Agenda and minutes

Cllr Holmes and Cllr Bains sent their apologies.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting on 14^th June 2018

Minutes of the meeting held on 14th June 2018

 

The Chair requested amendments on behalf of Cllr Higgins who had been present as a substitute at the previous meeting. Amendments requested as follows:

 

• 17/01577/OUT, The Old Clay Pit, Grantham Road, Bottesford. – The developer was asked if they were committed to delivering 32% affordable housing. They confirmed that they were. It was not an informal chat.
• 16/00615/OUT, Field No 4564, Burrough Road, Somerby – Page 14 The Ward Cllr stated - 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.
• 17/01500/OUT, Field 4100, Lake Terrace, Melton Mowbray – Clarification of condition for the decision, regarding £813,382 towards strategic road improvements. Conditions should read: 36 affordable homes and 2/3 bed properties must be secure. The ecological enhancement should be conditioned. The contribution towards the distributor road should be invested in to Lake Terrace and not just the bypass.

 

The Chair asked if Members agreed that this is what was said. They confirmed they did.

 

Approval of the minutes, subject to the above amendments, was proposed by Cllr Posnett and seconded by Cllr Greenow. It was unanimously agreed, by the members who were present at the previous 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 Rhodes and Cllr Posnett noted that they are both also Members of LCC and may have had input in to some of the items being discussed whilst in their role as a County Cllr.

 

Cllr Greenow declared an interest in application 18/00531/OUT, Land off Craven Street, Melton Mowbray, due to direct contact with residents of Craven Street, which could be a perceived bias.

 

Cllr Posnett declared an interest in application 18/00407/FUL, Gates Nurseries And Garden Centre, Somerby Road, Cold Overton, due to family members being employed at Gates.

Westbury, Hose Lane, Long Clawson

Applicant: Mrs Bryan

Location:  Westbury, Hose Lane, Long Clawson

Proposal: Link extension to connect garage to house and new stair access to first floor attic bedroom

 

(a)  The Development Manager stated that: This application is a householder application that seeks permission for the addition of a link extension to join the existing double garage and residential dwelling.  The link measures 5 metres in length and 7 metes in width with a height to match the existing garage.

 

The link would provide an entrance hall and dining room to ground floor and a landing to the first floor which would provide access to two bedrooms.

 

The proposal is presented to you as a member call in request, there are no updates to the report and the application is recommended for approval as per the officer report.

 

(b)  Elizabeth Swain, agent on behalf of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that: the agent and applicant had been working with the officer for sometime on the application and there had been no issues until a neighbour objection has been received. There was a previous application for a garage to the side which had been built and there were no issues. The family has increased in numbers hence the need for the additional space. It has been designed to be subservient to the original building and the materials chosen to give a lightweight finish. The proposed extension is also stepped back on the front and back to ensure subservience. It will provide additional living space and easier access to the accommodation upstairs in the loft space.

 

A Member noted that the previous application was in 2003 and had not been executed in the way it was approved. The current application is trying to regularise what has been done before. It looks odd and there are outstanding problems. How does it fit in to produce a coherent property? It is currently a shell of a building. The planning conditions were not complied with previously so how do we know they will be this time?

 

Elizabeth Swain responded that it would be down to planning enforcement should they not comply. The previous application had gone past the 10 year time limit so not enforcement action could be taken now. It had not been fully completed however if this application was approved it would be completed and help this extension work with the existing house.

 

A Member noted that the floor level of the garage is 2 feet below what is required and a car wouldn’t be able to drive in to it

 

Elizabeth Swain explained that it is still a garage space and that the landscaping and driveway is not complete. When they are completed it would bring it up to the correct level.

 

The Chair noted that condition 4 stated that the garage was not to be used as anything other than a garage.

 

A Member felt that this still doesn’t regularise the garage issue.

 

A Member asked for clarification with regards to  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL18.1

Gates Nurseries And Garden Centre, Somerby Road, Cold Overton

Applicant: Mr Nigel Gates

Location: Gates Nurseries And Garden Centre, Somerby Road, Cold Overton

Proposal:  Application for full permission for construction of a new retail unit (A1 use)

 

(a)  The Development Manager stated that: This application relates to a full    planning application for the introduction of a new retail unit at gates nursery and garden centre which is an established business, the key dimensions of the proposal are 33.5 meters by 18.5 metres with a ridge height of 7 metres. The use will be as an extension to the existing buildings for increased retail use.

