Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Thursday, 24th May, 2018 6.00 pm

Venue: Parkside, Station Approach, Burton Street, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE13 1GH

Contact: Development Control 

Items
No. Item

PL1

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Cllr Bains sent his apologies.

Cllr Higgins filled in as a substitute for Cllr Glancy.

PL2

Minutes pdf icon PDF 127 KB

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting.

Minutes:

Minutes of the meeting held on 26.04.2018.

 

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

 

8 Members supported the proposal.

 

Only 8 Members present attended the previous Committee meeting and it was unanimously agreed that the Chair sign them as a true record.

PL3

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 53 KB

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

Minutes:

Cllr Rhodes declared a personal interest as County Councillor in any application that is relevant to the County Council.

 

Cllr Posnett declared a personal interest as County Councillor in any application that is relevant to the County Council.

 

The Chair clarified that 3 objectors would not all be allowed to speak on application 17/01577/OUT, but that two objectors would be allowed to speak.

Mrs Ablewhite will speak as an objector to the application and Ian Sparrow has been requested to speak by the Parish Council.

 

PL4

Schedule of Applications pdf icon PDF 355 KB

PL4.1

16/00740/OUT

Land at Water Lane, Water Lane, Frisby on the Wreake

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Applicant: Ms Siobhan Noble

Location: Land at Water Lane, Water Lane, Frisby on the Wreake

Proposal: Outline application for residential development of up to 22 dwellings (amended application).

 

Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that there had been updates to the report and stated that:

 

LLFA have been reconsulted on the technical assessment submitted by Dr Warwick They have reiterated their advice and commented that

“it is the responsibility of the LPA to assess the suitability of a site for development, applying a sequential based approach where appropriate. As such, the County Council’s previous position stands albeit with minor rewording to the 4th condition suggested, noting that this advice is only valid where the LPA deem the site to be suitable for development” The amended wording relates to ground water monitoring to inform the design of drainage and protection.

 

4 further objections have been received since publishing the report, from 1 nearby resident:

1.         There appear to be no benefits to the existing community to be provided by the Application.

2.         The Application is in conflict with numerous policies of the NP

 

Policy H5 Housing Mix: Priority should be given to dwellings with 3-bedrooms or fewer.

The suggested housing mix is 50% 3-bed and 50% 4-bedroom houses. This does not help Frisby’s need for smaller houses. This could be satisfied by adding a condition to provide fewer homes of more than 3-bedrooms, and replacing them with some 2-bedroom dwellings and bungalows into the housing mix.

 

Policy ENV5: Biodiversity

Frisby on the Wreake Neighbourhood Plan refers to Natural England’s Impact Risk Zones (IRZs), wildlife corridors and MLP Strategic Green Infrastructure policies in which the Wreake Valley is a top Priority.

 

This affects the Water Lane site as the extant Planning Application describes how surface water would be collected and discharged to a ditch on the edge of the woodland. The ditch feeds into the SSSI. The IRZ indicates that no discharges are acceptable at this location. This also affects MLP Policy EN3. The River Wreake Strategic River Corridor as a Priority Green Infrastructure Enhancement Area

 

The Rivers Eye and Wreake corridor is an integral element of the wider 6Cs GI network (sub-regional corridor). It contributes to the Borough’s and sub region’s biodiversity resource and has the potential to provide access to nature for the communities of the Borough, specifically those in the east of Melton Mowbray, which currently has limited provision for this….

 

The River Wreake as the continuation of the River Eye is part of the ‘Sub Regional Green Infrastructure Corridors’ within the 6Cs area. Feeding into the Soar and eventually the Trent, it is vital that its water quality is kept at a high level. In addition to its ecological network function the Wreake corridor has the potential to become a major recreational resource for the Borough. Along the river, away from public access needs the vegetation should be left to form a buffer along which wildlife can move. The streams and field drains that feed  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.1

PL4.2

17/01577/OUT pdf icon PDF 512 KB

The Old Clay Pit, Grantham Road, Bottesford

Minutes:

17/01577/OUT

Applicant: Davidson Homes and Mr McNulty

Location: The Old Clay Pit, Grantham Road, Bottesford

Proposal: Outline application (access included) for residential development of up to 40 dwellings.

