Agenda and minutes

Cllr Rhodes, substituted by Cllr Pearson

Cllr Botterill, substituted by Cllr Higgins

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting.

Minutes of the meeting held on 24.05.18

 

Approval of the minutes was proposed by Cllr Posnett and seconded by Cllr Greenow. It was unanimously agreed 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 Higgins stated that as he is Ward Councillor for Somerby, he would abstain from the vote on application 16/00615/OUT

The Chair asked Members if they would take Item 6 first. This was proposed by Cllr Higgins and seconded by Cllr Holmes. It was unanimously decided that Item 6 would be discussed first.

 

Item 6: 18/00001/TPOMBC: Village Green, High Street, Waltham on the Wolds

 

(a)  The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report.

 

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

• Neighbourhood Plan established green as important setting
• Setting of 5 listed buildings
• Trees out of setting
• Continuous expense to maintain
• Out of scale
• Overgrown and interfere with heritage setting

 

A Cllr asked how all members of the Parish Council felt.

 

Mr Lusty stated that it was a unanimous vote.

 

Cllr Holmes stated that she would prefer to confirm the TPO and lop only the lower branches. Cllr Holmes proposed to confirm the TPO.

 

Cllr Baguley seconded the proposal and stated that the trees are an important part of the street scene.

 

A Cllr stated that they agreed with the Parish Council. To confirm the TPO would cause more issues in the future. Suggested that if the trees are removed the Ward Cllr and community should be worked with on the replacement.

 

A Cllr had concerns on the trees growing taller and if remedial work had to be done such as cutting the top of the trees, they would look ugly.

 

A Cllr stated that they would be expensive to take down.

 

A vote to confirm the TPO was taken. 2 Members voted in favour, 8 Members voted against, and 1 Member abstained.

 

Cllr Posnett proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation.

 

Cllr Greenow seconded the proposal.

 

A vote was taken. 9 Members voted in favour. 2 Members voted against.

 

DECISION: That the Tree Preservation Order should not be confirmed. 

 

The Old Clay Pit, Grantham Road, Bottesford

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

 

(a)  The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report and provided an update as follows:

 

•           It had been deferred to undertake a site visit which took place Monday, noting the extent of vegetation, the point of access, presence of knotweed and the proximity and slope towards the river

•           The applicant has provided further detail of the site investigation work they carried out and this has been added to the report on its second page

•           Regarding enquiries about compaction owing to the former use of the site, a Geo Technical report has identified that there is such a risk and therefore measures need to be included in the foundation design to reach the underlying strata. This would take the form of more detailed surveys leading to identification where piled foundations and a backfill is needed, and suspended floors to allow for escape of ground gases.

•           Affordable Housing is proposed at 32% rather than 37% as stated, in order to be in accurate compliance with the Local Plan Policy requirement.

 

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

 

·         The PC has changed its position on the application since it submitted its written comments

·         Development has changed from 1 combined site between 2 developers to 2 separate sites

·         Compaction problem

·         Contamination issues

·         Knotweed issue has not been addressed

·         Affordable homes decreased from 37% to 32%

 

A Cllr asked how the site is separated and stated that the Committee is not judging the entrance and all other factors, however suggested that it could be conditioned for the full application.

Cllr Bayman explained that 2 sites had been put in separately but the Local Plan had brought them together, which is better. There is no link between the two. There should be one entrance into one site.

 

(c)  Joyce Farnese, on behalf of Mrs Woollard (objector), was invited to speak and stated that:

·         The site was formally a landfill tip

·         There are contaminants on site

·         Knotweed present and impossible to eradicate

·         Vehicles on site pass through and deposit throughout village

·         Instability of tip contents requires piling

·         Soil needs to be removed for building disturbing toxins

·         Corby case – toxins and contamination caused limb deficiencies in unborn children

 

(d)  Jamie Pyper, the agent, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Client sought to engage with landowner of adjacent land however they are not willing to engage

·         Collaboration could be made in the future

·         With appropriate mitigation the site can be built upon with no issues with contamination

·         Environment Agency satisfied

·         Conditions can be added

·         Knotweed treatment is in hand and can be conditioned

·         32% affordable housing is in accordance with policy

 

A Cllr asked if the 32% affordable housing will be dependant on site cleaning and if there would be an  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL10.1

Daybells Farm, Bottesford

Applicant: Mr H Daybell

Location: Daybells Farm, Bottesford

Proposal: Outline application for the erection of 18 dwellings and associated infrastructure.

