Agenda and minutes

None.

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

None.

Report addressing the issues raised common to each of the applications

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services introduced the report which explained the weight that should be afforded to the Neighbourhood Plan (NP) and the emerging Local Plan (LP) in their relative state of advancement. He also explained the scheme developed by the LEA to expand the Primary School, including its limitations.

On Education, this has been a long standing difficulty raised in numerous objections in each of the applications. In response to this we have liaised with both the LEA and the school. They have devised a scheme that would allow expansion to allow for 30 additional children – the equivalent using the LEA’s measured of 127 houses. This has been designed out and costed by the LEA and the details are set out in the report. They have also advised it is a singular solution that cannot be downscaled or broken into parts.

Whilst aware of the likely costs, the no. of houses it will be divided between depends on the decisions that occur tonight. That is why – for those applications rec,. approval all are ‘subject to’ the final calculation on costs and of course the applicants’ willingness to meet them.

On the NP and LP the report addresses the question of weight following the relevant guidance from NPPF which will be familiar to the Committee. This has produced 2 key results :

•           The NP carries significant weight owing to the stage it has reached , having passed Examination

•           The NP is more advanced and less contended than the LP and in comparison outweighs the LP as a result. This is significant particularly to one of the applications tonight because the NP and LP address it in opposite terms, To reiterate, in current circumstanced, the NP holds greater weight.

He reported responses to the is paper:

Parish Council:

1.         The Parish Council (PC) is aware of the present need for Melton Borough Council (MBC) to determine the outstanding planning applications.

2.         The Neighbourhood Plan (NP) is expected to run alongside the emerging Melon Local Plan (LP) and give added local detail and content, while not conflicting with the LP’s strategic aims and policies. 

3.         The PC notes that the first Core planning principle in para. 17 of the NPPF is that planning should: “be genuinely plan-led, empowering local people to shape their surroundings with succinct local and neighbourhood plans setting out a positive vision for the future of the area.” 

4.         The PC agrees with the weight assigned due to the progress of the LCHH NP and MBC’s LP.  and that the NP attracts a higher level of weight in the determination of planning applications at present

5.         In line with NPPF para. 14, Councillors will be aware that there remains a legitimate point of public debate about the precise level of Housing Need within the Borough as a whole, and how that may impact upon the three villages

6.         Our own local consultations and NP community vision have led us to prefer a  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL66

Land South Of Keystones, Sand Pit Lane, Long Clawson

Applicant: Davidsons Developments Ltd

Location: Land South of Keystones, Sand Pit Lane, Long Clawson

Proposal: Residential development of up to 55 dwellings, together with new areas of public open space, access, landscaping and drainage infrastructure.

 

Councillor Holmes Proposed a motion to withhold standing orders for the duration

of this meeting, as there are many interested parties to speak on each application.

This motion was Seconded by Councillor Greenow.

Councillors voted unanimously in favour of withholding standing orders.

Standing Orders Withheld for the rest of the meeting.

 

a)         The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated:

 

•           It is an Outline application with an illustrative layout

•           The most difficult of the apps tonight because of the conflict between the NP and the LP – but as stated earlier the NP carries more weight at present. The NP does not allocate it for housing and has protective policy under ENV8. This is the main driver behind our recommendation of refusal.

•           The application has attracted widespread objection on several grounds all of which are outlined, but there are particular contentions regarding heritage and drainage.

•           He described the main concerns – setting of the Manor House, Church, Conservation Area forming a historic core. Historic England have described the impact as ‘less than substantial harm’ (using those exact words) and this means the impact needs to be balanced against the benefits identified in NPPF –  housing provision including AH being  to the fore. This has included seeking their view on the mini roundabout, - their comments in this respect are on page 9.

•           Drainage – concerns have been raised that the scheme cannot be achieved. It will be noted that we have reverted back and for the with the LLFA (page 8) and whist they agree not every detail is yet secured, as is the nature of outline applications, they are not saying effective drainage would not be possible.

Finally, we have received conformation form the applicants that they would meet the s106 requests proposed by the Village Hall management body (page 16)

 

b)         Cllr Tillyard, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

 

•           The Parish Council supports the reports and recommendations of all officers this evening.

