Author name: black8

The Planning Committee meeting is on Tuesday 25th March at 2pm in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil BA20 2HT.

The agenda is publised here and we have speakers accepted from Black Eight who will put our key views in front of the Committee.

The meeting is open to the public so come along if you want to but it is also streamed live on line and can be listened to by phone. 

You can join on line by clicking on the link Join the meeting now, or if you have the Microsoft Teams app use the Meeting ID: 362 430 818 286, passcode: 2TGRuE.

Or you can dial in by phone by calling 01823 772277 and use the Conference ID: 379 441 906#.

After all this time, effort and money, Tuesday is the day!

Here are some more documents that may help when you are formulating your objections:

1. A document listing potential objection points to the planning application.
2. A letter from Brian Goodenough who has previously managed the same buffalo herd which Emily Estate has now bought. He has identified numerous problems with Emily Estate’s Agricultural plans with regard to the Buffalo herd.
3. A letter from Reading Agriculture Consultants responding to Rural Solutions’ redacted rebuttal letter. They raise more issues with the Buffalo herd and also the application of Policy EP4 Rural Economy.
4. Speech notes from the CPRE for the Parish Council meeting on 15th January.

We know we’ve been quiet but we we were waiting for the Parish Council Planning meeting this week (more to follow on that …) but right now we need your help!

Following our request to Somerset Council for an extension, the new deadline is midnight Wednesday 22nd January! We know this is only 3 days away but even if you objected to the original application, you still need to do it again with the amendments now on the planning portal. We need to make sure that Somerset Council is aware of the procedural impropriety and of the scale of objections to this application so that it goes to a committee decision.

We have studied the amendments submitted by Emily Estate and we believe they change nothing about this application which should be opposed. For your information, below we outline Emily Estate’s main points and our counter arguments.

In addition, we recommend you read the letter from Brian Goodenough who has previously managed the same buffalo herd which Emily Estate has now bought. He has identified numerous problems with Emily Estate’s Agricultural plans with regard to the Buffalo herd which support the arguments in Point (7) below.

Here we go:

1. Landscape

• “The overall character of the area, as a valued landscape, will be protected and the proposals demonstrably accord with the relevant policies of the North Cadbury & Yarlington Neighbourhood Plan.” 
  1. The application does not demonstrably accord with Neighbourhood Plan. The application still:
• Does not comply with Neighbourhood Plan policy 5, (It does not enhance local character)
• Does not comply with Neighbourhood Plan Policy 6 (It doesn’t preserve or enhance publicly accessible views, 
• It does not comply with Policy 7, in failing to support wildlife movement.
• Destroys the countryside
• Does not comply with planning regulations EP4, EP5, EP7, EQ7 And NCYNP

• “Local views from public rights of way will be reduced in some areas, whilst the building removals and landscape restoration at the existing farm site will increase the availability of views to Yarlington Sleights.”
  1. The amendments provide no comparisons between gains and losses. They are very misleading providing only single points not walks.
  2. The removal of the barns does not enhance views from the village (the farm is barely visible) and the footpath through the farm is to be through the very original lower lane and there will be no views of the sleights gained along that stretch.

2. Access and Public Rights of Way

• “Introduction of gentle landform and additional tree / woodland planting to the west of the proposed replacement farmyard, to provide additional visual mitigation in local views from Hicks Lane.”
  1. In trying to hide the farm, hundreds of metres of views will be lost.
• “Omission of previously proposed (offsite) hedgerow along Hicks Lane, to retain views north / north-eastwards towards Yarlington Sleights.”
  1. This also involves ruining views of a national recreational walking route of. The hedge is to be up to 6 metres high and will create a boxed in pathway reducing views along nearly 1km of pathway.
• “Key views from public rights of way will be preserved and enhanced.”
  1. Key views are neither enhanced nor preserved, as indicated above.  The view along the path from Hicks Lane to Yarlington will be lost.  The one view the applicant has shown is a single viewpoint and not on a footpath. 

3. “Through further discussion with Officers it is now considered that agricultural development proposals fall outside of the scope of Policy EP4.”

1. There is no confirmation of this and is strongly debated. EP4 was used in the case of Lily Farm which EE (UK) still contends is used as a farm and therefore must still apply.

4. “The proposed farm will house lighting 16/24hrs with special lights.” 

