252-home outline scheme changes at Land Os 3400 North Of Mudford Road, Yeovil

What was proposed

The application sought to change the parameter plan, replace the constructed wetland with SuDS phosphate mitigation, and remove or revise related conditions.

“- Amendment of Condition 5 to substitute Parameter Plan SK007 Rev C with Parameter Plan SK007 Rev D - Removal of Condition 9 relating to the provision of a Constructed Treatment Wetland for phosphate mitigation, and - Removal of Condition 14 restricting development within 150m of the wetland/phosphate mitigation area.”

“The amendments arise from updated ground investigations and a revised nutrient neutrality strategy which proposes mitigation through a SuDS-based approach rather than the previously approved Constructed Treatment Wetland.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is about 25 hectares of agricultural land north of Mudford Road, with fields, hedgerows, nearby homes and a sewage works.

“The application site comprises approximately 25ha of agricultural land located to the north of Mudford Road on the northern edge of Yeovil. The site consists of three fields separated by hedgerows and falls from south to north towards the Yeo Valley. Existing residential development lies along Mudford Road and Stone Lane, with agricultural land beyond the northern site boundary. Yeovil Without Sewage Treatment Works lies adjacent to the north-western part of the site.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to a Deed of Variation and conditions because the revised mitigation and safeguards were considered acceptable.

“Having regard to the assessment above, the proposal is considered to accord with the relevant policies and material considerations. Officers are satisfied that the proposal is acceptable in planning terms and should be recommended for approval, subject to the recommended conditions and completion of the Deed of Variation.”

“RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation: Approve application 25/01367/S73 subject to (the prior signing of a Deed of Variation subject to) the stated planning conditions: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY TO THE DEVELOPEMENT FOR WHICH FULL PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED And that authority be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer, in consultation with the Chair (or Vice-Chair) of the Planning Committee where appropriate to:”

Officer report

What residents and groups said

Parish councils, residents and FoMAG raised concerns about flooding, drainage, landscape, transport, biodiversity, sewage infrastructure and the loss of the wetland.

“Concerns were raised regarding the implications for flood risk and drainage, nutrient neutrality, biodiversity net gain, landscape character, placemaking and the loss of the wider environmental and community benefits associated with the Constructed Treatment Wetland.”

“Fears that downstream flood risk could increase in nearby settlements including Mudford Sock and Yeovil Marsh • Concerns that rainfall data relied upon by the applicant may underestimate current rainfall levels • Requests that further evidence be provided to demonstrate the removal of the wetlands would not increase flood risk Landscape and Environmental Impact • Objections to the removal of the Constructed Treatment Wetland and the loss of an environmental feature…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard objections from flood, action-group, parish-council and local-resident representatives, followed by the applicant’s representatives.

Members’ discussion

Members questioned flood resilience, biodiversity, pumping, Section 73 law, the earlier appeal, reserved matters and separation from wet ponds.

“In response to the comments made by speakers, the planning officers clarified that: • A Section 73 application must be determined on its own merits. • The revised proposal remained lawful under Section 73. • Consultees, including the Lead Local Flood Authority, Ecology Officers and Natural England, raised no objections. • The Deed of Variation only amended the nutrient neutrality obligations and did not remove the remaining Section 106 obligations.”

“Biodiversity Net Gain. • The role of pumping within the original wetland proposal. • The legal status of Section 73 applications. • The significance of the Planning Inspector's previous conclusions. • Future reserved matters considerations. • Condition 14 relating to separation from wet pond features.”

Minutes

The vote

The approval proposal was carried with 7 votes in favour, 3 against and 1 abstention.

“Some Members expressed sympathy with local concerns regarding flooding and landscape impacts, while others noted the support of statutory consultees and the environmental advantages of the revised SuDS approach. There was a proposal to defer the application, but this did not secure a seconder. At the conclusion of the debate Cllr Stanton made a proposal to approve the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.”

“Voting: 7 in favour, 3 against, 1 abstention.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

Planning permission was granted subject to completing a Deed of Variation, the committee-report conditions and delegated wording changes.

“That planning permission 25/01367/S73 to vary condition 5 and remove conditions 9 & 14 of planning permission 22/00695/OUT (as granted under appeal APP/E3335/W/23/3328322) for Outline planning application with all matters reserved except for access, for the erection of up to 252 dwellings, public open space (including community orchard and village green), woodland planting, ecological buffers, sustainable drainage systems, a biodiverse wetland habitat and other ancillary…”

“And that authority be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer, in consultation with the Chair (or Vice-Chair) of the Planning Committee where appropriate to: a. Make minor amendments and refinements to the wording, numbering and sequencing of planning conditions b. Agree minor variations to the heads of terms and final drafting of the Deed of Variation c.”

Minutes