Agenda item

Mere Rd, Waltham on the Wolds

Applicant:     The Trustees of the Ninth Dukes Will

Location:      Land Off Mere Road, Mere Road, Waltham On The Wolds

Proposal:      Residential development of up to 99 dwellings, associated infrastructure and landscaping

 

Cllrs Chandler and Botterill left the meeting at 20:40 for the application 17/00080/OUT, due to prejudicial interests.

 

 

a)    The Planning Officer (GBA) stated that: There has been an update to the report and summarised:

 

Received a late letter from the agent expressing gratitude that the Severn Trent Water issues had been sorted out, but the agent was slightly unhappy that it had taken so long to reach a resolution on the education contributions.

 

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

• Developer did not consult with local people.
• There are benefits of building houses, but 99 houses are out of proportion and are far too large.
• The development would stand out and affect the landscape.
• The surrounding area is sensitive to development.
• It is outside the limits of development and the village envelope.
• It is not included in the local plan.
• Waltham already has its housing allocation up until 2036.
• It is a Greenfield farm site.
• There is no housing need in the area.
• It is out of proportion and out of character with the village.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mr Lusty.

 

c)    Malc Mills, On behalf of Sue Thurlby, was invited to speak and stated:

• Agree with previous comments that remain relevant to this application.
• LEA contributions for education are not confirmed yet.
• Adverse effects of bussing out primary school children to school into Melton Mowbray.
• It is currently agricultural land.
• Greenfield site.
• Huge traffic impacts on both High Street and A607.
• It is outside of the local plan.
• Will have big impacts on the landscape in the village.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mr Mills.

 

d)    Clare Pendle, Agent for the applicant, was invited to speak and stated:

• Lack of objections from technical consultants.
• Landscape effects are small.
• Limited weight must be afforded to both plans, as neither has been approved or adopted.
• The negatives do not significantly outweigh the positives.

 

Cllrs had no questions for Mrs Pendle.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services states that educational improvements depend on development, as more development will lead to greater developer contributions to boost education.

 

Cllr Wyatt Proposed to Refuse the application – the same points stand from the previous applications, and it breaks the character of the village.

 

Cllr Holmes Seconds the Motion to Refuse – it is not included in the SHLAA. Cannot build houses here as it breaks policy C1. There are a lot of traffic issues and it is on a very narrow road, and personally nearly had a crash at this junction recently.

 

A Cllr notes that this is very good quality land, as good quality land is needed to grow root crops, and this is a Greenfield site.

 

A Cllr comments that it will have a huge visual impact on the village.

 

Several Cllrs state that they cannot support this application for the reasons already given.

 

The Chair notes that the meeting has almost been running for 3 hours and motions to propose that proceed with the meeting until a conclusion is reached.

 

Cllr Holmes Seconds this motion.

 

The Vote is held. Councillors vote unanimously in favour of the motion, and it is unanimously agreed to continue until a conclusion is reached.

 

The Vote is held. All Members vote in support of the motion, and the application is 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 would occupy a prominent location and would be harmful to the landscape setting of Waltham on an approach from the east, and there is no identified need for additional housing at this location. These impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits arsing from the proposals.