Venue: By remote video conference
Contact: Democratic Services Team
Link: View Planning Committee Meeting
No. | Item | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chair's Introduction The Chair welcomed everyone to the Planning Committee meeting.
She introduced Members and Officers as well as referred to the public speakers
who would be speaking on individual applications. It was confirmed that all Members present could hear and see
the proceedings and Members could also see the Chair and each other. The Chair
explained that Members would use the functionality of the software to raise
their hands to speak and each Member would be asked in turn for their vote at
the appropriate time. The Chair explained that should the remote conferencing connection
be lost there would be an adjournment. She advised that the meeting would be recorded and
live-streamed on You Tube. |
|||||||
Apologies for Absence Minutes: There were no apologies for absence. |
|||||||
Declarations of Interest PDF 51 KB Members to declare any
interest as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting. Minutes: Councillor Posnett declared a personal interest in any matters relating to the Leicestershire County Council due to her role as a County Councillor. Minute PL27 - Application
20/00391/FUL - 3 Main Street, Grimston Councillor Posnett added that she had received a complaint of being predetermined as she had indicated support for a tweet which demonstrated that the community were supporting the pub which she felt was positive. She confirmed that she came to the meeting with an open mind on the application. Councillor Holmes said that although she had previously lived in Grimston, she had no interest in the application. Councillor Browne confirmed that he would be representing his ward on this application by making a representation to the Committee. He would therefore leave the meeting during debate and voting on this item in accordance with the Council’s Procedure Rules. |
|||||||
Schedule of Applications Minutes: The Chair advised that application 20/00096/FUL had been withdrawn. |
|||||||
Application 20/00391/FUL PDF 352 KB 3 Main Street, Grimston – Change of use: part conversion of public house to 2 bedroom flat, alterations to first floor flat access, conversion of outbuilding to 2 bedroom dwelling, retain part public house Minutes:
(Councillor Browne declared his intention speak as Ward Councillor on this application and therefore here left the Committee and moved into the public speaking gallery.) The Planning Development Manager addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the application. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 9, Paragraphs 2.8-2.28 of the Council’s Constitution in relation to public speaking at Planning Committee, the Chair allowed the following to give a 3 minute presentation: ·
Councillor
Henrietta Maddocks-Wright, Chair, Grimston,
Saxelbye & Shoby Parish
Council In response to a Member question on the number of bed and breakfast
premises in the area, Councillor Maddocks-Wright
responded that there was one other in Grimston and a
couple in the surrounding area. ·
Mike
Petty, Objector ·
Haydn
Wakefield, on behalf of the Applicant In response to a Member question, Mr Wakefield responded that the
applicants had seen the accounts 3 years ago before purchasing the property and
the pub was profitable at that time. With regard to the Council’s coronavirus
support grant, it was noted that as the pub was not trading on 11 March 2020 it
was not eligible for a grant. It was pointed out that the proposal was not for
a micro-pub but had allocated a smaller space for the public house function. ·
Councillor
Ronan Browne, Ward Councillor spoke on the application Following mention of the community’s interest in retaining the pub
possibly as an asset of community value, it was asked how the community was
going to raise the capital to finance the proposal. Councillor Browne responded
that there was interest in buying the pub at the market value and options were
under discussion with the Parish Council and other interested parties. He added
that the community needed at least 6 months to consider all the options to
retain the facility. The Solicitor advised that the question of the pub becoming an asset of
community value was not given as a planning reason for refusal. The Planning Development Manager confirmed that the application was not
for a micro-pub as this was a different type of business, the proposal was to
retain part of the building as a public house. During discussion the following points were noted: · Reference was made to the coronavirus support grant which was only available for businesses that were trading on 11 March 2020 and as this business was not trading at that time, the applicant was not eligible for the grant; · The issue of whether there was a proposal for the pub to become an asset of community value was not a planning consideration nor a reason for the recommendation for refusal in the report; · Grimston was a conservation area and an unsustainable village and there was no proven need for more housing; · It was mentioned that the ... view the full minutes text for item PL27 |
|||||||
Application 19/01386/FULHH PDF 202 KB The Elms, 11 Kings Street, Scalford – Construction of a 2 story extension Minutes:
The Planning Development Manager addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the application. It was mentioned that revised plans which reduced the overall height of the extension had been received but these were not significant enough to change the recommendation. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 9, Paragraphs 2.8-2.28 of the Council’s Constitution in relation to public speaking at Planning Committee, the Chair allowed the following to give a 3 minute presentation: ·
Zoe Sibree, Applicant In
response to a Member question, the applicant responded that the brick barn
would eventually be converted into a TV room. The
Planning Development Manager explained that the offer to reduce the height of
the extension was not relevant to the reasons for refusal as this alone did not
reduce the size of the extension which had the effect of making the host house subservient to the extension.
It was noted that the existing building should remain the prominent feature on
the site and the materials proposed were sympathetic and in-keeping with the
host property. During discussion the following points were noted: · There was a view that did not agree with the recommendation and felt that the applicant should be encouraged to refurbish the farmstead as there were not many left with surrounding land. It was felt to be a well known property and its renovation and investment should be supported as to not do so could put the property into a state of disrepair; · The Solicitor advised that the reasons given for the recommendation for refusal in the report in terms of adverse impact were subjective, however robust planning reasons would be required in order to overturn the officer’s recommendation; · There was clarification that it was felt the harm and scale of the extension was not detrimental to the site as indicated in the officer’s report; · There was concern at supporting permission as the Conservation Officer had objected to the proposal and it was against local plan policies; · There was a suggestion for deferral which could offer an opportunity for further discussions with officers to come to a compromise within the agreed policies; · It was felt that consistency to make decisions in line with policies was important but further dialogue could bring a compromise proposal; · Some Members felt that as the extension could not be seen from the village or neighbouring roads and therefore could not be considered harmful as overbearing then the proposal was acceptable; · It was mentioned that the applicant did not intend to build on the large green area to front of the site and the renovation would be an asset to the village; · The Solicitor pointed out that the green space referred to was not part of the application and was therefore not relevant to the proposal; · It was advised that conditions could be imposed should the application be approved. Councillor Chandler proposed to permit the application as it was considered ... view the full minutes text for item PL28 |
|||||||
Application 20/00096/FUL PDF 253 KB The Elms, 11 Kings Street, Scalford – New agricultural machinery store and stables for use by the Elms Minutes: This application had been withdrawn. |
|||||||
Urgent Business To consider any other items that the Chair
considers urgent Minutes: The Chair advised that the following additional Planning Committee meeting dates had been circulated and these meetings would only go ahead if there was a business need to do so : · Thursday 6 August 2020 · Thursday 3 September 2020 ·
Thursday 1 October 2020 |