Agenda and minutes

Cllr Chandler (Substituted by Cllr Rhodes)

Cllr Wyatt (Substituted by Cllr Higgins)

Cllr Greenow           

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting on 25.05.17

Minutes of the meeting 25 May 2017

Approval of the Minutes was proposed by Cllr Baguley and seconded by Cllr Holmes.

The Committee voted in agreement. It was unanimously agreed by the Members who had been present at the previous meeting, that the Chair sign them as a true record.

Cllr Faulkner noted that he was awaiting a response from officers with reference to PL5 urgent business, point 2) of the previous minutes, regarding refurbishment of properties on Nottingham/Asfordby Road.

The Regulatory Services Manager stated that it had been recorded as an enforcement case and that officers would proceed with the process as quickly as possible. Officers will report back to Cllr Faulkner once there is an outcome.

Members to declare any interest as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting.

Cllr Botterill declared an interest in applications 17/00002/LBC and 17/00001/FUL, Eastwell Hall, 3 Hall Lane, Eastwell.

Cllr Rhodes and Cllr Posnett declared interests with regard to being Members at Leicester County Council as well as being Members of Melton Borough Council.

Field OS 0850, Gaddesby Lane, Kirby Bellars

(a)       The Regulatory Services Manager stated that: Noted that there were no updates following the publication of the agenda.

Officer explained that this was an application for full planning permission for an agricultural dwelling. The site is in open countryside, remote from any settlement, where permission for a new dwelling would only be granted in exceptional circumstances.

The proposed three bedroom, detached dwelling would replace an existing mobile home on the site.

The key consideration is whether there is a proven need for a dwelling on this holding. The applicants have submitted information in support of their proposal which has been assessed by the Council’s agricultural adviser. This adviser considers that while there is a functional need for one person to live near the site and for them to be employed full-time, there are other dwellings in the local area. He considers that the proposal has not satisfied the financial test. He questions whether the income could support a dwelling and expresses concern about the temporary tenancy of some of the land used by the applicants.

It is recommended that permission should be refused.

(b)       Katrina Cass, the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Applying for an agricultural dwelling to replace mobile home.

·         Applicant and husband farming at Kirby Bellars for 20 years.

·         Built from nothing to a headage of 60 cows and over 250 breeding ewes.

·         Produce free range eggs which are sold at the farm gate and rear nearly 100 turkeys for the Christmas market.

·         Farm over 200 acres. Consists of owned land and rented on long term 3 to 5 year FBT’s.

·         Since permission for the mobile home was granted in 2014 livestock numbers have increased considerably and have been able to take on more land.

·         Aside from working on the farm and as part of the farm diversification her husband is an agricultural contractor. The contracting business, materials and equipment are based at the farm.

·         Farm accounts and those of the contracting business prove that there is a considerable profit. Enough to sustain the proposed dwelling. No debts, overdrafts, mortgages or loans therefore financially viable.

·         Family orientated business. Son is agricultural engineer who maintains the farms machinery and daughter provides support with lambing and livestock management. Daughter wants to carry on the family business.

·         Report incorrectly states timber cabin style building. Actually modest 3 bedroom house.

·         There is a long term essential need to live at our place of work.

·         Would enhance the rural character of the area, not erode as stated in the report.

·         Pass farm down through family.

·         Viable, profitable and sustainable.

·         Welfare of stock could be compromised if unable to live on site.

·         A farm of this size needs a dwelling.

Cllr Higgins asked for a point of clarification regarding where the family had been living prior to residing in the mobile home.

Mrs Cass responded that  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL9.1

Peacock Inn, Main St, Redmile

(a)  The Conservation Officer (TE) stated that: The application is presented following submission of a development appraisal by the applicant which demonstrates the need to provide 2 dwellings on the site. The scheme was previously deferred because the committee wished to see a revision in the design of the new build houses and a revised highway arrangement. The design of the new dwellings was revised to a more traditional scheme and the highways arrangements were unaltered.

Additionally, the suitability of the building as an asset of local community value was presented and it was agreed by the development control team that the building did not have life as a pub in the future, this was proved by the fact that the property was on the market for three years without any purchaser. It was later sold as a pub but with the potential for residential conversion.

(b)  Roger Smith, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Deferred previously to allow for a redesign of the site – Fewer number, a single building adjacent to the canal and more parking provision. Also consider if the dwelling can be relocated further from the canal and the traditional approach to the design. They have only changed the appearance of the design. The footprint of the application is the same.

·         Revision – 1 new dwelling at the rear of the building resulting in 5 new dwellings overall.

·         4 dwellings created through the change of use reflects just 1.6% return on the applicant’s investment.

·         6 new dwellings – 4 created through the change of use and 2 new dwellings reflecting a larger profit of 7.18% which is still considered low in commercial development terms.

·         Building will remain empty if not approved and at risk for the foreseeable future. Sounds like blackmail to the parish that the planning committee must accept this application.

·         Parish has no objection to 1 new dwelling being built along the canal as a compromise.

·         2 new dwellings would not be in keeping with the conservation area of the village.

·         Problems with car parking on the main street and this would add further.

·         Do not want over intensity of the site.

