Single-storey dwelling at Land At Mount Pleasant, Pilton, Shepton Mallet

What was proposed

The application sought demolition of a stone coach house and the erection of a single-storey dwelling.

“The Officer’s Report stated this application was for the demolition of an existing stone coach house and the erection of a single-storey dwelling.”

Minutes

Who spoke

Two objectors, a neutral neighbour concerned about access, and the applicant's agent addressed the committee.

What members debated

Members discussed scale, materials, access arrangements during construction, light spill and building height.

“Concerns over scale, design, and impact on neighbours, highlighting strong local feeling and the need to reflect community concerns more clearly. • Questions were raised about whether the proposal was appropriate for the constrained site, given proximity to neighbouring properties and potential cumulative impact on amenity.”

“Clarification was sought on existing vs proposed height. Officers confirmed the existing building was approximately 5m high and the proposed building 5.2m. • Members queried whether Pilton had a conservation area; Officers confirmed that it does, but the site lies outside it. • Members asked for comparison of floor area and were advised that the previous approved scheme was approximately 81 sqm and that this proposed scheme was 115 sqm.”

Minutes

The vote

A proposal to approve was tied and lost on the Chair's casting vote; a proposal to refuse then carried 6 to 5 with 1 abstention.

“After a full discussion a proposal was made by Councillor Alistair Hendry to approve the application with additional conditions relating to the Construction Management Plan and light-spill controls. This was seconded by Councillor Martin Lovell. There were 6 votes in favour and 6 votes against. The Chair then used her casting vote against approval.”

“On being put to the vote the proposal to refuse was carried with 6 votes in favour, 5 votes against and 1 abstention.”

Minutes

Why the committee refused

The committee refused contrary to the officer's recommendation over the scale and materials of the building and its effect on neighbours.

“A proposal to refuse the application was then made by Councillor Rob Reid and seconded by Councillor Ewan Cameron, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation due to materials and design not in keeping, excessive fenestration/light spill, harm to neighbouring amenity and the excessive scale for the plot.”

“That planning application 2025/1953/FUL be REFUSED contrary to the Officer’s recommendation due to the size and scale of the proposed dwelling and the impact on the residential amenity of nearby properties, the inappropriate choice of materials which were not in keeping with the local vernacular and the inappropriate level of fenestration.”

Minutes