 

(a)  The Planning Officer (JL) presented the report.

 

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

·            Provision of smaller homes is welcomed

·            Close to heart of village and amenities

·            Footpath will be maintained

·            41 homes too many, should be agreed at current state

 

(c)  Danny O’Connell, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Adverse impact on neighbouring properties

·         High density

·         Neighbouring properties overlooked

·         Distance less than 17m

·         Too small an area

·         Limited garden amenity space

·         Defer application to prepare revised site plan

·         No. of dwellings should be decreased

 

A Cllr asked the location of neighbouring houses from the location boundary.

 

Mr O’Connell stated it was 12m in some cases.

 

(d)  Herbert Daybell, the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Low density proposal

·         Footpath remains

·         Landscaped amenity area

·         Central location near local amenities

·         No concerns from technical consultees

·         Highways satisfied

·         Addresses needs of village

·         Mix of bungalows and houses, and affordable homes

 

A Cllr asked how the neighbours’ boundary concerns can be satisfied.

 

Mr Daybell stated that the application is indicative and can be revised.

 

A Cllr asked if a play area was included.

 

Mr Daybell confirmed he was happy to include one.

 

The Planning Officer (JL) stated that the housing mix and layout is not finalised and condition 4 stated that the reserved matters application needs to provide a mix of size and type. The layout is only indicative and needs to be confirmed.

 

The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that there is no requirement in law to demonstrate the capacity but the decision needs to be reasonable so we need to be satisfied the quantity can be accommodated, whether or not by the indicative layout. The Committee can use its judgement to determine if the site is capable of providing 18 dwellings.

 

Cllr Holmes proposed to permit the application as the site is close to amenities.

 

Cllr Posnett seconded the proposal to permit as it is well thought out and the closeness to amenities is what is needed.

 

A Cllr had concerns on the affordable housing and the size of the properties.

 

The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that housing associations only take on houses built to prescribed standards.

 

A Cllr asked for clarification on the figures for education as it was previously 672 places but is now 720.

 

The Planning Officer (JL) stated that the updated figures were received that day. They have moved on because of other permissions granted in the intervening period.

 

A Cllr asked if the proposer and seconder would consider adding a condition to find a solution for the neighbouring properties as the gardens are too close and this will affect the amenity of those properties. It is also important to have a good housing mix.

 

The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL10.2

Land off Station Road, Bottesford

The Committee had a break at 7.42pm and reconvened at 7.47pm

 

Applicant: Mrs Cheryl Hibbert and Mr Christopher Greasley

Location: Land off Station Road, Bottesford

Proposal: Erection of 4no dwellings (amended layout and house types)

 

(a)  The Planning Officer (GBA) presented the report and stated that:

Just one update on this one is that a full response from the LCC highways team has now been obtained that finds the amendments are acceptable and request their standard conditions be applied on ensuring the access is implemented as agreed.

 

The following proposal is a full application for four houses on land off Station Road Bottesford.

 

The scheme proposed is that all houses are two bedroom properties, dormer bungalow in scale and form and shown on a slide.

 

Various amendments have been achieved to take account of the concerns of views to the church and impact on the open space.

 

As hopefully clear as per our visit on Monday this is no longer an allocated open space in the new local plan.  Each area is encouraged now to put these spaces forward as part of a neighbourhood plan which their currently is none for Bottesford.

 

In terms of policy considerations therefore it is primarily SS1 that has been considered which is around applications in service centres such as Bottesford.

The principle of development is there viewed acceptable owing to the sustainable nature of the village with its key available facilities being in walking distance from the proposed site and good public transport links.

 

In addition, owing to the private nature of the open space and that a large section of this space remains open and undeveloped the impacts to it on balance are deemed acceptable.

In addition to this the provision of four two bedroom properties which are much needed in the village remain a considerable benefit along with the assessment with MBC conservation colleagues that the impact to views to the church and overall impacts to the conservation area are acceptable.

As such the proposal is recommended for approval as per the report along with the additional highway conditions.

 

The Ward Councillor, Cllr Chandlers comments were read out:

a) I have received numerous comments relating to the lack of emphasis given to both the Natural Environment & the Conservation Area in general, in the Committee Report.

