Agenda and minutes
Venue: Parkside, Station Approach, Burton Street, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, LE13 1GH
Contact: Development Control
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: Cllr Posnett, who
was substituted by Cllr Smedley Cllr Wood, who was
substituted by Cllr Hewson Cllr Illingworth |
|
To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting. Minutes: Minutes of the meeting held on
20th July 2019 A Cllr wished for the spelling
mistake of ‘compliant’ to be corrected on page 3, 5th paragraph
down. Approval of the minutes was proposed by Cllr Faulkner and seconded by Cllr Steadman. It was unanimously agreed that the Chair sign them as a true record. |
|
Declarations of Interest PDF 429 KB Members to declare any
interest as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: Cllr Chandler
declared a personal interest in application 19/00560/FUL and stated that she
would leave the meeting for the discussion and determination. |
|
Schedule of Applications |
|
Fields OS 2571, 4565 and 3251 Barkestone Lane, Plungar Minutes: Cllr Chandler left the meeting at 6.06pm 19/00560/FUL Applicant: Duchess of Rutland Location: Fields OS 2571, 4565
and 3251 Barkestone Lane, Plungar Proposal: Retention of fertilizer silo and water
tank. (a)
The Development Manager (LP) presented the
report and stated that: The application is for the retention of a fertilizer silo
and water tank at Barkestone Lane, Plungar, the requirement for a planning
application has been raised by the proposal being retrospective and therefore
not able to be considered under the prior notification assessment. The site totals 35 sqm comprising
a concrete base which supports a single 50 cubic metre liquid fertilizer
storage tank and a 26,000 litre vertical sprayer tank, which are to be used in
relation to the farming activities belonging to the Belvoir Estate. Since the committee report has been published 2 additional
representations have been received which raises concern over spill capture and
visual impact, comments have now been received from the Canal and River Trust
who recommend that Natural England are consulted in order to obtain appropriate
advice to identify whether the proposal presents any likely risk to the SSI and
if so, whether they can be adequately mitigated. The application is recommended for refusal due to the
prominent location causing visual harm to the open countryside and surrounding
landscape contrary to Policy EN1 of the Local Plan. The siting in this location is also
considered to cause harm to the setting of the Grade II* listed Church of St
Peter and St Paul and the Grade II listed Manor Farmhouse contrary to Policy
EN13 of the Local Plan. (b) Cllr
Smith, from the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that: ·
Lack of application ·
Retrospective ·
Substantial harm to setting ·
Contrary to Policy EM1 ·
Insensitive siting ·
Rural setting ·
Planning permission should have been sought
first ·
No evidence of it being necessary in this
location A Cllr asked when the silos were built and when the
complaints started. Cllr Smith stated they were built approximately 2 years ago
and complaints started before this year. (c) Cllr
Evans, the Ward Councillor, was invited to speak and stated that: ·
Location concerns ·
OS Survey trigger point ·
Location of Grad II listed buildings ·
Multitude of footpaths providing views ·
Concern on late information circulated ·
No justification of site ·
A less intrusive site could be found ·
Visual intrusion ·
Lack of security and potential for vandalism ·
Area is constantly used – there is often flytipping ·
Concrete base would not contain fertiliser if it
were to leak Cllr Holmes proposed
to defer the application as she had concerns about the late submission of
information and it should be looked at properly and shared with the Parish
Council and local people. Cllr Cumbers seconded
the proposal to defer and stated that Members should not be presented with
extra information at the meeting and that it is needed well in advance. A Cllr stated that they could not support a deferment and noted that the late letter would have been the agent’s 4 minute speaking ... view the full minutes text for item PL105 |
|
Land West of Bowling Green, Leicester Road, Melton Mowbray Minutes: Cllr Chandler returned to the meeting at
6.35pm 19/00217/FUL Applicant: Countryside
Properties (UK) Limited - Olivia Hoare Location: Land West of Bowling Green, Leicester Road,
Melton Mowbray Proposal: 14 residential dwellings comprising 10 x 2
bed units and 4 x 3 bed units (a)
The Assistant Director
of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report. (b)
Chris May, the agent,
was invited to speak and stated that: ·
No technical objections ·
Social benefit outweighs
concerns of Developer Contributions ·
Affordable mix of houses ·
Meets needs for
affordable housing ·
£50,000 contribution
from developer ·
Local people will occupy
homes ·
Incorrect to assume
increase in services is needed ·
Sustainable location ·
Travel contribution not
necessary ·
Site will be left
undeveloped if not accepted A Cllr asked what green aspect it will take
and if there are plans for grounds, solar tiles, and materials. Mr May stated that the materials will be in keeping
with the site, designed to a high specification and to Homes England
requirements. A Cllr stated there will be over 100 houses
in the area and asked what play facilities will be available, and the size of
the leap. Mr May advised that there is a public open
space to the north of the site and if a leap is required this can be secured by
S106. A Cllr if the planning department are content
to recommend to permit in the light of LCC response. The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning
and Regulatory Services confirmed they are because the LCC response was
expected. There is a choice between delivering affordable housing and
forfeiting developer contributions, or the need to follow Policy IN3. A Cllr stated there are 111 properties and 53
of those will be affordable housing. However the previous application was for
shared ownership or affordable rent, and there has been a huge change. The NPPF
paragraph 64 says at least 10% affordable home ownership and the figures have
to be contended. Did not think this proposal is policy compliant. Of the 53
affordable homes not one is affordable home ownership in terms of a starter
home or a discount market home in perpetuity to the residents. Cannot support
this type of application, however might be able to support subject to this
being conditioned and negotiated. A Cllr stated that if £187,000 from the
County Council is divided by 14 it is £16,000 a house. Extra services are not
needed as these are for local people. Suggested the application needs deferring
