Agenda and minutes

Cllr Glancy

Cllr Botterill was not present at the beginning of the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting on 27.04.17

Minutes of the meeting 27 April 2017

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

The Committee voted in agreement. It was unanimously agreed by Members that were present at the last meeting that the Chair sign them as a true record.

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

Cllr Posnett expressed a declaration in both Brooksby College applications due to being Governor at Brooksby College and the Chair of Mencap.

Cllr Greenow declared an interest in Plot 2 The Lane Barsby due to knowing the applicants personally.

Both Cllrs to leave the room when relevant applications are discussed.

King Street, Melton Mowbray

Applicant: Brooksby Melton College

Location: Brooksby Melton College, King Street, Melton Mowbray

Proposal: Conversion and partial demolition of existing buildings together with new build element to provide an affordable housing scheme of 21 units (18 flats and 3 houses).

(a) The Planning Officer stated that: Members may remember this application from a previous committee meeting of December 2015 under application reference 15/00247. The proposal is also intrinsically linked to the next item on the agenda 16/00920 at Spinney Campus in Brooksby which was previously submitted under application reference 15/00246.

Application 15/00247 was refused for 3 reasons as set out in the report.

Applications 15/00246 and 15/00247 are currently being held in abeyance by the Planning inspectorate, at a planning committee of August 2016 members voted that the council adopts the position at appeal as set out in a previous report, unless its concerns regarding the development at King Street are overcome.

This application 16/00919 has reduced the number units proposed from 25 to 21, all 21 units will be provided as affordable units, the revised proposal also retains the existing frontage building onto King Street and sets back the new build element to Chapel Street allowing more extensive views of the listed church.

23 parking spaces are provided by the new development the 3 houses would have an individual parking space each. Access would be formed from Chapel Street, the application also involves the dedication of land to MENCAP premises to the north.

As set out the application is directly associated with application no 16/00920 the applicant has provided details of how the proceeds of the development at the Spinney would support this scheme which represents the delivery of affordable housing in a location more sustainable and appropriate than at The Spinney, Brooksby, and will fund the improvements to Brooksby Hall and the theatre in the college campus on Asfordby Road for which permission already exists.

It is considered that the application presents strongly positive benefits with some very limited harm which must be considered by the committee in reaching its conclusion.

The proposed housing development is situated within the built up area of the town where development is generally acceptable, importantly it is considered that the application addresses the previous reasons for refusal.

Affordable housing provision remains one of the councils key priorities, this application presents affordable housing that helps to meet identified local needs. The application has some adverse impacts in terms of the potential to impact on the setting of the church, however this is considered to be of very limited importance due to the quality of the views concerned and the fact that the revised scheme retains the majority of these views albeit they are reduced.

In conclusion it is considered that there are significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of hosing supply and affordable housing and protection of heritage assets in particular. The balancing issues, which are impact on heritage assets are  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.1

The Spinney, Brooksby

Applicant: Brooksby Melton College

Location: Spinney Campus - Brooksby Melton College Brooksby

Proposal: Mixed use redevelopment of the disused education/agricultural complex at the Spinney, Brooksby for residential development (up to 70 dwellings), B1 development (up to 850 sq.m.) and village shop 100 sq.m. (A1) with means of access (outline application).

(a) The Planning Officer stated that: As set out earlier the previous submission 15/00246 is currently being held in abeyance by the planning inspector, the reason for this is non determination of the application.

The proposal is an exact resubmission of the previous application for a mixed use redevelopment of the disused education/agricultural complex at the spinney, Brooksby for residential development consisting of up to 70 dwellings, b1 development up to 850 sq. metres and a village shop of 100 sq. metres, the application is an outline application with only access considered at this stage.

The proposal is part of the College’s development programme and detailed information ahs been provided to explain that its proceeds will support the ongoing improvement of the facilities of the college at both its Melton campus and Brooksby, including significant repairs to the Grade II listed Brooksby Hall that lies opposite, as well as funding the affordable hosing proposed at King Street Melton.

Following on from comments received in relation to additional traffic and the use of the road to gain access to the A46 additional comments have been sought from the County Highway Authority and I quote their following response

Following advice from the CHA the applicant factored their 2013 traffic counts to 2017 flows using the standard industry TEMPRO database. The CHA considered this to be a suitable base on which to test the impact of the development on the highway network.

The trip distribution in the submitted Transport Statement showed that the majority of the development traffic would use the main highway network and travel toward the larger built up areas of Melton Mowbray and Leicester. It is acknowledged that the roads through the villages are of a lower standard that the A607 and there is some additional development traffic through the surrounding villages as a result of the proposed development however the roads will remain well within their capacities.

The cumulative impact of trips associated with the other activities on the site and the ongoing development at the Brooksby campus have also been taken into account and there is sufficient capacity on the network to accommodate these trips. The CHA did not have any evidence to suggest that the proposed development traffic on the A607 would cause ‘severe’ harm on the highway network in accordance with Paragraph 32 of the NPPF.

