Agenda item

Planning Application - Land Os 3727 Part Windmill Hill Lane Ashill 17/03800/OUT

Meeting of Regulation Committee, Tuesday 18th September 2018 10.00 am (Item 36.)

Minutes:

Application Proposal: Erection of 25 dwellings and formation of access (outline) Land Os 3727 Part Windmill Hill Lane Ashill TA19 9PA

The Area Lead Planner presented the application as detailed in the agenda and with the aid of a power point presentation showed the site and proposed plans. In terms of updates he reported that a number of photographs had been received by local residents and have been included within his presentation.

He referred to the key considerations of the application, and advised that Ashill is defined within the Local Plan as a rural settlement, however explained only limited weight can be given to the housing constraints policies given that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year land supply. He said the village had some local facilities including a village hall and primary school and noted the Area West committee concerns who were minded to refuse the application concluding the site was not located in a sustainable location. However he does consider the village meets the criteria as set out under Policy SS2 of the Local Plan and given a number of appeal decisions in other similar rural settlements within the district where inspectors have accepted residential development he believed the principle of development to be acceptable.

The Area Lead Planner also noted the Highway Authority had raised no objection and that the parking had now been amended and only falls two short of the optimum standard. He noted the Landscape Officer comments and although appreciated his concern regarding development of the whole site the Area Lead Planner considered with the additional landscaping this proposal would not have a significant impact on the area.

He believed the scheme would not have an adverse impact on the setting of the local heritage assets including the church and Listed village road sign and that the Ecologist had raised no objection given the hedges are largely to be retained and was satisfied with the submitted biodiversity report. He noted the site was within Flood Zone one and although appreciated residents’ concern the applicant would need to submit an acceptable drainage scheme to mitigate any flooding issues which would be determined and conditioned at reserve matter stage.

The Area Lead Planner explained the historical applications at the site had been refused permission because of impact on the area but settlements previously had development boundaries which no longer existed.

He therefore concluded that after considering all of the responses and advice, as outlined in the agenda report, his proposal was to approve the application subject to the conditions as set out in the agenda report.

In response to questions from Members, the Area Lead Planner advised:

· Although the Local Plan had provided an expected target of 2,242 homes across all the rural settlements, with completions and commitments, this figure was now at 2,700.

· The land was agricultural grade III.

· Approximately 250 housing were situated within the parish of Ashill but unsure of the exact amount of development in Ashill over recent years.

· Appreciated the concerns regarding flooding within the area but clarified that should natural infiltration of the site be unacceptable the applicant would have to submit an acceptable Attenuation Scheme that satisfies the Lead Flood Authority before any development shall commence.

· Financial contributions would be sought towards the provision of local facilities.

· Other planning applications are not relevant, members must consider whether this is an appropriate development in Ashill on this particular site.

· Whilst Policy SS2 of the Local Plan should be considered, some housing is expected to be delivered within rural settlements and Ashill benefits from some local services and facilities and therefore considered a relatively sustainable location and along with the Council’s current lack of a five year housing supply, only limited weight can be attached to this Policy.

· Confirmed there were limited bus services for the village.

· Should permission be granted, assurance given that the roads be of adoptable standard.

Councillor Linda Vijeh, Ward member addressed the committee and raised several objections to the application. These included:

· Referred to previous appeals that had been dismissed and noted the Inspectors comments that development would have a severe impact on the area and open countryside.

· Increase of this amount of houses within the nucleus of this village would be detrimental to the area given the elongated layout of the village.

· The Local Parish Council do not support the application and referred to the significant number of objections received.

· Sufficient footpaths are not possible due to current drainage ditch and independent properties located opposite the site.

· Questioned the enforcement of sufficient planning conditions in relation to the surface water drainage and suggested that sufficient information be submitted prior to the application being approved.

· Have no guarantee that further additional funding will be available to enhance the existing local facilities of the area.

· Referred to the concerns raised by the Council’s Landscape Officer and the development of the whole of the site.

· The application does not provide evidence to support several points within the SS2 policy of the local plan has been met including; the protection and enhancement of the environment and distinctiveness of settlements, provide evidence and demand for the growth proposed, lack of varied transport options, enhancement of local facilities and add sustainability to the village in comparison to other larger villages within the district.

· No support from the local community with no robust local consultation taken place.

· Unfair disproportion of housing growth given to this area.

In conclusion she believed that based on her comments made and with informed consultation with the local community believed the Area West Committee recommendation to refuse the application be upheld.

The committee were addressed by the Chairman of Ashill Parish Council, three local residents and a representative for the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) who all spoke in opposition to the application. Their comments included:

· Referred to a previous appeal decision of a planning application for five dwellings at a nearby site where the inspector concluded that development would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area.

· Harmful traffic/highway impact on local roads.

· Raised concern regarding the surface water management system and its maintenance.

· The application does not provide evidence to support several points within the SS2 policy of the local plan.

· Impact on local water supply and impact on flood water drainage.

· Lack of infrastructure within the village to cope with the proposal.

· Major increase in traffic levels, likely increase in accidents.

· Lack of employment/facilities in the village.

· This scale of growth not required in Ashill.

· Council rely too much on the current lack of five year housing land supply.