1. The area will suffer from light and noise pollution. It is a dark skies area and should not be allowed. Avalon Farm has already demonstrated that it cannot keep lights off in accordance to comply with regulations.  It will be a busy site with up to 100 vehicles a day, breaking promises made for the original Avalon Farm application.

5. “Reduction in height of the two main proposed replacement farm buildings…to reduce visual effects…the minimum possible to allow for access and tipping / loading by the applicable farm machinery.” 

1. The buildings will be 11m high: the equivalent of 3 stories.  They are out of place and unnecessary in this location. 

6. “There is no need for an Environmental Impact Assessment.”

1. We believe there is a legal requirement, but it is a point that  can only be decided by Somerset County planning committee. 

7. “Viability of Proposed Business and Need for the Replacement Farm.”

1. The different cattle herds could be at separate locations, which will most likely be more beneficial for animal health.
2. Existing farmyards could be redeveloped with modern farm buildings, where necessary.
3. The proposed new design, on this scale, requires a detailed financial business case with the application. 
4. Further planning applications for on-site rural workers’ dwellings would likely be forthcoming.
5. Building on Grade 1 land is not essential as there are alternative agricultural solutions.

8. “The farm is needed on this site.”

1. At the original site meeting, Mr Paul Rawson (EE director) admitted Emily Estate do not “need” it on this site.  He stated they “want” it. 

Please lodge your objection here before midnight on Wednesday 22nd January and we are as ever, grateful for your support.

From all of us at Black Eight.

www.Black8.org.uk

A modest extension beyond  9th January 2025 has been requested by Black Eight to Somerset Council for comments or objections to be submitted to the Somerset planning portal for the Yarlington Manor Farm application 24/01203/FUL. This follows the amendments submitted by Emily Estate on the 18th December. Black Eight are currently working through this long list of amendments and will send their thoughts and comments out as soon as possible. Of course objections can be submitted by yourselves any time from now.

The deadline for responses and comments to the revised planning application is unreasonable so Debra Fox has written a letter on behalf of Black Eight to the Planners requesting an extension (thank you Debra and Adam).

Emily Estate have submitted a revised planning application and whilst we will try to get an extension, at the moment we have less than 3 weeks to submit comments (by 9^th January). 

There is a lot to it but read what you can and the the summary is “Supporting Information Amended – Cover Letter_Redacted”. We will be sending out more information very soon.

Thanks and have a very Happy Christmas!

Welcome to the Black Eight Newsletter

1. Yarlington Manor Farm Planning Application – decision delayed again

Following communications with the chief Planning Officer, Simon Fox, it seems that any decision on the application will not be taken until early 2025, with the likely date the end of February.  It is possible there will be more submissions, which will need to be consulted on, hence the further delay.

We will continue to monitor the planning website and have made more submissions ourselves, which we detail below. 

2. Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA)

As part of the application, Emily Estate has submitted an LVIA.  We commissioned a review of this LVIA by The Landscape Partnership which highlights numerous errors and omissions in their methodology and the contents of their Assessment which weakens the planning application even further.  

We have submitted our LVIA Review to the planners, but you can read it here. 

3. Lily Farm Planning Application

There was widespread dismay that the Lily Farm development in Shepton Montague has been approved, despite assurances that no decision would be made until the Section 19 Flood Prevention Report had been completed.  The development – which converts the former organic farm into holiday lets and a restaurant (for the exclusive use of guests) is symptomatic of what we are opposing:  the wilful destruction of farms and communities in the area by The Newt, which is oblivious to the concerns of local residents.

4. Bad Press for The Newt

The Newt is finding its way into the national press for all the wrong reasons, with The Mail, The Times and The Daily Telegraph reporting on the growing discontent in Castle Cary.  The Times gave a scathing review of the The Creamery at Cary Station, while the Mail and Telegraph have picked up on the rising indignation in Castle Cary over The Newt’s acquisition of The George Hotel and several other prime commercial premises.

5. Land Alive Conference

We were surprised to note that The Newt was not present to contribute to the conversations at the Land Alive conference at the Bath and West showground this weekend; a conference which sought to “make the case for a more localised, regenerative farming and food system”. 

It is strange the Newt was not a part of the discussions, which were aimed at developing farming to “boost local economies, make healthy food accessible, and build resilience into our food system”.  Even more surprising, as, in their Community Matters newsletter on 12^th November, they had been excited to tell us that their farm manager, Cameron Knee, would be there to help play his part.

