park will be a significant up-grade on the existing outdated equipment, some of which has already been removed for health and safety reason, being safer for the end users and will not have any more of a visual impact on the character or appearance of the area than the existing equipment. .

Neighbouring amenity

The use of the site as a skate park is well established and the new park is unlikely to raise any additional amenity issues over or above those which might already exist.

Highway Safety and Parking

No changes to the access or parking arrangement are to be made which are considered sufficient to serve the use.

Other issues

In respect of drainage there are no foul drainage issue to consider and the proposed concrete park will utilise existing surface water drainage. With regard to disposal of the existing ramps, this is not a material planning consideration. It will be the responsibility of the Shepton Mallet Town Council to ensure the old equipment is disposed of appropriately.

Environmental Impact Assessment

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 53

This development does not fall within the scope of the town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and so Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Conclusion

It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

Reason/s for Recommendation

1. The proposal accords with the Council's settlement strategy for the location of new development. The proposal, by reason of its design, scale and layout would be in keeping with its surroundings. 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. 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:- CP3 and CP4 (principle of development), DP1 (local identity), DP7 (design and amenity), DP9 (transport), DP10 (parking), DP16 (open space) of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006-2029 (Part 1 Strategies and Policies - adopted 15th December 2014) National Planning Policy Framework Planning Practice Guidance The Countywide Parking Strategy (2013)

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with Location Plan and drawing numbers SHEP-PSP01A, ESP01, EXS01. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

List of Advices

1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has granted planning permission.

2. 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.

3. The Planning Authority is required to erect a Site Notice on or near the site to advertise development proposals which are submitted. Could you please ensure that any remaining Notice(s) in respect of this decision are immediately removed from the site and suitably disposed of. Your co operation in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 54

Planning Board Report 20th January 2016 Page 55