 

The Development Manager introduced the report.

 

The Chair invited the Parish Council representative to address the Committee. Mr Sparrow explained he had been asked to speak by the Chairman of the Parish Council, Mr Bayman, and it was clarified whether he was their representative.

 

Mr Sparrow stated that:

  • Without contamination surveys this application should not be before Committee. Based on the experience of the construction of the dwelling adjacent to this piling on site will be required potentially unlocking contaminants
  • Site water runs off into the River Devon so the consequences of getting this wrong could be catastrophic
  • There is Japanese Knotweed on the site. It will be difficult if not impossible to certify the site ‘Knotweed Free’ to potential buyers.
  • The site is 12 minutes walk to the Queen St/ High Street junction in Bottesford and 19 minutes to the School entrance. People do not walk to amenities from anywhere but the very heart of the village
  • Free bus passes to the occupants of this development is a token gesture. Sustainability augments based on accessibility are therefore flawed.
  • There is evidence of developers reneging on commitments to provide affordable housing
  • Is it ‘up to 40 dwellings’ or ‘40 and leave part of the site undeveloped for a further application’
  • National Government seeks a planning system in which local people in each neighbourhood specify what kind of development and use of land they want to see in their area. There is no Neighbourhood Plan and the opinion of the majority of the locals is that this development should not proceed.

 

The Chair enquired whether the views expressed were those of the Parish Council. Following clarification Mr Sparrow conformed they were not. The Chair ruled that the Committee should disregard the comments made as misleading and unrepresentative of the Parish Council’s position, which was conveyed in the report.

 

Mrs Ablewhite, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

  • Japanese Knotweed is present on site.
  • Lots of pollution will travel downstream to Easthorpe.
  • This is a landfill site.
  • There are Cyanide and asbestos on site.
  • There are health and safety issues with contamination on site.
  • This site is a danger to the whole parish.
  • Water contamination in nearby river will affect the whole parish.
  • There has been no ground analysis on the site.
  • Nearby river will become polluted.
  • This site is very contaminated and council should err on the side of caution and not risk the health and wellbeing of residents.
  • Health of residents should come first.
  • This site is very poorly connected to the rest of the village.

 

A Cllr queried if Mrs Ablewhite had seen the Japanese Knotweed on the site.

Mrs Ablewhite responded that nothing grows on the site and that Japanese Knotweed is prevalent across the village.

 

Councillors had no further questions for Mrs Ablewhite.  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.2

PL4.3

16/00929/FUL and 16/00930/LBC pdf icon PDF 355 KB

Sysonby Lodge, Nottingham Road, Melton Mowbray

Minutes:

Applicant: Mr Brian Henton

Location: Sysonby Lodge, Nottingham Road, Melton Mowbray

Proposal: Conversion and redevelopment of Sysonby Lodge and associated Outbuilding for residential development comprising 10no. dwellings (Use Class C3) with associated access, landscaping and car parking.

 

The Case Officer (TE) stated that there have been updates to the report and stated that:

  • This application is linked to the enabling application 16/00926/OUT.
  • This site is a historic lodge, and very important to the heritage of the town.
  • This site was last used as offices, but is gradually falling into disrepair, and now must be occupied to be able to survive.
  • The building is currently wind and weather proof, but has been empty for a long time.
  • The ground floor plans are historically significant, and are currently planned to be retained.
  • The current windows will be maintained.
  • The building will be restored to its former grandeur, but requires significant investment, hence the enabling application.