to go into it in more detail. A Cllr was concerned that it is too expensive
and people cannot get on the housing ladder. Houses need to be affordable all
the time and therefore must consider being green. A Cllr stated that local people should be
prioritised. A Cllr stated that the agent said the
developer would consider adding equipment to the play area but could we
possibly ask for an amount of money towards a possibility of something in the
south of the town. The Assistant Director of Strategic ... view the full minutes text for item PL106 |
|
Catherine Dalley House, Scalford Road, Melton Mowbray Minutes: Applicant: McCarthy And Stone
Retirement Lifestyles Ltd Location: Catherine Dalley House, Scalford Road, Melton Mowbray Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings, erection
of 46 retirement apartments, 10 bungalows, communal facilities, landscaping, access,
car parking and ancillary development. (a)
The Development Manager
(LP) presented the report and stated that: The application is for the
demolition of existing buildings notably the former care home and Silverdale
Lodge and proposes the erection of 46 retirement apartments, 10 bungalows, and
associated works. Of the total 56 homes being proposed, 23 are 1 bed living
apartments, 23 are 2 bed living apartments and 10 are 2 bed bungalows. The scheme consist of a single building in the form of a 3 and 2 storey L shaped block occupying a similar part of the site to the existing car home building. Bungalows are proposed to have a dormer style and there is sufficient outdoor space associated with the development and additional tree planting and landscaping envisaged. The proposal will have traditional materials and the design will reflect the character of the original house. A Financial Viability Assessment has been submitted as part of the proposal and independently assessed by the District Valuer Service which concluded that a planning policy compliant scheme is not viable, and that the proposed scheme can only viably support an affordable housing offsite contribution of £210,000 together with contributions towards the NHS of £24,307 and Libraries of £1,340 the agent has confirmed that an offer of £235,647 in line with the independent viability conclusion is made. In order for the scheme to be policy compliant a sum of £706,893 would be requested. It is considered however that together with the positive nature of the scheme in design terms and the provision of a form of housing for which there is a recognised need for this is sufficient to justify the shortfall in contributions and the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions and the requisite Section 106 agreement being made. (b) Neil Martyn, the agent, was invited to speak
and stated that: ·
Well
designed scheme ·
Positive
use ·
No
technical objections ·
Lots of
public support ·
Sustainable
location ·
Meets
identified local need ·
Good
mix of housing including bungalows ·
Complies
with Planning Policy A Cllr asked if the
site will be gated or if the green areas will be open to the public. Mr Martyn stated
that the garden space will not be accessible to the public as there is the
safety of the residents to consider. A Cllr asked if any
trees will be taken down as these screen the noise and should be retained. Mr Martyn stated
that the trees at the front will be retained as these all have TPO’s. The only
tree being taken out is a small one to widen access. The Chair stated
there is a well established hedge and asked if the fence will be on the inside
of the hedge, or if the hedge is being removed. Mr Martyn stated that it depends on the ownership ... view the full minutes text for item PL107 |
|
42 Avon Road, Melton Mowbray Minutes: Applicant: Mr & Mrs A Abrames Location: 42 Avon Road, Melton
Mowbray Proposal: Side and front extension to form an annex
and a two storey rear extension to include demolition of existing garage. (a) The Assistant Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report. (b) Mr C Ward, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that: · More like a small bed and breakfast than an extension · 5 bed home needs 3 parking spaces – insufficient space for this · Extension comes out 5m from the front and prevents view · Original extension and proposal exceeds permitted square footage the Council policy allows · Boundary position on plan appears to be incorrect · One of the datum points was taken from middle retaining wall · Retaining wall belongs to neighbouring property and has right of access · Wall already prepared for past neighbours at a cots of £750 · Drawing comes within 8 inches of retaining wall · Distance between drawings and main wall of the house would be 51inches · Lift would cause excessive noise · Lack of communication with LPA · Extension is out of character A Cllr asked if the
window on the plan is the same window Mr Ward was referring to. Mr Ward stated that
if the building comes out past their property they would not be able see down
the road. A Cllr asked if it
will affect the light. Mr Ward stated it
will affect the view but a shadow from the extension may also affect the light. (c) Mrs Abrames, the
applicant, was invited to speak and stated that: ·
Extension
is needed due to needs of mother and care for children ·
More
space and bedrooms are needed ·
Windows
are in roof so neighbour will not be overlooked ·
Building
lines kept back to reduce impact ·
Structural
Engineer hired to help ·
Party
Wall Act engaged ·
View
cannot be seen through dense trees ·
Lift
does not make noise ·
Moving
out of home to ensure building will be done quicker The Assistant
Director of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that there is a
requirement for 3 spaces for which there is ample space on the property. There
are no specified limits to the scale of a property and it should be judged on
impact. There will be no shadowing or lack of light as it is due north. Right
of access and the Party Wall Act is not a planning condition so cannot be
adjudicated by the Committee as part of this determination. A Cllr stated that
the development takes the whole of the site and it is dangerous. If there was a
fire at the back of the house there is no way to it. Could be configured
differently. A Cllr stated that
it is a mass development and out of character of the area. It is a fire risk as
there is no access to the back. A Cllr stated that the view is not a planning consideration, however the wall is very close to the neighbour’s window. Concerned about the use ... view the full minutes text for item PL108 |
|
24-26 Pate Road, Melton Mowbray Minutes: Applicant: Mr Lewis Wardle Location: 24-26 Pate Road,
Melton Mowbray Proposal: Proposed retention of a Crossfit Gymnasium.