Given the location and nature of the proposed development and the personal injury collision data the CHA would not be in favour of reducing the speed limit as the character of the road will be unchanged. The CHA would also need to gain the support of the Police to enforce any speed limit change in this area.  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.2

Field 00700, Hoby Road, Asfordby

Applicant: Jelson Ltd

Location: Field No 0070 Hoby Road Asfordby

Proposal: Outline application for residential development (up to 70 dwellings) and associated infrastructure (all matters except access reserved for subsequent approval) (Re-submission of 16/00570/OUT).

(a) The Planning Officer stated that:

• First we have received an objection siting that this is intrusive development into the countryside and there is archaeology on the site and is close to other natural assets. Other concern relating to highways has also been raised. Finally, mentions that Asfordby has already allocated sites for housing in its' Neighbourhood Plan and has not chosen this site.

• In addition I trust members have received the letter issued by Rob Thorney, land manager of Jelsons. The recommendation remains the same in spite of this summarising that we are not saying Asfordby is a less sustainable location, but the site is less sustainable in itself because of poor connectivity and the measure they took are insufficient.

The following application is a re-submission of the previous scheme submitted on the same site reference 16/00570/OUT that was refused on 1st December 2016. This revised scheme is submitted with more links provided to the site but still remains a development not well connected with Asfordby as a whole and unbalances the settlement therefore impacted on its character. Not enough as been achieved to change the recommendation from the previous proposal.

(b) Tim Evans, agent for the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that

·         Previous application for planning permission was refused on this site. Jelson have appealed and a public enquiry is scheduled for August 2017.

·         Client met with officers regarding refusal.

·         70 new homes for Asfordby which is highly sustainable and in accordance with local plan.

·         Poor connections to village mentioned in report yet another application was recently permitted directly opposite this site.

·         Application will not have an adverse impact on the landscape.

·         No objections from local residents.

·         As detailed in letter from Jelson, officers recommended approval for houses in less sustainable locations such as Waltham on the Wolds and Old Dalby in the face of significant local opposition. This application by contrast is highly sustainable and not controversial to local residents.

·         Please reject officer’s recommendation to refuse.

Members had no questions for the speaker.

(c ) Cllr de Burle is not present at the meeting but has prepared a statement to be presented by the Head of Regulatory Services.

·         It appears that this Re application is being pushed through by the developer with undue haste! Without significant change from its predecessor and well in advance of the latest permitted date for it, of the 7th July advised to me by Jim in his email dated 26th (please see below).

·         Could this be because of the email from Penny O’Shea dated 15th May about the progress of the ANP advising (I Quote below)

·         “To whom it may concern The Examiner, Mr Brian Dodd, is close to completing his examination of the Asfordby Neighbourhood Plan. In the interests of fairness,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.3

The Ferns, 12 Main Street, Twyford

Applicant: Mr Philip Norwell

Location: The Ferns 12 Main Street Twyford

Proposal: Approval of appearance, scale, layout and landscaping for Plot 3 only

(a) The Planning Officer stated that:

This application seeks Reserved Matters consent for Plot 3 only, outline consent was granted at appeal under reference 13/00691, a previous reserved matters application has also been granted under reference 16/00156.

This application seeks to amend application 16/00156, the proposal will remain a single dwelling with a ground and first floor now comprising of 5 bedrooms. The proposed scheme continues to utilise the approved point of access and private driveway from the paddocks off Lowesby Lane.

The proposal does have a larger footprint than that of the existing, however in the context of the site and distances available to nearby dwellings the size of the dwelling is not considered to have any significant impact on neighbouring dwellings or appear overdeveloped in the context.

The proposed dwelling is to be set down into the site and will therefore be no higher than the previously approved dwelling. The application site will retain the majority of the existing hedgerow and tree planting to the southern, eastern and western boundaries, with further planning to be provided in accordance with the previously approved landscaping scheme and demonstrated on amended plans.

There is one update to the report, condition 5 states that prior to the first occupation of any dwelling, a turning space shall be provided at the end of the private drive, as pointed out this land is beyond the applicants ownership and therefore is considered unreasonable.

To conclude the application site lies within an area that has been granted previous outline and reserved matter consent, the proposal whilst slightly larger than previously approved is not considered to give rise to significant overlooking or loss of light and is therefore recommenced for approval subject to conditions as set out in the report with the exception of condition 5 which should be deleted.

(b) Christopher Trent, objector, was invited to speak and stated that

·         Big houses – 5 bed house – since original planning permission height has increased by 1m.

·         2 concerns for this area for people facing this house – more obtrusive.

·         In context of Twyford area these houses are very large.

·         Twyford has one of worst affordability ratings in the area.

·          

A Councillor questioned the separation distances from nearby houses.

The speaker responded that he believes there is a 6m gap between this house and the adjoining one. Does not have draft plans to refer to.

The Chair asked for clarification from the planning officers on separation distances.

The Planning Officer confirmed that the measurements demonstrated on the plan are 35m from building to building, with another dwelling at 30m.

The Head of Regulatory Services confirmed that the minimum required distance is 21m.

Phillip Norwell, applicant, was invited to speak and stated that

·         I am seeking to build a home for my family which reflects and respects local area.