 

Maria Boyce, the Agent, was invited to speak, and stated that:

  • This building is grade 2 listed, so is of regional and national importance.
  • The building must be in use to be maintained to a suitable standard.
  • The original permission that was granted in 2007 has lapsed.
  • The site is sustainable, as long as the enabling application is also approved.
  • There are no technical objections from consultees.
  • The enabling application is designed to help fund this restoration.
  • The current approach is a conservation led approach, designed to maintain and restore the site as much as possible.
  • The final design is now optimum, after a lot of re-designs and amendments since the application was submitted.
  • The site is of great historical importance, and heritage aspects must be given significant weight.
  • The building will continue to deteriorate if nothing is done now.
  • Agree with the recommendation of the officer to permit.

 

Councillors had no questions for Mrs Boyce.

 

The Case Officer (TE) had no further comments.

 

The Chair opened up the application for a debate.

 

Cllr Rhodes proposed to Permit the applications, as the scheme if very impressive and we need to preserve this listed building.

 

Cllr Baguley seconded the motion to permit.

A Cllr stated that this site is a very important heritage asset, and must be preserved. Very supportive of this application.

 

A Cllr stated that even though they couldn’t attend the site visit, they are very happy that this site should be preserved.

 

A Cllr stated that this site used to be very impressive, and needs to be restored to its former grandeur.

 

A Cllr stated that the road would not be built to LCC Highways standards, so queried who would pay for maintenance of the road.

 

The Case Officer (TE) responded that this would be a legal matter, and should not be considered by the committee.

 

A Cllr confirmed that this application is for the restoration and conversion of the building only, and does not consider the proposed 22 new dwellings in the grounds.

 

A Vote was held on the motion to Permit.

 

10 Members  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.3

PL4.4

16/00926/OUT pdf icon PDF 450 KB

Sysonby Lodge, Nottingham Road, Melton Mowbray

Minutes:

Applicant: Mr Brian Henton

Location: Sysonby Lodge, Nottingham Road, Melton Mowbray

Proposal: Outline Planning Application for a residential development comprising up to 24no. dwellings (Use Class C3) and associated access.

 

The Case Officer (JL) stated that there had been no updates to the report.

 

Maria Boyce, the agent was invited to speak and stated that:

  • Previous application cannot go ahead without the funding provided by this application.
  • This application will fund the restoration of Sysonby Lodge.

 

A Cllr stated that the scheme that had been approved at Craven Lodge looks fantastic, but that 60 trees on the site is a lot to lose.
Mrs Boyce responded that this has been calculated and worked out as the optimum scheme, and tries to retain as many trees as possible and the trees are not of that high a quality.

 

A Cllr asked how long the site has been under the ownership of the current application.

Mrs Boyce responded that the site has been in control of the current applicant for over 10 years.

 

A Cllr queried why there are no affordable housing or S106 agreement within the scheme.

Mrs Boyce responded that this is an enabling scheme, so all contributions go directly into the restoration of Sysonby Lodge.

 

A Cllr queried the presence of badgers on site.

Mrs Boyce answered that there will be sufficient mitigation if the scheme is approved.

 

The Chair opened up the application for a debate.

 

Cllr Rhodes stated that the listed building cannot be restored without the approval of this application, so refusal would condemn Sysonby Lodge. Cllr Rhodes proposed to permit the application.

 

Cllr Greenow seconded the motion to permit.

 

A Cllr stated that this site is part of the heritage of the area, so support the motion.

 

A Cllr stated that they were concerned about the loss of the trees on site, as the trees are part of the setting of the Lodge.

 

A Cllr stated that 60 trees is a lot to lose, so must try and keep the best and most mature trees on site.

 

The Case Officer (JL) stated that the trees must be lost to make room for housing to fund the restoration of the Lodge as a whole, and that lots more trees will be retained.

 

A Cllr proposed a condition that more trees be retained by the scheme.

 

The condition was refused by the proposer of the motion to permit.

 

A Cllr stated that they agreed with the current motion.

