Agenda item

Application Proposal: Outline planning permission is sought for the development of up to 60 residential dwellings (Use Class C3), together with associated highways and drainage infrastructure, public open space and landscaping. Details of access are submitted for approval with all other matters (Layout, Scale, Appearance and Landscaping) reserved for later approval.

The Planning Specialist presented his report to members. He explained that the application was an outline application for up to 60 dwellings and that all matters, except access, would be considered by a later reserved matters application. 

He explained to members that there was a slight error in the report where a sentence on page 37 of the agenda had part of a sentence omitted. He clarified that the comments of the County Highway Authority should read; ‘However, the matter which has created concern is the pedestrian infrastructure and how new residents who wish to walk to the local services are accommodated bearing in mind Brewham Road has no current infrastructure in place.’

He summarised a number of late letters of representation, which had been received since the report had been published. He explained that there were 2 letters of objection and 1 letter in support, however advised that they contained no new information that had not already been covered within his report. He advised of one point which had not been covered within his report, which had been submitted from the owner of 1 Bruelands. He explained that although the owner of 1 Bruelands had been contacted by the developer to negotiate the possible sale of some land adjoining the site, that negotiations had not continued from the developer.

Using a PowerPoint presentation, he provided plans to show the location of the site and photographs of the site and access. He also pointed out the position of the River Brue and the existing residential development of Bruelands.

He explained that the layout plan which had been provided was an indicative plan, however did show how 60 dwellings could be positioned on the site. He also showed the position of the proposed large attenuation pond and advised members that both the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Agency were satisfied with the proposal subject to a detailed drainage condition. 

He also detailed the access and visibility splay as proposed, explaining that the proposed visibility splay was more than normally required.  He also explained that the proposal included a new pavement to link the development to the town, which would be situated the south of the development, adding that a priority system for vehicles approaching from the west, was also proposed on the road along the north of the site. The proposal had been considered and audited by Somerset County Council and had passed the tests which were carried out.

Photographs on the site and the surrounding area, to include the access, were shown to members.

The Planning Specialist advised that a number of planning applications for housing developments had recently been approved in Bruton, which totalled 193 new dwellings. He explained that the additional 60 dwellings which were proposed as part of this application would exceed the minimum target of planned houses to be built in Bruton by 24%. However, he felt that this would not be considered significant.

In summary, he felt that the key considerations for members would be drainage and highway safety, however advised that it was his recommendation that the application be approved.

Councillor Lucy Trimnell spoke in objection to the application. She explained that the additional traffic which would be created by this proposal was a concern, especially when considering other new housing developments in the area. She also felt that the pedestrian access which would be created would be unsafe. She also expressed her concern that classroom numbers would be increased at the primary school and explained that the doctors surgery was already struggling with high numbers of patients. She also commented that new affordable homes would be welcomed by some residents in the town, and this would help the national housing shortage. She summarised that the site was not suitable for development. Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest, she left the room.

Members of the Bruton Town Council spoke in objection to the application. Their comments included;

·         Bruton welcomes new, well-designed homes in suitable locations

·         The Bruton Town Council plan conducted in 2017 showed a clear need for 2 or 3 bedroom homes as well as affordable homes however the Town Council would only support appropriate, low density dwellings on this site.

·         60 homes is too excessive  for this site.

·         The Parish Council disagree with the SCC Highway comments as pedestrian routes are unsafe. The SCC Highways Team have been unwilling to confirm when a site visit took place.

·         The pavement width, proposed access and turning does not meet SSDC Local Plan policy TA5. The proposal also does not facilitate cycling routes.

Members of the public addressed the Committee to speak in objection to the proposal. Their comments included;

·         The footpath can be overrun with vehicles and will be unsafe for pedestrians. There is a steep bank on one side of the road, which is often hit by vehicles.

·         The road is frequently used by large vehicles.

·         There are missing footpath links, which does not encourage walking or cycling. The route that has been provided is dangerous; most cars drive in excess of 40mph along this stretch.

·         The swept path analysis which has been provided in flawed and an alternative access should be proposed.

·         The narrowing of the road will make the road more dangerous and will make driving large agricultural vehicles difficult. Trailers will overhang pavement when turning.

·         Hedgerows will grow back.

·         There is little benefit to the community. The developer has built another scheme in the town and provided only 18% of the development as affordable housing after they promised 35%.

·         There are no jobs in Bruton. The proposal does not support policy SS3.

·         There have been over 100 objections to the scheme as well as a petition.

·         It was disappointing that the Committee meeting was held during the day as it was difficult for some people to attend.

