Agenda item

Mill Lane, Waltham on the Wolds

20.04pm - 20.10pm Meeting suspended for short break

 

Applicant:     Barwood Homes

Location:      Field Nos 3080 3166 And 5875, Mill Lane, Waltham On The Wolds

Proposal:      Erection of up to 124 dwellings with associated infrastructure and public open space (all matters reserved except means of access).

 

a)    The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services stated that there has been an update to the report and summarised:

 

Comment

The access from this site through land (application 14/00777/FUL) is no longer under the control of Barwoods Homes and is currently up for sale. Therefore this highly important access onto the High Street can no longer be used as a means of connectivity to the village centre

Indeed when CHA were considering this application they mentioned the importance of this access point in their decision and stated that it improved the proposed developments connectivity and isolation from the village. It advised that this important link should even be provided prior to first occupation

As the applicant cannot now claim the use of this land or access point has Highways been informed of the changes as I am unable to find any correspondence relating to this issue

Without the use of this secondary access this development forms an isolated and detached pocket of development with one awkward vehicle access.

Applicants Response

Whilst part of the site is for sale, the freehold of the remaining part of the site is owned by Barwood Homes. Barwood Homes are therefore confident that any link to the wider site to the south can be delivered.

Applicant’s letter

First draft s106 which obviously doesn’t take into account the secondary education contributions yet.

Please note that it has been prepared as a unilateral undertaking so that we may proceed swiftly to obtain planning permission if we obtain a resolution to grant, or proceed swiftly to an appeal if we receive a resolution to refuse planning permission.

Please can you point out to Members that this document secures the very significant benefits of this scheme, which other schemes in the village do not offer, in particular the large amount of POS and the healthcare contribution.

We hope that submitting this now will demonstrate our commitment to early delivery of the scheme.

Consequently, it could help if the s106 was provided to Members as part of the committee papers to clearly illustrate the benefits we are securing. Please can you confirm you are willing to do this?

A Cllr queried where this development would emerge and have access.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services confirmed the access points and where it would connect to High Street.

 

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

• General points for all application still stand.
• The public consultation the developer carried out was flawed, and should be carried out again.
• Historic England stated that this application would harm the assets of the village.
• Neighbourhood plan is strongly against the site.
• The development is for a large housing estate, and is outside the limits of development.
• Against both the local and neighbourhood plans.
• Far exceeds the local plan allocations for the village.
• It harms the village and is not proportionate to the rest of the village.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mr Lusty.

 

c)    Mrs White, as an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

• Proposal is totally disproportionate to the rest of the village.
• Would cause huge damage to the village.
• Sewage and water issues in Waltham still persist.
• Health Centre would be unable to cope with increased demand.
• Internet speeds are already very changeable.
• The school would be unable to handle all the new pupils that this development would bring.
• Access to the site is very poor, and High Street already has significant traffic issues and congestion.
• It is a Greenfield site outside of the development limits of the village.
• All but 5 houses in the allocation to Waltham have already been approved.
• Neighbourhood plan is close to completion and does not allocate on this site.
• Waltham is a conservation village, and Historic England states that this development would cause significant harm to the village.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mrs White.

 

d)    Andrew Gore, representative of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated:

• This application has the least impact of all four applications this evening.
• Highways Authority says that the traffic impact would be small.
• Conservation officer and LCC stated that the heritage impact would be small.
• This development would lead to big contributions to education, traffic calming measures as well as an extension to the health centre.
• 37% affordable housing in this development.
• 43% of total area is open space and green areas.
• It will improve pedestrian and cycle access within the village.
• It is a reserve site in the local plan.

 

A Cllr asked whether the health centre contributions would lead to an extra doctor.

 

Mr Gore responded that the developer have no direct say in how the money is spent, so cannot confirm.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services states that the school issues have been resolved, and that the school has the capacity to be expanded. Health centre issues have been resolved, and that contributions are dependent on the size of the site and the number of proposed dwellings.

 

A Planning Officer (GBA) notes that the highways comments come from the highways department at LCC, and are very accurate.

 

A Cllr commented that the new access would become a rat-run, and that the health centre would not get another doctor.

 

A Cllr asked for clarification about the access points onto High Street.

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services clarifies the access point onto High Street and that it would connect through another site as well.

 

Cllr Chandler Proposed to Refuse – because the development is outside of the local plan and neighbourhood plan, the traffic and access onto High Street is very poor, the scale of development is not needed, it is out of scale with the build form of the rest of the village and Waltham lacks the infrastructure and facilities to cope with a development of this size. The harm would outweigh the benefits.

 

The Chair seconded the motion to refuse – Waltham has now exceeded its local plan allocation.

 

A Cllr states that they agree with the motion and the reasons behind the motion.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services comments that the local plan alone does not carry that much weight, as it has not yet been approved or adopted.

 

A Cllr comments that they cannot support this application as it is far too large and out of proportion with the rest of the village.

 

A Cllr comments that this development is in contravention of the local plan, the application is far too large and would exacerbate the existing traffic and congestion issues on High Street.

 

A Vote was taken. All members supported the motion, and the application was unanimously refused.

 

Motion Carried – Application Refused.

 

DETERMINATION : REFUSED for the following reason

 

The proposed development would be contrary to the emerging Melton Local Plan (polices SS3 and C1) and Waltham on the Wolds and Thorpe Arnold Neighbourhood Plan (policies S1, H1 and ENV 12) and would create a severe impact on highways conditions on High St., Waltham arising from the quantity of traffic generated and the route it would follow. The development is out of scale with the existing built form of the village and there are insufficient facilities to support a development of this size. These impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits arising from the proposals.