Agenda item

(Councillor Dean Ruddle having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application remained in the meeting until he had made his ward member representation, and then left the room for the debate and decision.)

Proposal: Outline application for the construction of up to 59 dwellings with a new vehicular access from Cartway Lane, associated car parking and open space including the provision of a play area and laying out of an access road. (The maximum height of buildings to be two storeys above existing ground level) with some matters reserved.

The Planning Officer presented the application, as detailed in the agenda report, and highlighted that the red line for the application excluded a strip of land to the south of the site which was a bridleway. She explained and presented to members a number of amendments that had been made to the application as it had progressed, including that the play areas were no longer proposed to be linked. Since the agenda had been published there were a number of updates:

·         County Archaeology raised no objection to the proposal subject to a condition.

·         Additional comments in objection had been received from Somerton Town Council:

o   Lack of safe pedestrian access

o   Linking of the play areas

o   Using the bridleway for emergency access

·         Five further letters from the public had been received

·         Leisure had revised their required contributions – these were detailed to members and the Planning Officer explained that this would require a change to the figures in the recommendation should the application be approved.

The Planning Officer noted that since writing the report, concerns about the width of Cartway Lane had been considered by the developer. The developer had agreed to the addition of an extra clause into the Section 106 obligations to make provision to safeguard land to widen the road should this be necessary if a new school site came forward on Cartway Lane.  The officer recommendation was to approve the application, subject to the addition of an archaeology condition, the increased leisure contributions and the additional clause in the Section 106 for safeguarding land for road widening.

Members were then addressed by Mr T Bown of Somerton Town Council, Mr J Andrews, Mr S Law, Ms M Fletcher, Mr M Vicker-Craddock, Mrs Richardson, Mrs P Short and Mr A Bartlett who all spoke in objection to the application. Their comments included:

·         Concern regarding lack of pedestrian access along Cartway Lane, even if developer does provide a section of pavement it will not connect to Langport Road.

·         Question why bridleway needs to be used for emergency access.

·         The eastern side of the site is often waterlogged or flooded - concern about lack of detail regarding a suitable surface water drainage scheme, and storage of excess water needs to be conditioned.

·         Concern that any linking of the play areas will allow pedestrian access from one site to the other.

·         Oppose due to lack of pathways, much of the bridleway is unsurfaced, dark and gloomy. Residents will have a long walk around and there is no continuous pathway along Bancombe Road and Cartway Lane.

·         Highway safety is a concern, especially as when Bancombe Road is stopped up there will be increased traffic along Cartway Lane.

·         Concern that an attenuation pond will be located close to properties at Parklands – how big will it be? What will happen if the pond overflows and who will be responsible for its maintenance?

·         Concerned if the bridleway will be accessible for emergency vehicles in its current condition, and will it affect access to the property at the eastern end.

·         Of the opinion that safe routes for pedestrians should be conditioned on all applications.

·         As current tenant of the fields, feel the tenancy agreement should be observed until its termination and the water supply must be maintained without any break.

·         Clarity is needed regarding whether or not the hedge to the south is being retained.

Mr M Hirsh, agent, noted that the proposal was in line with policy and the Local Plan. The open space had been re-considered and had been moved to provide more natural surveillance and to be situated further away from housing. The principle of using the bridleway for emergency access had been agreed with the County Rights of Way department, and there had been no objection by County on highway grounds. Comments made about the prospect of a school site coming forward were acknowledged.

Ward Member, Councillor Stephen Page, acknowledged that if the application was approved it would take Somerton about 34% over the suggested growth for the town detailed in the Local Plan. He felt some very valid comments had been made by the public speakers and concerns raised by the local farmer needed to be addressed. The proposal had a good mix of homes which was to be commended, but he felt the application should be deferred to address the issues raised.

Ward Member, Councillor Dean Ruddle, was pleased that the developer had been in discussions with the Town Council. He noted it was unreasonable to expect the developer to put in a path to connect to Langport Road which is outside of the proposed development. He commented that the site did flood onto the bridleway, and that the issue regarding the play area had been resolved, and as the Town Council owned the Parklands play area they would be in a position to control any linking in the future.

(Councillor Dean Ruddle left the room.)

During a lengthy discussion members raised a number of concerns and sought clarity on several issues including:

·         Pedestrian safety and traffic along Cartway Lane

·         Distance from the town centre and feel it’s an isolated site

·         Farmers concerns are very valid

·         Clarity needed about use and surface of the bridleway

·         Need to know what width of land would be designated for a pathway

·         Unless work done to the surface of the bridleway emergency services won’t be able to use it.

·         Other recent appeal decisions would suggest this site is too far away from the town centre to be a sustainable location

·         Many concerns about pedestrian access to and from the town

·         Consultation with communities at the Local Plan stage identified the directions of growth.

·         Concern about indicative layout, and feel layout needs revising

·         More detail needed regarding drainage issues

The Area Lead and Planning Officer replied to comments raised and their responses included:

·         Indicating the direction of growth for Somerton

·         Cannot expect developer to make highway improvements to land not in their control

·         Unable to say exactly what width would be required to widen the road, however the plans suggested ample land available. A clause could be added to the Section 106 obligations to agree the amount of land required with County Highways and the ward members.

·         Normal to ask for permission to use a Right of Way for access during an absolute emergency. There was no reason to assume gates could not be kept locked and only opened by emergency services.

·         Regarding concerns raised by the farmer many aspects were covered by other laws.

·         The proposal was that the southern hedge is not removed.

·         Regarding connectivity between communities – it would be reasonable to accept that links may be needed in the future, and opening up a link from the play area would be in the control of the Town Council.

·         Applications such as this had to be supported by detailed drainage proposals including technical detail and maintenance, and would be conditioned.

·         Cartway Lane is adequate width for HGVs as it was built to serve an industrial estate.

·         Only the western end of the bridleway to midway along the development site is proposed to be emergency access.

·         No phasing of growth is detailed in the Local Plan.

·         Acknowledgement that Highways had some concerns about the internal layout.

·         Clarity could be sought that waste and emergency vehicles can access around the site.

·         There is no need for a sequential test as the site is situated within Flood Zone 1, but acknowledge more detail could be requested.

Hearing comments made by members, the Legal Services Manager advised that a starting point for consideration was the Local Plan Policy and the site was in the defined direction of growth for Somerton. She advised that members should not be worried about a refusal going to appeal if the reasons for refusal could be defended -but did need to be aware that an unjustified refusal could be subject to costs.

At the conclusion of debate, most members felt more clarity and information was required on a number issues. It was proposed to defer the application to allow for clarification of drainage, highways widening and footpath provision along Cartway Lane, and treatment of the bridleway. On being put to the vote the proposal was carried (9 in favour, 2 against, 0 abstentions).

(Voting: 9 in favour, 2 against, 0 abstentions)