 

A Cllr queried the lack of S106 agreement.

The Case Officer (JL) responded that this is due to it being an enabling scheme, so all contributions will fund the restoration of the Lodge.

 

A Cllr stated that this site is an important heritage site in the area, so must be retained, and that further details of the scheme can be agreed upon at the reserved matters stage.

 

The Proposer and Seconder of the motion agree to condition that the scheme provide a play area on the site.

 

A Cllr  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.4

PL4.5

18/00271/OUT pdf icon PDF 272 KB

Land to the South of The Lane, Barsby

Minutes:

Applicant: Mr and Ms Featherstone and Harvey

Location: Land To The South Of The Lane, Barsby

Proposal: Demolition of barns and erection of one two storey dwelling, including access.

 

The Case Officer (GBA) stated that there had been one update to the report, and stated that a letter has been received from Cllr Janet Simpson, expressing her views on the application.

 

Jenny Hurst, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

  • Support this application.
  • Will enable greater efficiency in Farming.
  • Will renovate the derelict building.
  • Will improve the immediate area.
  • This site is within the village.
  • Site has safe access.
  • There is a local need for 3 bed houses.
  • This scheme is a high quality design.
  • Should support this scheme and vote to permit.

 

Councillors had no questions for Cllr Hurst.

 

Stella Harvey, the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

  • This site is not within the open countryside.
  • Site is located within the local village.
  • Applicants are local farmers within the community.
  • There is a local need for this housing.
  • Other applications have been permitted in Barsby.
  • There is a local need for 2 and 3 bed houses.
  • Village is only 1 mile from Gaddesby.
  • Barsby is not unsustainable.
  • There is a lot of support within the community.
  • There are no technical objections to the scheme.
  • Material considerations are in favour of support.

 

A Cllr sought clarification on what would happen to current house.

Ms Harvey responded that the current house would be sold.

 

The Case Officer (GBA) clarified that this is not an application for an agricultural workers dwelling. The applicant had made a clear statement to that effect.

 

The Chair opened up the application for a debate.

 

A Cllr stated that this is not needed to help the business, so there is no justified need; so cannot support the application, and Barsby is an unsustainable location.

 

A Cllr stated that this application is against policy, as there is no justified need.

 

A Cllr stated that this is an application for a farm, but it is not an agricultural application so this makes little sense.

 

A Cllr suggested that another application can be submitted for an agricultural workers dwelling, or that shows the local need for the scheme.

 

Cllr Holmes Proposed to defer the application - to analyse if the scheme was needed or had an agricultural tie.

 

The Chair commented that this motion would have to be for a refusal – the motion fails.

 

Cllr Faulkner Proposed to refuse the application.

 

Cllr Cumbers Seconded the motion to refuse.

 

A Vote was taken on the motion to refuse.

 

9 Members supported the motion.

0 Members voted against the motion.

1 Member abstained from the vote.

 

DETERMINATION: REFUSED, for the following reasons:

 

1.         The dwelling hereby proposed is considered to be located in an unsustainable location. Barsby as a village lacks many amenities that facilitates sustainable travel and therefore the proposed occupants are likely to rely on the private motor vehicle, which  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.5

PL4.6

18/00287/FUL pdf icon PDF 287 KB

Holmwood, 33 Main Street, Kirby Bellars

Minutes:

Applicant: Mr And Mrs Alan Batten

Location: Holmwood, 33 Main Street, Kirby Bellars

Proposal: Proposed two bedroom single storey dwelling

 

The Case Officer (GBA) stated that there had been updates to the report, and stated that:

  • Petition received in support of the application with 21 local signatures.
  • One further objection has been received that highlighted the parking issues along Main Street, Kirby Bellars. All other concerns raised have been addressed in the report.
  • An additional reason for refusal has been added, relevant to Para 53 of the NPPF, over the resisting of development in residential gardens.

