Somerset Council has this week formally rejected plans by a Burnham-On-Sea care home to build an extension of eleven new apartments.
Now, the owners are seeking to build a modern new one-storey building and introduce a new landscaped garden.
However, Somerset Council’s development committee unanimously rejected the application after hearing from residents at their meeting on Tuesday (May 14th) and considering the plans.
A representative for the applicant told Tuesday’s meeting that the new application reduces the height of the proposed new properties adjacent to the boundaries of residential homes to the south of the site, addressing concerns about overlooking and loss of natural light.
The council’s planning officer added that “they’ve tried to address the issue of scale and massing that was apparent in the previous scheme in respect of the impact on the neighbouring properties.” She added that another issue that was raised previously related to ecology which had now been covered and the application was therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions.
The councillors heard from several residents who spoke out against the scheme. Jenni Turco said the plans represent a “massive, overbearing overdevelopment” and the second application is “significantly worse than the first.”
She explained that “the much bigger footprint” would see new properties being built next to her home, with a loss of privacy and extra noise from extra traffic plus run-off water flowing into her garden from the proposed steep-roofs. The development would also “destroy the peace and quiet and Rectory Road’s character.” She said that if doubts remain, that councillors could defer the application until after a site visit.
Graham King added that “It is out of keeping with overshadowing, visual domination, and a loss of privacy and disturbance.” He went on to add that the site’s proposed parking proposals are “totally inadequate.. and would lead to vehicle overflow onto nearby residential roads.” He added that the apperanace of the proposed new buildings “is out of character to the local surroundings.”
And Ian Stradling added that while the first proposal was refused due to its “scale and massing,” the new plans had grown from 470 square metres in the orginal application to 530 square metres in the amended proposal, making it ripe for refusal. He also raised comcerns about the size of the new properties, roof pitches, and minimal parking provision.
Cllr Gill Slocombe said after hearing the feedback: “When I look at any planning application I always think to myself would I like this if I lived there. How would I feel and I have to say the close proximity of this does really seem quite overbearing. It would be an enormous building for this area.”
Cllr Grimes he knows the area of Burnham well and added: “This would be an over domination, with shadowing and a loss of light. It is too big and I think the character is out with the surrounding buildings. I just think it’s too big and it’s it’s just in the wrong place.”
Cllr Mike Murphy added: “It would definitely be over-bearing and unacceptable, casting a shadow over nearby homes. The size of the proposal is just un-neighbourly and you would run the risk of parking issues and safety issues in Rectory Road.”
Cllr Bob Filmer adds: “I’m going to struggle with this one in terms of its character and design. I understand the issue that was raised by the officers about going for a contemporary design, but to be honest this one to me feels like… it’s not really contemporary. It’s trying to take a lead from the traditional building but then brought in some contemporary materials which don’t seem to work.”
“In terms of design and character, I couldn’t support it as it currently stands, especially with the high roof line elements on a single story building. I think the applicant has just got it wrong.”
“In terms of development size, it feels like the footprint, has grown from what was there last time. So again, for me it still feels like when you look at that courtyard, that is very, very busy in terms of the amount of building space they put in there. So it still feel like it’s an overdevelopment.”
Cllr Gill Sllocombe proposed that the application be turned down for being over-bearing, over dominant with insufficient information in terms of scale of use and parking provision.
Councillors unanimously rejected the application, saying it is over dominating, reperesents an overdevelopment of the plot with concerns regardingabout scale, design, character and materials resulting in an adverse impact on the neighbouring properties.