Although the omission seems curious, the point could be made that The Newt’s plan to pour concrete on their best and most valuable land to build a needless new farm, would suggest they are not really committed to improving the environment. 

On the conference website it says, “Living Soils Hold The Key”.  Not much chance of that if they are buried under 22,000 M² of concrete!

---

From all of us at Black Eight, thank you for all your support in 2024, we hope you all have a great Christmas and we look forward to a positive outcome in 2025.

We were surprised to note that The Newt was not present to contribute to the conversations at the Land Alive conference at the Bath and West showground this weekend, 22nd & 23rd November; a conference which sought to “make the case for a more localised, regenerative farming and food system”.

It is strange the Newt was not a part of the discussions, which were aimed at developing farming to “boost local economies, make healthy food accessible, and build resilience into our food system”. Even more surprising, as, in their Community Matters newsletter on 12th November, they had been excited to tell us that their farm manager, Cameron Knee, would be there to help play his part.

Although the omission seems curious, the point could be made that The Newt’s plan to pour concrete on their best and most valuable land to build a needless new farm, would suggest they are not really committed to improving the environment.

On the conference website it says, “Living Soils Hold The Key”. Not much chance of that if they are buried under 22,000 M² of concrete.

Have a read (click on image) …

Welcome to the Black Eight Newsletter

1. Planning Decision postponed from 24^th September to 29^th November

The planning authority has agreed to extend the time required for the determination of the planning application, until 29^th November.  This was requested by Emily Estate who “are considering the responses of consultees in relation to this planning application, with a view to making some amendments in due course”

Their email was sent shortly after the Black 8 files explaining our opposition to the plans is published on the Somerset Planning website on 11^th September. 

So, perhaps, at the very least, Emily Estate have realised that the opposition to this not only numerous and vociferous, but well-informed and knowledgeable, too.  

2. More opposing voices needed

With the deadline extended, we have the chance to register more objections on the planning portal.  While many excellent points have been raised there are still some that need to be made clear to the planners.  These are:

• Financial Viability
  • Emily Estate is required in planning regulation to provide an outline of the financial viability of the farm and how it fits into its agricultural business model in order to justify a large new farm outside of its current facilities.  It has not done this and this needs to be highlighted.
• No extra employment created
  • Any argument by Emily Estate that this farm is going to provide extra employment needs to be refuted.  It will not.
• Hedgerows and visual impact
  • There is a contradiction in their proposals that a new farm will maintain hedgerows in line with normal farming practice, but in other documents they say that hedgerows will be allowed to grow (along The Monarch’s Way, for example) in order to reduce the visibility of the farm buildings.  They cannot have it both ways. Of note is that the latter will also significantly reduce visibility of the cherished views of the Yarlington Sleights from the adjacent historic footpaths.

If you have already registered your opposition on the Somerset Planning Website, please encourage family members and friends in the area to put their opposition in too.  We need to keep this a ‘live’ debate and something Somerset Planners (and Emily Estate) know will not just quietly fade away.

3. CPRE (Somerset) Report

The CPRE (Council for the Preservation of Rural England) have published a letter detailing their objections to the planning.  Much of it is based on the Agricultural Report.  In addition, it highlights the contradictions in Emily Estate’s reasoning of what constitutes a rural landscape and setting.  It is a reminder of what we are fighting for in this case regarding Emily Estate’s plans for farms in the area.  You can go to the planning website to view it here.

4. LVIA reports – analysis

For our part, we have been consulting with experts regarding the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) that Emily Estate have used to support the proposal.  After reading the reports and making a site visit our experts have identified several areas in which Emily Estate’s LVIA lacks thoroughness or credibility.  We intend bringing these points forward in due course.

5. Monarch’s Way Association

We recently met with John Tennant, the chairman of the Monarch’s Way Association.  We walked with him along the Hick’s Lane stretch of the Monarch’s Way and around the Black Eight site (along the public footpaths).  He expressed alarm at the proposals which would, in his opinion, be severely detrimental to the views from this ancient historic path.

6. Fundraising

With the continued commissioning of expert reports, we still need funds.  All donations gratefully received, for the good of the community.  Please go to the website for details.

From all of us at Black Eight

www.Black8.Org.uk