Agenda item

18/02218/FUL - Land South Of St John The Baptist Church, Church Lane, Horsington

Minutes:

The Specialist Officer – Planning presented her report to members.

She explained to members that there two separate applications for the same site, one being a full planning application and the other being listed building consent.

She advised that the application was for a single dwelling within the walled garden of Horsington House.

Using a PowerPoint presentation, she provided maps to show the location of the site as well as the position of listed buildings, public rights of way and the adjoining conservation area. She explained that the church was a Grade 2* listed building.

She also pointed out the proposed access and the position of the proposed dwelling, highlighting buildings to be demolished and proposed parking areas. She explained that the access to the site would be reached along Church Lane and past the church.

She also provided photographs of the site and pointed out that outbuildings used for storage would be demolished.

She provided drawings to show the proposed elevations, sections and site layout. She explained that there were high walls surrounding the site.

She advised members that the design of the dwelling included a flat green roof, substantial areas of glazing and the use of pre-weathered coloured zinc and natural stone.

The Specialist – Planning advised members that Horsington was considered to be an SS2 location and given the lack of a five-year land supply, it was felt that modest development was acceptable. She advised members that the application had been considered in detail by Historic England, who supported the scheme. She added that the Conservation Officer also offered support to the application. She explained that views of the dwelling were fairly well contained due to the high walls, however noted that some parts of the proposed dwelling would be viewable from the public right of way to the south of the site. She also advised that the access was already a shared access and that the addition of one further dwelling was unlikely to cause any significant issues.

She recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions as detailed in the report.

Members of the public spoke in objection to the applications. Their comments included;

· The description given to the planning application is deceptive. It should read; a development within a Grade 2 listed walled garden in the grounds of Horsington House.

· Some residents have been kept outside of the loop and not notified about the application.

· The report is biased and one sided.

· The proposal does not provide employment or enhance community facilities or services. Nor does it address the affordable housing need.

· RPS and highways reports have been ignored.

· The Parish Council object to the application and the proposed access.

· The dwelling is not in-keeping with the surrounding listed buildings.

· The narrow access lane runs across the private garden of Horsington House and Horsington House West. There is an alternative access route which runs from the A357 which would be more suitable. Church Lane is very narrow.

· The vehicles using this lane will affect the residential amenity of the residents of the apartments in Horsington House and Horsington House West, which will be contrary to policy EQ2.

· Concerns raised over possible damage to the driveway as they were not constructed for use by heavy lorries.

· The driveway is not for shared use, it is for service vehicles and the residents vehicles.

· Concern over the safety of a small child as the garden which he uses will have cars driving through it every day.

· The walled kitchen garden is listed and it is a heritage asset, not wasteland. It should be protected. A new home within the walls will not enhance the site, it will rob the community of an important heritage asset.

· The proposal fails to meet the criteria of the local plan policy SS2.

· The proposal will have a detrimental impact of the heritage asset and neighbouring amenity.

The applicant addressed the Committee. He pointed out that the access road is very well made. He also explained there are no signs of wear on the surface of the road. He advised members that it was hard and impractical to maintain the walled garden. He also added that the he had a right to access over the driveway. He explained that the only objectors to the scheme were residents that live close by to the site and that the village of Horsington as a whole did not object. He also pointed out that the Conservation Officer supported the application. He clarified that the roof line wouldn’t be raised to a height above the wall.

Councillor Hayward Burt explained that he had concerns over a modern building being built within the grounds of a listed building. He explained that the importance of a grade 2* listed building was significant. He felt it was contrary to policy EQ3 as this did not enhance the character of the listed building.

The Chairman commented that the views of the Parish Council were not covered by the Specialist Officer – Planning, during her introduction of the report.

During the discussion, members commented that walled gardens were rare and felt that the heritage of the site should be respected. Members also commented that the other existing access would be a better option for the development.

In response to a question from a member, the Specialist Officer – Planning confirmed that the wall itself was not listed, however she viewed it as being curtilage listed. She also confirmed that the church and Horsington House were both listed and suggested that the buildings within the buildings could be considered curtilage listings, however were not listed in their own right.

In response to a question from a member, the Senior Planning Advisor advised that members were able to consider a refusal due to the importance of the walled garden view a view to safeguard the distinctiveness of the listed building. However, he pointed out that the application did not harm the wall and that the dwelling would be sunk down within the walls and that very little of the proposal would be viewed from outside the walls. He also pointed out that the site was not within a conservation area and would not create a precedent for development outside of the village, as the site was contained within the walls.

Following the discussion it was proposed and seconded that the planning application should be refused, contrary to the recommendation of the Specialist Officer as the loss of the historic garden and creation of a new modern building was out of context with the listed building and surrounding area. The proposal also would be detrimental to the tranquil character and nature of the setting of these groups of listed building.

The meeting was adjourned for 5 minutes.

On recommencement of the meeting, members agreed the reasons for refusal which was agreed to read;

1. The proposed development, by reason of its siting, nature, layout and design, will result in the loss of a historic walled garden and will fail to respect the setting, character and special historic interest of this site, adjacent listed buildings as well as the adjacent conservation area and fails to reinforce local distinctiveness contrary to the aims and objectives of policies EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

2. The proposed development, by reason of the proposed use of the historic carriage route as a vehicular access to the site, will be detrimental to the tranquil character and nature of the setting of this group of listed buildings contrary to the aims and objectives of policy EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

On being put to the vote, this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: that members agreed to refuse planning application 18/02218/FUL, contrary to the officer recommendation, for the following reasons;