 

b) The Church Field (the location for the proposed dwellings) is part of the natural environment of Bottesford, one of only two “windows” left with open views of the Grade 1 Listed Church, thought by many to be the finest church in Leicestershire, often referred to, as a mini Cathedral.  Whilst, l acknowledge that Church Field has lost its “protected open space listing” to now being designated as a “Green Area”, we surely have a duty to preserve our natural heritage.  It must be remembered that the Pack Horse Route to Grantham via Allington was routed alongside the River Devon from the Grade 1 Fleming’s Bridge during the 17th Century (1636), across what is now Station Road,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL10.3

Burrough Road, Somerby

Applicant: Stimson Developments:- Mr T Stimson

Location: Field No 4564, Burrough Road, Somerby

Proposal: Residential development (outline)

 

(a)  The Planning Officer (JL) presented the report.

 

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

·           Local Plan has significant weight and the site is reserved in the plan

·            Policy C1B

·           Requirement of 44 houses – 30 already approved plus 12 on Manor Lane. 42/44 houses already achieved

·           Requirement met and likely to be exceeded

·           Harmful effect on conservation area

·           Close proximity to listed vinery

 

A Cllr sought clarification that not only were there houses permitted on large sites bit also individual homes amounting to approximately 8.

 

Mr Blakebrough confirmed this and added that there are 11 individuals in Pickwell.

 

(c)  Ros Freeman, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Environmental reasons why Burrough Road was a reserved site

·         Level of mitigation at conservation area should be high

·         Negative impact on surroundings

·         Historic scene

·         Attractive landscape

·         No community support

 

(d)  Mike Sibthorp, the agent, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Favourable pre-application advice

·         Technical issues resolved

·         Development will not harm setting

·         Outline application so no numbers specified

·         Enhance sustainability

·         Dwellings could be limited to not exceed 10

·         Local Plan supports development of up to 10 dwellings

 

A Cllr asked for clarification on the number of dwellings as the application refers to 31 however 10 were mentioned.

 

Mr Sibthorp stated that the application is indicative and no number was supplied.

 

The Planning Officer (JL) stated that the application is outline and the layout is indicative only. The listed vinery was listed after the application was submitted. Concerns from Archaeology have been considered in the report.

 

A Cllr suggested the application should be deferred to confirm number of dwellings.

 

The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that the application could be limited to 10 dwellings. Policy SS2 applies and leads directly to Policy SS3 – service centres of rural hubs will accommodate housing through allocated sites and by encouraging small scale developments where it would enhance the sustainable community in accordance with Policy SS3. SS3 says that small developments will be acceptable where they provide housing which meets a proving local need as identified by substantiated evidence. There is no evidence that the application forms a specific need.

 

The Chair stated that the site is a reserved site and there is no reason to believe the other sites will not meet the need.

 

The Ward Cllr stated that Somerby needs 2 or 3 bed houses and affordable homes. If the scheme is reduced to 10 dwellings, this would reduce the number of any affordable homes. If the scheme was reduced to 10, there were no guarantees to secure any affordable housing or s106 commitments for the village.  Therefore no identified benefits.

 

Cllr Greenow proposed to refuse the application in line with the officer’s report.

 

Cllr Glancy seconded the proposal to refuse.

 

A vote was taken. 10 Members voted in  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL10.4

Lake Terrace, Melton Mowbray

The Chair asked Members and Officers if they would continue with the meeting at 8.44pm. All were in favour of continuing.

 

Applicant: G S Property Holdings Limited - Mandeep Singh

Location: Field 4100, Lake Terrace, Melton Mowbray

Proposal: Residential development (up to 90 dwellings) including public open space, removal of material from existing disused railway, landscaping and alterations to existing vehicular access (outline - all matters reserved except access)

 

(a)  The Planning Officer (GBA) presented the report and stated that:

5 Updates to report on this item:-

1.    A late representation from a resident concerned about impacts on the highway network specifically relating to how this would add to school traffic at the nearby roundabout. Also wanted to stress concern about impact on wildlife, destruction of our railway heritage and removal of green amenity land. Final concern about the development potentially overlooking the resident’s house and the noise and disturbance during construction.

2.    The LCC Ecology team have advised of further conditions to bolster the enhancements proposed which will be applied to the application

3.    Further comments from the MBC environmental health team have also been obtained which again confirm the position that the mitigation proposed will be sufficient to mitigate against the noise issues of the site. They confirm that no complaints have been received from those nearby. Further details will be supplied through a subsequent reserved matters scheme for review.

