Agenda and minutes

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

Contact: Development Control 

Items
No. Item

PL101

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Cllr Posnett, who was substituted by Cllr Smedley

Cllr Wood, who was substituted by Cllr Hewson

Cllr Illingworth

PL102

Minutes pdf icon PDF 135 KB

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.

PL103

Declarations of Interest pdf icon 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.

 

PL104

Schedule of Applications

PL105

19/00560/FUL pdf icon PDF 409 KB

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

PL106

19/00217/FUL pdf icon PDF 581 KB

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

PL107

18/00518/FUL pdf icon PDF 521 KB

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

PL108

19/00365/FULHH pdf icon PDF 396 KB

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

PL109

19/00165/COU pdf icon PDF 403 KB

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

PL110

19/00513/FUL pdf icon PDF 354 KB

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.

PL111

Urgent Business

To consider any other items that the Chair considers urgent

 

Minutes:

None

 

A to Z of Council Services