Change of use from B2 to D2. (a)
The Assistant Director
of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report. (b) Jeremy
Watkinson, an objector, had a statement read out by the Assistant Director of
Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services and stated that: Following the publication of the planning departments report
and recommendation with regard the change of use of units 24-26 Pate Road, Leicester
Road industrial Estate (Planning Application Number: 19/00165/COU) from
B1/B2 to D2 use, My initial concerns I raised with the Council Chief
Executive are now a grave reality, we are heading for a U turn on the Melton
Plan. The planning officer has decided that sport and recreation
take precedence over what is meant to be a safeguarded space for industry and
employment. If MBC does not stand by the very comprehensive and
meticulously constructed Melton Plan it will send completely the wrong message
to businesses looking to move or expand in Melton, when MBC then makes changes
so freely on what appears to be the recommendation of one planning officer to
valuable industrial and employment space that had specifically been safeguarded
for very good reasons in the Melton plan and was approved by the full council
members. It would appear that the author of the planning report is
the same planning officer that had given pre-application planning advice to the
applicant and so it could be seen as a conflict of interests and maybe why the
planning report looks so biased with missing and incorrect key facts. The amount of industrial space in the Melton plan is
measured in square feet/meters and not in the number of industrial
units. There would be a clear loss of B1/B2 space if the application was
approved units 24-26 are 4160 square feet, the gyms previous unit number 32 was
only 1400 square feet, this unit also had no change of use, so the space was
included in the Melton plan reports for the total industrial area for
Melton. If the application is approved we will see a lose of 4160
square feet of B1/B2 industrial space this will mean businesses like my own
will find it impossible to expand and take on additional staff without moving
out of Melton. The membership of the gym is given as 90+ in the applicants
supporting statement with plans to increase the membership in the new site. LHA in their original consultation response asked for the
number of gym users so they could determine the amount of parking required,
this question has never been answered? The planning officer’s report now only puts membership at
60-70?? Since the extra parking was created by the gym last month I
have noticed we still get on-street parking from gym members when their own
parking is full, please can we look at the true facts on these numbers. My own business PPC Labels in units 16 & 18 has 4500 ... view the full minutes text for item PL109 |
|
9 Lyle Close, Melton Mowbray Minutes: Applicant: Mr & Mrs Wyles Location: 9 Lyle Close, Melton
Mowbray Proposal: Single storey rear and first floor side
extensions. (a)
The Development Manager
presented the report and stated that: The proposal is a householder application for the erection
of a single storey rear and first floor side extension to dwelling, the
proposal is before you as the applicant is a member of staff. The proposal would provide for a larger bathroom and
additional bedroom at first floor level and the addition of a utility room to
the ground floor. The development is
considered to be subservient to the host dwelling and sympathetic to the
character of the area, having no detrimental impact on either the street scene
or the amenity of neighbouring occupants, and therefore recommended for
approval subject to conditions. Cllr Chandler proposed to permit the application. Cllr Holmes seconded the proposal to permit. A vote was taken. It was unanimously decided
the application should be permitted. DETERMINATION: APPROVED, subject to the conditions as set out in the
report REASONS: The development would appear subservient to the host dwelling and be sympathetic to the character of the area, having no detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the site and the street scene. Proposed materials would ensure the development respects the existing dwelling and wider character of the area. The proposed development would therefore accord to Policy D1 of the Melton Local Plan and the overall aims of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. |
|
Urgent Business To consider any other items that the Chair
considers urgent Minutes: None |