Agenda item

Application Proposal: Outline application for residential development (for up to 10 No. dwellings) with associated vehicular access arrangements, relocation of parking for Norbeth and The Bell Inn (Revised Application)

The Planning Officer presented his report to members with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. He advised that the application was for outline permission for residential development comprising 10 dwellings, associated parking, landscaping and construction of access.  The application followed a previous refusal of outline permission within the same site which was now under appeal.  The key considerations associated with the application were principle of development, highway safety and visual/residential amenity.  The Planning Officer updated that additional correspondence had been received from the Parish Council advising that they would be speaking at the meeting and two further objections from neighbouring properties raising concerns over highway access and the development resulting in a disproportionate number of dwellings for a small village.  His recommendation was for approval subject to a S106 agreement and the conditions outlined in the agenda plus an additional boundary treatment condition.

In response to questions from Members, the Planning Officer, Area Lead West and Legal Services Manager confirmed:

·         The two reasons the previous application was refused;

·         Members needed to consider the application on its own merits;

·         The applicant was entitled to make a second application and could be in a position where he has two planning permissions;

·         The application was for a new scheme and should be looked at afresh;

·         How the proposed site related to the previous application site;

·         A layby area would be created which would allow delivery vehicles to pull in;

·         The car park would not be able to provide access for delivery vehicles;

·          The estate road was 5m wide which was standard a width and was wide enough for two way traffic.

Christine Trueman, Chair of Broadway Parish Council advised that the objections to the previous application still applied.  Concerns expressed related to the following:

·         Loss of open space;

·         Concerns over the access and the risk to road users and pedestrians;

·         Ongoing problems with sewerage;

·         There was no proven demand for housing in Broadway;

·         Increased risk of flooding.

The Committee was addressed by Lynne Baker (on behalf of the Almshouses), David Swain and Roger Mazillius (on behalf of Brian Twigg) in objection to the application.  Concerns expressed related to the following:

·         The proposed access was inadequate and unfit for purpose;

·         Broadway Road was a busy road particularly at school drop off and pick up times with additional parked cars.  The road was unable to cope with any further traffic;

·         Concern that if the application was approved a further application would be put forward for further dwellings;

·         Concerns about the sewerage and rainwater infrastructure not being capable of supporting further residential development.

The Applicant, Mr G Pavier believed that the application would help bring more young families into the village and would be beneficial to local facilities and businesses.  He also referred to the Needs Survey commissioned by the Parish Council which concluded that 50% of residents were in favour of development.

The Applicant’s Agent, Mr S Travers, noted that the scheme had been reduced in response to previous concerns.  The scheme would be a small addition to Broadway and would be situated within a sustainable location given the facilities provided in the village.  He highlighted that the consultees were in support of the application and the scheme would bring various benefits to the local community.

Ward Member, Councillor Linda Vijeh felt that the number of applications was excessive for the size of the village and because of the approval of other schemes the proposal was not looked at favourably by local residents.  She also raised concerns over the increase in traffic and flooding.

During the discussion, the majority of members were minded to refuse the application and made a number of comments which included the following:

·         There was no difference between this application and the previous application bearing in mind that the reason for refusal was not in relation to the volume of houses;

·         Concern was expressed over sustainability and the lack of bus services;

·         The site still comprised an area of land that formed a strategic landscape space;

·         There were issues with flooding and sewerage;

·         The view of the Parish Council and local community should be supported;

·         Concerns over traffic impact particularly at school times.

The Planning Officer noted that the access proposed remained the same as for the previous application and therefore recommended against refusing the application on the grounds of highway impact.  He also advised against refusing the application on flooding grounds as no statutory objections had been received.

The Area Lead West reiterated that the view of the Planning Officer was that a scheme of 10 dwellings was acceptable and that there were no technical grounds to refuse the application.  He referred to the two previous appeal decisions and also advised against including use of public transport as a reason for refusal as it was an issue for the whole of South Somerset.

The Legal Services Manager advised that with regard to cumulative impact, the development must address its own impact.  In terms of traffic, members needed to be clear that traffic from the development would be unsatisfactory.  

At the conclusion of the discussion, it was proposed and seconded to refuse the application contrary to the Planning Officers recommendation for the following reasons:

The site comprises an area of land that forms a strategic landscape space separating the existing development to the west of the site from the Primary School and Lamparts Way area at the east end of the village. Additionally, the site maintains continued separation of the village of Horton from Broadway which is integral to the local distinctiveness of the area and the setting of the village. As such the erosion of this space would be harmful to local landscape character and distinctiveness contrary to Policy EQ2 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028).

The development of this site would, when considered against other recently approved schemes would result in a cumulative level of development that it is out of scale with the function and role of Broadway and is therefore considered to be an unsustainable form of development contrary to Local Plan Policies SS1 and SS5 of the South Somerset Local Plan (2006-2028).

On being put to the vote, the proposal was carried by 10 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.