·         There are huge traffic problems within the town and along this stretch of road. Recycling vehicles will struggle to access site.

·         It is already difficult turning onto Brewham Road from Frome Road.

·         Walking to school is already a scary experience. The road is dangerous and often used by lorries and tractors. It will become terrifying is the road is narrowed.

·         There are too many houses proposed for the site.

·         Concerns over drainage on the site. The existing drain and sewer cannot cope with the rapid surface water drainage. No evidence has been provided to show that the problem will not be worsened by the proposal.

·         The site will be built on clay and will become a flood risk. 

The agent addressed members to speak in support of the proposal. He explained that there had been no technical objections from any statutory consultees and highlighted that new homes are needed in Bruton. He added that the primary school had offered support to the proposal. He further explained that the proposal will provide high quality and affordable homes and would create opportunities for first time buyers and will allow families to remain in the together in the town.

A Highways Consultant, representing the agent, addressed members. He explained that all standards and regulations had been adhered to, when designing the proposed access to the site. He explained that he had worked closed with SCC when designing the access and new junction. He felt that the proposed priority scheme would improve the current situation.

The applicant addressed the Committee. He referred to another development in Bruton which Acorn Developments had recently built and explained that this was a successful development, which provided high quality homes. He advised that the proposed development along Brewham Road would also provide high quality homes, which would include some smaller units and some more affordable homes. He understood the highway concerns, adding that a footpath had been proposed to try to overcome some concerns.

In response to a question, the Planning Specialist advised that the applicant would aim to deliver 35% of the development as affordable homes. He also reminded members that the application was for outline planning permission only.

The Chairman explained that the application had been 2-starred in line with the SSDC scheme of delegation and should the committee recommend that the application be refused; the application will be referred to the Regulation Committee for determination.

In response to a question from a member, the Lead Planning Specialist explained that any pre-application advice and comments from the SCC Highways team were included within the report.

During the discussion, concern was raised over drainage and some members felt that 60 dwellings would be overdevelopment of the site. Members also felt that the access and proposed footpath was dangerous and more should be done to encourage walking and cycling.

One member raised concern over the number of new dwellings proposed for Bruton which was considered a rural centre. He felt that this was contrary to both the settlement statement and policy SS5 and that this should be given consideration. He also felt the comments were contrary to policy TA5 as the access and pavement would be unsafe and felt that people would resort to using cars.

Members continue to raise concern over the proposed highway alterations and the proposed footpath. One member also felt that the proposal did not encourage green travel options such as cycling and felt that the environmental strategy should be considered.

Concern was also raised over the existing sewerage system. One member felt that the system would be upgraded before work should commence on the site.

It was proposed that the application should be refused due to the safety concerns over the access, highway alterations and poor footpath links. Members also wished for the application to be refused as the application was contrary to the settlement strategy and to policy SS5. This was seconded by another member.

The Lead Planning Specialist explained to members that Somerset County Council had raised no objection to the planning application, and would therefore not provide any additional support in defending an appeal. He also added that the district council would need to rely on support from the Parish Council in defending the reasons for refusal.

On being put to the vote this was carried 10 votes in support, with 1 abstention.

RESOLVED:  that planning application 19/00655/OUT be refused, contrary to the officers recommendation, for the following reasons; (and therefore the application is referred to the Regulation Committee)

1.            The proposal for up to 60 dwellings would take the level of growth for Bruton up to 253 dwellings over the plan period. This would represent a scale of growth which is 24.6% over the target for this Rural Centre as set out in Policy SS5 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028). As such, the development would be a significant increase over that envisaged in Policy SS5 and would be contrary to the intended growth strategy and settlement strategy and therefore contrary to Policies SD1, SS1 and SS5 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028).

2.            The development fails to provide inclusive, safe and convenient access on foot and cycle by reason of a narrow footway and contrived routing via Darkey Lane, meaning pedestrians will be forced to walk in the highway east of Darkey Lane creating conflict prejudicial to pedestrian and highway safety. Furthermore the inclusion of a new footway narrows the useable carriageway, especially on the junction of Brewham Rd and Frome Rd, which would result in the overrunning and over-sailing of the footway by HGV and agricultural vehicles, prejudicial to pedestrian and highway safety. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy TA5 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028), the National Planning Policy Framework and Manual for Streets.

3.            The development, when taken with the existing use of Brewham Rd by existing residential, commercial and agricultural traffic would create a residual impact which is considered severe, contrary to para. 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

(voting: 10 votes in support, with 1 abstention)