 

Stuart Machin, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

  • This scheme has a direct impact on neighbours.
  • Kirby Bellars is an unsustainable location.
  • There are no benefits to this scheme.
  • This is contrary to both the Melton local Plan and the NPPF.
  • There are properties available to buy within the village.
  • This reduces the amenity value for neighbours.
  • The proposal breaks several design policies.
  • This is not an appropriate development.
  • There is no back land development within Kirby Bellars.
  • There is a lack of amenities in the area.
  • Support the recommendation to refuse.

 

A Cllr sought clarification on the location of neighbouring houses on the plans.

 

Alan Batten, the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

  • They want to downsize but remain within the community.
  • Member of the parish Council
  • Support lots of community events within the community – valued members of the community.
  • There are no suitable properties available in Kirby Bellars.
  • The scheme has almost 300sqm of garden.
  • There is already back land development in the area.
  • Local Plan says that Kirby Bellars will need some development to be able to survive.
  • Very reluctant to leave the area.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mr Batten.

 

The Case Officer (GBA) stated that there were no further updates.

 

The Chair opened up the application for a debate.

 

A Cllr queried about the receipt of a petition in support of the application.

The Case Officer (GBA) clarified that MBC received a petition with 21 signatures in support of this application.

 

A Cllr stated that they had sympathy with the applicant, and the there does need to be some development within this village.

 

A Cllr stated that the scheme is not currently recommended for refusal under the Local Plan conditions. The site may be over intensive with this scheme. Do not agree with Clause 1 in the conditions in the recommendation for refusal.

 

Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services (JW) stated that the new SS3 in the Local Plan would enable development such as this, where there is a demonstrable need.

 

A Cllr argued that people who work and are valued members of the community are very important, such as the applicant.

 

A Cllr stated that the plot size seems very large for a two bed bungalow.

 

A Cllr stated that this scheme may be over intensification of the site, but development is needed in this village.  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL4.6

PL4.7

18/00001/TPOMBC pdf icon PDF 290 KB

Village Green, High Street, Waltham On The Wolds

Minutes:

18/00001/TPOMBC

Applicant: Waltham On The Wolds And Thorpe Arnold Parish Council

Location: Village Green, High Street, Waltham On The Wolds

Proposal: Two Lawson Cypress Trees

 

This application was already deferred earlier in the meeting due to the late hour and time constraints on the meeting.

 

PL4.8

16/00157/OUT pdf icon PDF 148 KB

Update report for application 16/00157/OUT – Land Adjacent to the Woodlands, Station Road, Old Dalby.

Minutes:

Applicant: Hofton & Son Ltd

Location: Land Adjacent The Woodlands, Station Road, Old Dalby

Proposal: Erection of up to 25 houses with all matters reserved except access

 

Applications and Advice Manager (LP) briefed members on a report of the application, and a request for a deed of variation to remove the affordable housing condition in the approved application.

 

A Cllr sought clarification on the calculations, and questioned whether the figures in the report are correct. Even with the deed of variation, the applicant will still lose over half a million.

 

A Cllr stated that the applicant knew the policies and requirement when applying for the original permission, and must now follow through and deliver. They should have done the viability assessment at the start of the process, not after permission has already been granted.

 

The Legal Council recommended that this be deferred to seek legal review.

 

Cllr Higgins proposed to refuse the deed of variation.

 

Cllr Holmes seconded the motion to refuse.

 

A Cllr stated that they agree with previous comments.


A Cllr stated that this does not add up, and so should be refused.

 

A Vote was held on the motion to refuse.

 

10 Members supported the motion.

0 Members voted against the motion.

0 Members abstained from the vote.

 

DETERMINATION: REFUSED, because insufficient information has been presented to remove the Affordable Housing element of the Section 106 Agreement.

PL5

Performance Report

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Performance Review

 

This item was deferred until the next meeting.

 

PL6

Urgent Business

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

 

Minutes:

None