The Chair noted that Members don’t feel blackmailed.

(c)  Ian Lowther, on behalf of the objectors, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Owns 3 properties adjacent to the site. 2 of them (1 of which is listed) share a boundary with the Peacock car park. 1 overlooks the old building.

·         Unhappy wasn’t made aware of the new application or committee meeting.

·         Under the impression that the proposal had been moved closer to my properties which I would have objected to, but this is not the case.

·         Only change is the design. Contemporary would have made a stunning  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL9.2

Land Around Sherbrook House And Millway Foods, Colston Lane, Harby

(a)  The Regulatory Services Manager stated that: There have been no updates following the publication of the agenda. For the record , note that the applicants have agreed to pay the developer contribution for the village hall ( page 11 of report).

This is an application for outline planning permission for 50 dwellings with associated infrastructure. The only matters for consideration at this stage are the principle of development and the vehicular access. A single point of access is proposed from Colston Lane .

The site is a mix of greenfield and brownfield land between the existing edge of the built area of the village and the vacant former Millway Foods site.

The main considerations are compliance with policy and the NPPF, sustainable development ,impact upon the character of the countryside and  highway safety .

The site is outside the old village envelope for Harby ,but it is situated between the village and the former Millway Foods site where outline planning permission was granted on appeal in January this year for 53 houses . Harby is a sustainable village ,with a range of facilities which can accommodate some growth .The development of the current application site is a reasonably logical proposal which would deliver housing in general and affordable housing in particular. Due to its location the impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the countryside would be limited .

The developer has agreed to make all of the contributions which have been requested .

The Highway Authority considers that the proposed access is acceptable. They have requested that the development should provide a new footway ,to link in with the existing footway on the opposite side of the road, which would help to make the site accessible.

It is recommended that permission is granted subject to a section 106 agreement to secure the developer contributions which have been requested and the conditions which are listed in this report.

(b)  Cllr Philip Tillyard, on behalf of Clawson, Hose and Harby Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Concerns regarding the cumulative effect on the housing proposals within the village of Harby.

·         As part of the emerging local plan Harby was allocated 98 new dwelling over a 20 year period. If this proposal is accepted we will be up to 138. Far too many now.

·         There is currently planning permission granted for 78 houses and if you add windfalls to that, it takes it to 88.

·         Cumulative effect on the local school. Officers report states 12 school places will be generated by this development. Other applications don’t appear to have been taken into consideration.

·         Currently 83 children on school role. County Council states105 capacity but practicality should be 95. No school hall. Disassemble classrooms at lunchtime.

·         Suggest deferral or refusal regarding provision for the school.

Cllr  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL9.3

Eastwell Hall, 3 Hall Lane, Eastwell

Cllr Botterill left the meeting at 7.35pm after declaring an interest in these applications.

(a)  The Conservation Officer stated that: The application is required to be considered by the Committee because there are exceptional circumstances; allegations have been made by former residents of the building that the owners are guilty of deliberate neglect to the building, in allowing it to reach a state of dilapidation necessitating significant modernisation and the subdivision of the house to maximise their revenues. Historic England have identified less than substantial harm as a result of subdivision of the property, and this is considered to be outweighed by the benefits of securing the building’s optimum viable use, in accordance with Paragraph 134 of the NPPF.

The former tenants who have objected to the proposal claim that the building’s optimum viable use is as a single residential dwelling, consummate with its historical origins. However, this application was submitted in January 2017 and six months later, there has been no confirmed interest in taking occupation of the building as a single dwelling, as claimed by the objectors. As such, Historic England’s guidance informs the recommendation for this application, in that the works to restore the property as a result of its subdivision will secure its optimum viable use and increase the public benefit of a restored Grade II* listed building which is only marginally legible from the exterior by the nature of screening / partitioning between the newly created properties.

Cllr Baguley proposed to permit the application and added that it costs a lot of money to restore these types of buildings. Historic England have a list of buildings at risk.

The Conservation Officer noted that the applicants had demonstrated a sound knowledge of conservation.

Cllr Higgins seconded the proposal and noted that these great houses are eventually split up as society has changed and they are expensive to run.

A Member commented that the building already looks like 3 dwellings and it shouldn’t be allowed to get in to any worse state.

A vote was taken. The Members voted unanimously to permit the application.

DETERMINATION: Planning permission and Listed Building Consent approved as recommendation for the following reasons:

The determining factor is considered to be Historic England’s assessment of ‘less than substantial harm’ that would result from the subdivision of the property. As such, the public benefits outweigh the harm caused in the loss of historic character of the building. The allegations of deliberate neglect must be given material consideration and must form the basis of a separate enquiry with regards to unauthorised works. However, it is recommended that this does not interfere with the matter of securing the optimum viable use of an empty and dilapidated Grade II* listed building. The applicant is minded to ensure the properties would not be granted registration as separate dwellings until the work has been carried out, as such  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL9.4

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

Cllr Botterill raised a concern regarding an application at Greengates Farm, Eastwell Road, Goadby Marwood which had a 3 year temporary permission which was at the end of its term. Requested if Officers could review the renewal.

Cllr Holmes commented that she would also ask officers to look in to this matter.

The request was noted by officers.