PLANS to build a "substantial" extension at Boyd House residential home, in Minehead, have been refused planning permission despite a widely acknowledged shortage of care beds for the elderly.

Applicants Stephen and Madeleine Dear had hoped to build a 32-bed, two-storey extension alongside the existing home to provide much needed extra bed space.

But West Somerset District Council's planning committee followed the advice of officers and refused to grant outline planning permission on the grounds the extension was outside Minehead's development limits and, as such, was tantamount to being built in open countryside.

They also noted concerns from the highways authority about inadequate access and concluded the proposed extension would be out of proportion to the existing home.

Officers noted the extension would only be linked to the main house by a single-storey link and drew the planning committee's attention to the past history of the site.

They said Mr and Mrs Dear had failed to secure planning permission to build sheltered housing alongside the home in 1987.

The couple lost an appeal against that decision when a Government planning inspector concluded the countryside had to be protected from such development and even single-storey buildings on the site would be "visually intrusive".

Two years later, the couple were granted planning approval to create additional bedrooms at the home, but in 1991 their application to build eight self-contained, single-storey sheltered housing units and a warden's home on the site was refused.

In support of their latest application, Mr and Mrs Dear amassed letters from local GPs and social services, all of whom pointed out the desperate need for additional residential care beds in the area.

A letter from the Dears to planning officers stated: "The site of Boyd House in Periton Road has had an established use for care for the elderly for some 37 years.

"During our 15-year ownership, there have been no traffic incidents or accidents associated with our entrance.

"Any slight hazard which may previously have existed has been removed by the enforcement of a 40mph limit a few years ago.

"We trust this matter will receive your serious attention in view of the urgency for nursing care beds as confirmed by the letters of support."

But officers advised last Thursday's committee meeting that, while it would be unreasonable to refuse permission for a "modest extension", the proposed development represented "a significant expansion of the home".

Officers and councillors noted there was an urgent need for extra care beds for the elderly, but believed it was not enough to ignore existing development policies.

A report to the committee stated: "The application is only in outline form. However, the applicant has clearly stated that the accommodation required is for 32 bedrooms, lounges, dining room etc.

"While this in itself may not indicate the final form or appearance of the building, the requirements of the development being applied for do dictate that the extension will be large and the extra facilities do give rise to concerns in relation to other matters."

It continued: "The size and scale of such an extension, also bearing in mind the elevated nature of the site above the road making it visible from various vantage points in Minehead, would be out of scale and proportion to the existing property and also harmful to the visual amenities of the locality.

"The support of social services and medical practitioners from the Minehead area is acknowledged and appreciated.

"However, the issue of need is not a consideration that can be taken into account in terms of development plan policy which, of course, is the context by which the planning authority must take its planning decisions."