The application is presented to you as a departure to policy, there are no updates to the report and the application is recommended for approval as per the officer report.

 

(b)  Maurice Fairhurst, agent on behalf of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         It is a popular rural business in the borough.

·         Employs over 100 people.

·         Makes an important contribution to the economy.

·         Mature landscaping ensures no significant impact.

·         It will be a pleasant looking building and provide an enhanced shopping experience.

·         It will improve business efficiency.

·         No harm to the landscape and local amenities.

·         There are no objections from neighbours.

·         In line with the NPPF.

·         In accordance with strategic policies in the new local plan.

·         No objections from highways.

 

A Member asked for clarification of the proposed use.

 

Maurice Fairhurst responded that it is for general retail use and has been assessed on that basis.

 

Cllr Posnett  declared an interest in this application as she has relatives that work at Gates.

 

 

Cllr Botterill proposed to permit the application and added that it is a successful business that brings people together as friends and family around the area use it to meet up.

 

Cllr Baguley seconded the proposal.

 

A Member offered their support but added that they wouldn’t like to see so many additions to Gates that it becomes that big that it has an impact on the surrounding area.

 

The Chair reminded Members that they could assess this in the future if other applications come forward.

 

The Chair read out a statement from the Ward Cllr, Cllr Higgins: 

I support the officer report and recommendation to permit and would see this as a good asset to the Somerby ward for enterprise and employment.

 

A vote was taken and the Members voted unanimously to permit.

 

Determination: PERMIT, subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

 

Reason:  In conclusion it is considered that, on balance of the issues, there are therefore significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of boosting the rural economy.  Applying the ‘test’ required by the NPPF that permission should be granted unless the impacts would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits.  Taking into account the proposed retail unit would be an expansion to the existing; it is considered that permission should be approved.

 

Land off Craven Street, Melton Mowbray

Applicant:     Dr Ervin

Location:      Land off Craven Street Melton Mowbray

Proposal:      Outline application for the erection of one dwelling

 

Cllr Greenow left the meeting at 6.33pm due to his declaration of interest.

 

(a)          The Applications And Advice Manager stated that: This application seeks outline planning permission for the erection of one dwelling, the application is in outline with all matters reserved, there is therefore no detail presented for consideration solely the principle of residential development in this location, it should be noted that the submission follows a previous identical permission reference 15/00286/OUT, the reason for the submission is that the permission expired in May of this year.

The application is presented to you due to the number of representation received, representations have been considered accordingly, however given the previous approval and the nature of the submission which is outline with all matters concerned the application is recommended for approval as per the officer report.

The Chair advised Members that more than one objector wished to speak and asked if Members would suspend standing orders to allow this. Cllr Posnett proposed to permit and Cllr Glancy seconded it. The Members voted unanimously to allow more than one objector to speak.

 

The Development Manager advised that she had received a number of photos from the objectors and asked if they were happy for these to be shown during both of their presentations.

 

(a)  Dr Wood, on behalf of the objectors, was invited to speak and stated that:

 

·         She is the owner and occupier of 52 Craven Street which is adjacent to the proposed development site.

·         According to planning policy it is inappropriate development of a garden.

·         There are mature shrubs and trees. Removal of these would have an impact on aesthetics and wildlife.

·         Prevent infill development in the Sandy Lane area.

·         There are no details with it being an outline application. The impact on boundaries is unknown.

·         It would overshadow our kitchen and nursery.

·         Loss of privacy to ours and neighbouring properties.

·         Currently predominantly Georgian style houses. A new build may affect the street scene.

·         No mention of access in the proposal. There is no access from Craven Street. The house that the garden belongs to is currently accessed via Ankle Hill.

·         It would create significant impact on traffic on Craven Street and the parking along the street. Parking is already an issue.

·         Access would impact on the current difficult parking situation and pedestrian and road safety.

 

A Member asked for clarification regarding who owns the hedge between the

properties.

 

Dr Wood replied that the boundary is currently in question and she is not sure who it belongs to as there are fences within the hedge.

 

(c)        Chris Adams, on behalf of the objectors, was invited to speak and stated that: he echoed much of Dr Wood’s comments. His main concern was the access on to the property and traffic calming measures. Parking is already an issue but adding an access would add an impact to this as it could be a  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL18.3

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

 

None