· Harmful to the character and appearance of the village and does not enhance the natural environment.

· Why have the Landscape Officer’s comments have be given little weight?

· Proposal was not within a sustainable location.

· Scale of development was too excessive for the village.

· Fully supported the comments of Area West committee and their recommendation to refuse the application.

Following a short discussion members requested and were given a copy of the appeal decision referred to by many of the objectors. In agreement with the applicant a short adjournment of the meeting was taken to allow members and the applicant to read and consider the full appeal statement.

Following the break the Area Lead Planner advised members that the previous planning appeal decision referred to was not in the same location as this application and was set further from the village.

He also noted the Inspector’s comments that Ashill contained the basic core facilities including a primary school, village hall and church and therefore suitable for housing development appropriate with the scale and character of the settlement. He also highlighted the Inspectors refusal on the grounds of loss of employment land and premises and harm to the character and appearance of the area but not the need.

The Agent then addressed the committee and confirmed that a full drainage report was submitted but unfortunately was not looked at in full by the Lead Flood and Drainage Authority for reasons beyond the applicant’s control. Nonetheless he confirmed they would except the condition imposed. He also considered the current play facility adequate and the importance of the public consultation referring to a full day’s workshop that took place inviting local resident to view the plans proposed. He confirmed that funds would be provided for the enhancement of facilities under a section 106 legal agreement should permission be granted. He concluded that all statutory consultees had raised no objections to the proposal and although appreciated the concerns raised regarding the sustainability of the proposal believed the necessary tests have been applied and passed and found this site to be suitable and achievable.

During members’ discussion, varying views were expressed including:

· Concern regarding surface water drainage and flooding concerns.

· Sustainability of the site was not proven and the application should be refused.

· Cannot rely solely on the Council’s lack of five year housing land supply to approve the application.

· Development of this type is needed to help the village grow and survive.

· Acknowledge the balance of development with the impact on the character and appearance of the village – how much is too much?

· Scale of development to excessive for the village.

· Acknowledge some development is needed but not of this size.

· Appeal decision referred to was not in the same location as this application and was set further from the village.

· Ashill contained some facilities including a primary school, village hall and excellent play area and believed this proposal on balance appropriate for the scale and character of the settlement.

· Noted many local objections to the application which should be taken into account.

· Not enough evidence and information to substantiate the application.

· Believed some development was need to sustain and enhance the village, however hesitant whether the amount of houses was acceptable.

· Believed villages need growth and with some local facilities and excellent play area on balance considered the proposal acceptable.

The Senior Planning Advisor stated that the application should help the sustainability of the village and that the appeal decision referred to was located in a different location within the village.

Following a further discussion, it was then proposed and subsequently seconded that planning permission be approved as per the officer’s recommendation as set out in the agenda report. On being put to the vote this was carried by 7 votes in favour, 6 against and 0 abstentions. .

RESOLVED:

That application 17/03800/OUT be approved subject to the following:

01. The proposed scheme will result in a sustainable form of development that would make a valuable contribution towards meeting the Council's housing needs, including affordable housing, would not harm residential amenity, would provide a safe means of vehicular access, provide sufficient levels of off road parking, would not harm ecological interests nor heritage assets and can be adequately drained. The scheme is in accord with Policies SD1, SS1, SS2, SS5, SS6, HG3, HG5, TA4, TA5, TA6, HW1, EQ1, EQ2, EQ3 and EQ4 of the South Somerset Local Plan and Chapters 2, 8, 12, 14, 15 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:

01. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of three 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 later.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of Article 4 (Article 5) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015.

02. 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(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

03. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until particulars of the materials (including the provision of samples where appropriate) to be used for external walls and roofs have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area to accord with Policy EQ2 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

04. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of the development, as well as details of any changes proposed in existing ground levels; all planting, seeding, turfing or earth moulding comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area to accord with Policy EQ2 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

05. Any reserved matters application shall include the recommendations in section 5 of the Biodiversity Survey/Assessment (Lowans Ecology and Associates, 23 February 2017) regarding the detailed development plans (e.g. inclusion of details of biodiversity enhancement measures), further wildlife surveys (for specific species depending on detailed proposals), and for ecological mitigation proposals.

Reason: In the interests of ecology in accord with Policy EQ4 of the South Somerset Local Plan and Chapter 15 of the NPPF.

06. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 2015, no development under Schedule 2, Part 2, Classes A and B shall be undertaken by any of the properties that adjoin Windmill Hill Lane, without the express grant of planning permission.

Reason: To protect the rural character and appearance of Windmill Hill lane and the setting and significance of the listed roadsign in accordance with Policy EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

07. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Drawing numbers: Site layout plan DP101E rev E and DP.100.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

08. No work shall commence on the development hereby permitted until details of suitable footway improvements have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These improvements should provide a continuous footway of 1.8m width along Windmill Hill Lane from the proposed site access southwards to the existing entrance to the recreation ground, and the provision of informal pedestrian crossing points on Windmill Hill Lane and the old A358, including any footway extensions required to achieve these. Such works shall then be fully constructed in accordance with the approved plan(s), to an agreed specification, before any dwelling within the development is first occupied.