·         Want to contribute to the area  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.4

Plot 2, The Lane, Barsby

Applicant: Ms Victoria East

Location: Plot 1a The Lane Barsby

Proposal: Proposed dwelling

Cllr Greenow left the room

 (a) The Regulatory Services Manager stated that

The application provides full details of a timber cabin style, single storey dwelling. It would be situated between two new dwellings which were approved in 2016. Works has not yet commenced on those dwellings.

It is proposed that the dwelling would be occupied by a relative of the farmer who owns and farms the land which includes this site. Note that it is not being proposed as an agricultural dwelling. Barsby is a small, unsustainable settlement, unsuited for new residential development. Recommend that permission should be refused.

Standing orders were suspended to allow both the agent and applicant to speak. Members voted unanimously in favour. Chair confirmed other speaker could therefore also have six minutes to speak.

(b) Jenny Hurst, supporter, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Representing Gaddesby Parish Council.

·         Victoria East, the applicant, wishes to own a low cost home in the village to live near her family and various work arrangements.

·         Applicant has lived in Barsby her whole life.

·         Proposed house will be situated between two houses that have recently also been approved.

·         The land is a disused area between a track and farm buildings.

·         Affordable to the applicant due to its construction.

·         Central part of the village appearance will not be affected by this proposal.

·         Attractive design to blend in with rural setting.

·         Application has come not a developer but from a local young person.

A Councillor asked with regards to the other two plots that have already been approved, why building work hasn’t yet started. The speaker responded that the previous applicants are in the process of commencing building work, and that planning permission took a long time to achieve.

Members had no other questions.

Steve Platt, agent on behalf of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that

·         Level of support from residents and Parish Council demonstrates positive feeling from local area.

·         Same support shown in 2016 applications on same site which were approved by the planning committee.

·         Planning Officer states dwelling will be isolated however this is misleading due to other two plots currently being built on.

·         Site is only visible from the farm and not from the street.

·         Agricultural opinion was not requested therefore why is this relevant now.

·         Good bus links, broadband updated, supermarkets have delivery options, there is no immediate need for a car in this location.

·         The application fulfils the criteria for low cost housing and will allow the applicant to remain in village.

A Councillor questioned the two previous applications and if there had been problems with planning, would this application be different from those. The speaker responded that he was not directly involved in the other two applications so was unable to comment. Both other plans were from family members, plans are in place to make a start but applicant is not in control of this, no knowledge of when  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.5

2 Windsor Road, Waltham

Applicant: Mr And Mrs I Woodhall

Location: 2 Windsor Road Waltham on the Wolds

Proposal: Proposed new dwelling on land to the rear of 2 Windsor Road; alterations to existing house to form new access driveway (Resubmission of withdrawn application reference: 16/00351/FUL )

(a) The Planning Officer stated that:

There are updates to the report, firstly the plan used on the front page of the report incorrectly hatches a parcel of land to the side of the development, and this part of the proposal has been removed as part of the proposal and is an error.

There has also been one further objection received in relation to the application, this objection raised matters concerning village envelopes, removal of trees, loss of privacy, out of keeping and their relevant sections contained within the NPPF, these matters have been discussed and considered within the relevant sections of the report.

This application is the resubmission of the previously withdrawn application 16/00351/FUL, the application was withdrawn due to concerns raised in relation to the effect of a new garage to No 2 Windsor Road and development on public land, the mass of the original dwelling, the architectural elevation treatment was not considered to be in keeping with the street scene and the proximity of the new dwelling to the existing site boundary was also of concern.

Since the previous application the dwelling has been reduced in size and scale to better reflect those of the area. Whilst the reduction is welcomed the dwelling remains larger in form in comparison to those that already exist close to the site.

The separation distances proposed within the application shows a distance of 22 metres from the existing dwelling to the proposed dwelling, window to window, this is considered acceptable and above the standard requirements.

The proposal is situated within a village that offers a larger range of facilities and services than most of the borough and therefore is considered to be a settlement suitable for residential development. The proposal has been designed so as not to cause significant overlooking or loss of light to nearby dwellings and has been sufficiently reduced in size and scale not to appear cramped in form when compared to the previous submission.

Balanced against this, the proposal does form a tandem development sat behind an existing dwelling and the land currently utilised as garden land with no presumption in favour of development.

It is considered that on the balance of the issues there are limited benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply.

The balancing issues being the limited impact on character of the area are considered to be outweighed by the benefits of the proposal, namely the provision of housing in a sustainable location and of a size that would benefits the needs of the Borough.

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions as set out within the report.

Cllr Lusty, on behalf of the Parish  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.6

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

A Councillor requested clarification from officers regarding

1) Car wash at Enterprise site on Nottingham Road

2) Properties being refurbished on Nottingham/Asfordby Road and if they are within planning laws

The Head of Regulatory Services confirmed that the Enterprise site on Nottingham Road is legitimate, presence of vehicles there is acceptable, and no structures have yet been built but would need permission prior to anything being built. Unsure at this point if it will become before a future Committee.