•           This site is not identified in the Neighbourhood Plan, and is not allocated.

•           This site is not even a reserve site in the Neighbourhood Plan.

•           Environmental impacts should be included in the reasons for refusal.

•           The site is poor and not suitable for development.

•           It is next to a Conservation Area and a listed building.

•           The site has flood risks.

•           The reasons for refusal should include heritage, landscape and flooding.

•           It breaks policies H1, H2, H3 and H7 of the neighbourhood plan.

•           It breaks policies ENB8 and ENB9 of the neighbourhood plan.

 

Councillors had no questions for Cllr Tillyard.

 

c)         Dr Cooper, as an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           This site is against the  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL67.1

Land And Buildings North Canal Farm, Pagets End, Long Clawson

Applicant: R D and J K Chandler

Location: Land And Buildings North Canal Farm, Pagets End, Long Clawson

Proposal: Demolition of agricultural buildings, construction of up to 40 dwellings, improvements to existing access, formation of surface water attenuation pool and associated infrastructure, provision of public open space and landscaping.

 

a)         The Applications and advice Manager advised that:

 

The application is for outline planning permission for the erection of up to 40 residential dwellings, the application relates to the approval of the access with all other matters being reserved, the application is supported with an indicative layout plan showing how the houses may fit on the site.

 

The application site is located in Long Clawson and lies next to existing dwellings.  Statutory consultees have assessed the proposal and raise no objections subject to conditions.

 

There are updates to the report, within the report the site is referenced as North Canal Farm, however the actual site address is Canal Farm rather than North Canal Farm.

 

The site would be accessed via the existing entrance off Canal Lane, and not via Paget’s End as stated on the first page of the report.

 

As within the conclusions section of other reports an error has been made in which it has been stated that the Council is deficient in terns of housing delivery, the applicant has questioned why this statement has not been considered and or addressed within this report, this is an error, the council can demonstrate beyond a five year housing land supply and this also forms part of the balancing for members when determining the applications.

 

The application is a reserved housing site referenced Long 5 in the submitted version of the Local Plan and similarly is a reserve housing site in the Neighbourhood Plan referenced NPLONG 5.

 

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply and affordable housing in particular, however the weight attached to the site being a reserved site and not allocated for housing outweighs the benefits in this instance.

 

As such the application is recommended for refusal as per the 2 reasons set out in the report.

 

a)         Cllr Tillyard, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           The Parish Council supports the officer’s recommendation to refuse.

•           This is a reserve site in both the local plan and the neighbourhood plan.

•           The site is not suitable for large scale development.

•           The visual impacts are intrusive.

•           The neighbourhood have objectively assessed the site, and the site is poor compared to others within the village.

•           There are environmental and landscape impacts of this site.

•           It has poor links to the village centre.

•           There are transport issues for this site, and this site would irreversibly harm both the environment and the local highways.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Cllr Tillyard.

 

b)  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL67.2

Birleys Garage, 1 Waltham Lane, Long Clawson

20.40pm - 20.45pm Meeting suspended for short break.

 

Applicant: AG and JML Birley

Location: Birleys Garage, 1 Waltham Lane, Long Clawson

Proposal: Residential development of up to 45 houses.

 

a)         The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that:

•           The application is in outline with an illustrative layout

•           the site  is allocated in both the NP and the LP for the no. of houses proposed

 

The application would not affect roadside trees and incorporates highways works and a footpath at the junction with East End  ,just to the north 9which were displayed)

 

He highlighted various matters for clarification:

 

Drainage - at the bottom of page 15 (65) in the left hand column the comments of a neighbour have been reported, relating to a ditch which runs along the northern edge of the eastern part of the site.  The application red line in slightly from the boundary hedge and ditch.  Indicative Layout drawing BG-16-01revC.

 

Ecology - the "no objection subject to conditions” view of the County Ecologist is reported at the bottom of page 7 (57).  The County Ecologist responded that her initial concerns had been met

 

Letter from the applicants solicitor:

•           Confirmation of the provision of 37% affordable housing – this would be refined by a scheme to be submitted under the s 106

•           Request that the s106 arrangements for the school are entered into by all successful applicants to ensure that the school goes ahead alongside the housing (if any).

