67-home outline scheme at Land At Welcome Home Farm, Hornsbury Hill, Chard

What was proposed

The outline scheme sought up to 67 dwellings, open space, access and infrastructure, with only access considered in detail.

“Application Details Application Reference Numbers: 23/03051/OUT Application Types: Outline application Extension of Time: Pending at time of writing report Description: Outline application (all matters reserved except Access) for the demolition of existing buildings and the erection of up to 67 dwellings, open space, vehicular and pedestrian/cycle access, and associated infrastructure.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 3.2-hectare site is mainly agricultural land on Chard’s edge, with an existing unoccupied dwelling and outbuildings proposed for removal.

“The application site comprises an area of land of approximately 3.2 hectares, situated on the north-eastern edge of Chard, positioned between the A358 (Furnham Road) to the north-west and Chaffcombe Road to the south-east. The site occupies a transitional edge-of-settlement location, adjoining the established built form of Chard while remaining visually and physically connected to open countryside.”

“Relationship to Chard 4.11 Chard is identified as a ‘Primary Market Town’ within the South Somerset Local Plan, offering a range of facilities and services including schools, supermarkets, healthcare, commercial premises, public transport, leisure facilities and recreational spaces. The site therefore benefits from a sustainable settlement-edge location, with convenient access to town-centre amenities and established active-travel networks.”

Officer report

What consultees and residents said

Technical consultees raised no remaining objections subject to safeguards, while the town council and residents objected over wildlife, flooding, roads and services.

“In respect of flood risk and drainage updated modelling and drainage information submitted, the LLFA and Highways raised no objection, noting any remaining technical detail is capable of resolution through conditions, legal and/or technical approvals. This is covered within the Flood Risk and Drainage section below.”

“Officer comment: These contributions will be secured through the S106 Agreement, with final figures subject to review should the Agreement not be completed within the specified timeframe. LLFA The LLFA initially raised concerns regarding surface water flood risk, exceedance routing, finished floor levels and the proposed drainage strategy, noting modelled flooding to several plots and the need for further design clarifications.”

Officer report

Public concerns

Five public responses objected and one was neutral, citing wildlife loss, traffic, poor pavements, overstretched services and flood risk.

“Objections highlight safety risks arising from increased traffic, with an estimated 200+ additional vehicle movements. Concerns that access points require careful design to avoid adding to existing accident history on the A358. • Existing pavements are overgrown and in poor condition, raising safety concerns for pedestrians travelling between the site and the town.”

“Flood and Drainage • Multiple objectors report that part of the site has recently flooded, including standing water over a significant portion of the fields during extreme rainfall • Concerns that the land acts as a functional floodplain, and that developing it would: - Increase flood risk to new residents, - Reduce natural flood storage capacity, - Exacerbate downstream flooding due to loss of permeable land • Queries whether it is responsible to permit housing in an area…”

Officer report

Who spoke to the committee

A town council representative opposed the scheme, while the agent supported the process and said assessments and mitigation addressed remaining concerns.

Members discussed the relief road

Members considered the safeguarded relief-road land and contribution, while the ward member remained concerned about whether the road would realistically be delivered.

“The land that has been safeguarded will accommodate the width of the proposed Eastern Relief Road (ERR). • The details around cycle ways and footpath access will come through at the reserved matters stage of the application. • Most of the site sits within the Chard Eastern Development Area (CEDA) and is therefore exempt from CIL, but a small section of the site lies outside of this area and is CIL liable.”

“Following the members’ questions, the Chair invited the committee to debate the application. The ward member advised that she does not have any objections to the development itself, but, that she still has concerns about the realistic prospect of delivering the ERR, despite the financial contribution and safeguarding of the land.”

Minutes

The committee voted

Cllr Oliver Patrick proposed approval, Cllr Peter Seib seconded it, and all 12 voting members supported the proposal.

“At the conclusion of the debate, Cllr Oliver Patrick proposed to approve the application in line with the officer’s recommendation. This was seconded by Cllr Peter Seib and when put to the vote was carried unanimously, 12 in favour.”

Minutes

The decision

Permission was granted subject to a Section 106 agreement, conditions, delegation arrangements and an amended relief-road contribution with alternative active-travel provisions.

“That planning permission for an outline application (all matters reserved except Access) for the demolition of existing buildings and the erection of up to 67 dwellings, open space, vehicular and pedestrian/cycle access, and associated infrastructure at Welcome Home Farm, Hornsbury Hill, Chard, Somerset be GRANTED subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 Planning Obligation/Agreement,(Delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Area Chair (South)) the…”

“A financial contribution of £419,740 required by Somerset Council towards the delivery of the proposed Chard Eastern Relief Road. Should this sum not be spent or committed for expenditure within eight years of receipt, the Council may apply this sum towards alternative active travel measures to mitigate the transport impacts of the development. If the sum is not spent or committed within ten years of receipt, it will be returned to the payee.”

Minutes