Four rural dwellings at Maperton Dairy Unit, Maperton, Wincanton

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing several agricultural buildings and erecting four dwellings with associated works, including parking, garages and private gardens.

“The application is for demolition of several agricultural buildings on an existing farmyard (a dairy farm) and the erection of four dwellings.”

“The character of the immediate area is highly rural, with agricultural fields to the west, north, and south of the site. There are gardens of dwellings to the immediate north-east, with the dwellings themselves sited approximately 50m further away.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The rural farmyard is surrounded mainly by fields, has access from an existing road, and is largely at high risk from surface water flooding.

“Access into the site would be from the existing access onto the (seemingly unnamed) C-road. Each dwelling would have an entrance gate (opening inwards), a parking area, and a garage.”

“The site, including the access, is wholly within Flood Zone 1, but most of the site is at high risk from surface water flooding.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

A previous permission allowed four dwellings through conversion of one agricultural building, while two earlier conversion proposals were refused and one four-home proposal was withdrawn.

“21/03069/PAMB - Notification of prior approval for conversion of agricultural barns into 4 residential dwellings (C3 use) and ancillary works - REFUSED”

“21/01735/PAMB - Notification of prior approval for conversion of agricultural barns into 5 residential dwellings (C3 use) and ancillary works – REFUSED”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the proposal better than the fallback because it would improve amenity, design and flood safety, outweighing the identified national flood-policy conflict.

“It is acknowledged that the proposal would be contrary to national planning policies on flooding, that no Sequential Test has been undertaken, that the proposal would likely have failed to pass had one been undertaken, and that the LLFA have objected to the proposal.”

“Overall, it is considered that the proposal would be compliant with Policy EQ1 and EQ2 of the South Somerset Local Plan, and be in accordance with the development plan as a whole, and that the identified conflict with national planning policy on flooding is outweighed in the planning balance in this case by the significant material planning consideration of the fallback Class Q permission established by 23/01238/PAMB.”

Officer report

What consultees and residents said

The parish council and residents objected mainly to the design, materials, flooding, traffic, housing mix, ecology and landscape, while highways and ecology raised no objection subject to conditions.

“.... The creation of a group of intrusive glass-faced and timber-clad buildings at the immediate foot of this panorama would be a very sad development..... North Vale Parish Council does not object to the principle of a new housing development at the site of the now- redundant Maperton Diary, but we agree with local residents that the design currently being presented uses inappropriate materials and needs to be revised to be compatible with the local environment.”

“SC Highways No Objection subject to standard conditions.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A member of the public, a parish council representative, the division member and the agent addressed the committee.

What members debated

Members discussed the fallback permission, the need for sequential testing, rural character, planning policy and whether smaller homes would provide a better mix.

“SSDC local plan policies SS1 and SS2 are not considered to be relevant to the application, because the Class Q fallback permission still applies, and the re-development of the barn will go ahead. • Precedence is not a material planning consideration because decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis.”

“The development rights of Class Q fallback cases override the planning system. • Sequential testing should have been done on the site. • This is suburbanisation of a small rural settlement which is against SSDC Local Plan Policy. • 4 x 3 bed dwellings would have been a more acceptable housing mix.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Mike Stanton proposed approval, Councillor Oliver Patrick seconded it, and the proposal passed by seven votes to five.

“At the conclusion of the debate, Cllr Mike Stanton made a proposal to approve the application as per the officer’s recommendation. This was duly seconded by Cllr Oliver Patrick, and when put to the vote was carried by 7 in favour and 5 against.”

“That planning permission for demolition of existing agricultural buildings and erection of 4 residential dwellings (C3) with associated works at Maperton Dairy Unit, Maperton, Wincanton, Somerset, BA9 8EN be GRANTED subject to the planning conditions listed in the Officer’s report, and subject to the satisfactory completion of a S106 Legal Agreement to secure monitoring and management of Biodiversity Net Gain measures, with final determination to be delegated to the Head of…”

Minutes