 

This appears to be the same as the proposed recommendation.

 

b)         Cllr Tillyard, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           The neighbourhood plan agrees to permit this development.

•           The Parish Council support this application and the recommendation to permit.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Cllr Tillyard.

 

c)         Hamish Forbes, as an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Owns adjacent property to the north.

•           Borough Council or the applicant has never consulted him on the issues about the boundary ownership issues that have now been resolved.

•           There are already water flow issues that cause flooding and property damage.

•           The nearby brook leads to Hose, so may cause further flooding downstream.

•           Current drainage in the area is inadequate.

•           Phase 2 will flow into the pond and brook, and lead to further flooding.

•           There is possible contamination on the site, which could lead to the pollution of the brook, which is used as drinking water for livestock.

 

A Cllr queried what is phase 2 of the plan.

Mr Forbes responded that phase 2 is the demolition of the garage and the piggeries for additional housing.

A Cllr clarified that phase 2 is not part of this proposal, and sought further clarification on the location of the brook to the site.

Mr Forbes confirmed the brook location is to the East.

 

d)         Melanie Steadman, as an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           It is in the Neighbourhood Plan,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL67.3

Land At Back Lane, Long Clawson

Applicant: Laura and Sarah Fitzpatrick

Location: Land at Back Lane, Long Clawson

Proposal: Erection of up to 19 dwellings with associated access, drainage infrastructure and amenity space (amended description) - Revised flood risk and drainage information and reduction of dwellings to 19.

 

This application was withdrawn.

 

Cllr Wyatt proposed a motion to continue past the 3 hour meeting limit and continue until a conclusion is reached.

 

Cllr Greenow Seconded the motion to continue to a conclusion.

 

A Vote was held on the motion for the meeting to continue until a conclusion is reached.

 

11 Members supported the motion.

0 Members were against the motion.

0 Members abstained from the vote.

 

The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting will continue until a conclusion is reached.

Land Rear Of 1 To 3, Hickling Lane, Long Clawson

Applicant: Mr T Hazelton

Location: Land Rear Of 1 To 3 Hickling Lane, Long Clawson

Proposal: Outline application for the erection of up to 31 dwellings with associated access, open space and parking

 

 

The Applications and Advice Manager (LP) introduced the application and advised:

 

The application is for outline planning permission for the erection of up to 31 residential dwellings, the application relates to the approval of the access with all other matters being reserved, the application is supported with an indicative layout plan showing how the houses may fit on the site.

 

The application site is located in Long Clawson and lies next to existing dwellings.  Statutory consultees have assessed the proposal and raise no objections subject to conditions.

 

There are updates to the report: comments have now been received from the Lead Local Flood Authority.  They have stated that the revised FRA includes a drainage strategy and additional detail as requested in their previous consultation response.  The drainage strategy does not contain any level details, however on cross-checking against the submitted topographic details, it is found that the proposals would be deliverable.

 

The LLFA welcome the use of various SuDS treatment trains within the strategy however it is noted that some appear to be shown in locations that may ultimately become private space.  As such, consideration regarding the maintenance of these features will be required when discharging the appropriate conditions.

It is noted within the FRA that intrusive ground investigation works have been commissioned.  The FRA advises that it is believed these works will demonstrate infiltration is not viable on-sit.  Result from infiltration testing will be required in order to discharge the relevant condition.

 

As with other applications this evening within the conclusions section of other reports an error has been made in which it has been stated that the Council is deficient in terns of housing delivery, this is an error, the council can demonstrate beyond a five year housing land supply and this also forms part of the balancing for members when determining the applications.

 

The application is an allocated housing site referenced LONG2 in the submitted version of the Local Plan and similarly is an allocated housing site in the Neighbourhood Plan referenced NPLONG 6.

 

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply and affordable housing in particular, and the allocation of the site in both the emerging Local and Neighbourhood Plans is considered to further add to the weight in favour of the development.

 

As such the application is recommended for approval as set out in the report along with the additional conditions from the Lead Local Flood Authority.

 

a)         Cllr Tillyard, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           The Parish Council supported this application and will continue to support.

•           Drainage from this site will run down Hickling Lane,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL67.5

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

 

None.