4.    The site meeting on Monday raised some questions including planting of trees. The agent has confirmed that new trees are proposed and hawthorn planting is proposed.

5.    Also just to make clear that public access to the site is proposed to be increased and there would be interpretation boards etc. provided as part of the enhancement scheme. 

 

The following proposal is an outline application including access for up to 90 houses on land to the north of Lake Terrace, Melton Mowbray

 

The scheme proposes a mix of housing that will be confirmed through a subsequent reserved matters application.

The site is not an allocated site for the purposes of the new Melton Local Plan and therefore this engages policy SS1 of our new local plan considering the overall sustainability of the site.

A balance has been struck where the proposal is deemed to be well connected to Melton town therefore affording excellent access to facilities by foot, bike and public transport.

It also proposes quite substantial ecological improvements and accessibility to this with information boards where appropriate.

There is some substantial work proposed to reduce the impact of flooding which has been deemed acceptable by the Environment Agency.

All other technical matters are satisfied through positive consultation responses.

Finally, the scheme proposes contributions in excess of £1m to cover substantial highway improvements, education, surgery, refuse site enhancements and towards library services and facilities.

With all these factors is deemed to contribute squarely to the ambitions of creating sustainable development against the significant need to provide more homes.

This application is therefore recommended for approval as per the  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL10.5

Update Report: Great Lane, Frisby on the Wreake

The Chair asked Members and Officers if they would continue at 9:30pm. All confirmed they were in favour of continuing.

 

Update Report: 17/01325/REM Great Lane, Frisby on the Wreake

 

(a)  The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report.

 

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

·       1 minor adjustment in comparison to 5 recommendations

·       Ignored views of neighbours and Parish Council

·       Over 47% 4 bed/larger properties

·       Shortage of small bed properties

·       Gateway entrance should blend in with current bungalows

·       Originally for 40 properties

·       48% increase in properties

·       Application should be deferred

 

A Cllr asked what is a priority to be addressed.

 

Mr Sercombe stated that all issues need addressing.

 

A Cllr asked if the developers have made an attempt to negotiate.

 

Mr Sercombe advised that they had not.

 

(c)  Bob Widdowson, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Developers have not addressed any issues

·         The development should be an asset, fully integrated, compatible and in keeping

·         Not the right houses or in the right place

·         Bungalows are in high demand but short supply

 

A Cllr asked what the objector’s priorities were and if they had met with the developers.

 

Mr Widdowson stated that the priority is the no. of houses and mix of dwellings. The attempts to meet with the developers were unsuccessful.

 

(d)  Cllr Edward Hutchison, the Ward Councillor, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Revisit housing type and mixture

·         Discussion should take place with developers and ward councillor

·         Developers became negative to further change

·         Better and fairer design needed

 

The Chair asked Members if they would suspend standing orders to allow the agent to speak. Cllr Higgins proposed this and was seconded by Cllr Holmes. All were in favour.

 

(e)  Sally Smith, the agent, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Parking for plots 9-11 has been rearranged to reduce no. of spaces

·         Parking has been moved further away from the boundary of existing properties on Great Lane, a distance of 9.5m

·         Planting along boundary to mitigate noise

·         Frontage is not imposing or overpowering on the street scene

·         Distances between existing and proposed are 34.5m at narrowest point

·         Play area overlooked by 26% of properties

·         Submitted drainage plan

·         Mitigated with land drain along northern boundary

·         Play area will be level and useable

·         Proposed no. of dwellings not defined

·         Design respects sites location and optimises use of land

·         Mix of bungalows agreed with housing officer

·         No. of bungalows increased to 4 to meet requests

 

A Cllr asked why no discussions had taken place with the Parish and residents.

 

Ms Smith stated that they met with the Parish Council and local residents before the application was submitted, and the provision of bungalows was added after listening to residents.

 

A Cllr asked if there was a reason houses could not be moved back.

 

Ms Smith stated that the houses had been moved away from the boundary.

 

A Cllr asked if the issue of single storey  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL11

Considerations of representations and confirmation regarding the Provisional TPO

This item was discussed at the beginning of the meeting.

Development Control Performance: 2017/18 Quarter 4

DC Performance Report Q4 17-18

 

(a)  The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report.

 

The Chair stated that the department is on an upward curve due to an improved performance. Particular note was made that the recent improvement coincided with the appointment of the Development manager and the focus she has been able to apply. It was also noted that this had been achieved before additional resources have had an effect.

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

 

None