Agenda item

Land North of Main Road, Old Dalby

 

Applicant: Mr and Mrs William and Jane Grice

Location: Land North of Main Road, Old Dalby

Proposal: Outline application for residential development, car park and open space

 

(a)       The Applications and Advice Manager (LP) presented the report and stated that:

 

This is an outline application for a residential development, car park and open space.  Access is to be considered at this stage with all other matters reserved.  The application documents state that the development will consist of 7 new dwellings, 3 number 3 bed bungalows and 4 number 4 bed chalet bungalows, along with a car park area for approximately 20 cars to be used by the playing field and school and would also provide some public open space.

Since the publishing of the Committee report, three further letters of representation have been received, stating

•           The proposal would transform Old Dalby into an urban sprawl with land that is present countryside being taken up by more housing.

•           The proposal would bring negative consequences for residents and the environment, with an increase in volume of traffic passing through the village resulting in higher air pollution, accidents and traffic jams.

•           Planning approvals have been granted for approximately 184 dwellings within Queensway/Dukes Road and Old Dalby with no increase in public facilities.

•           The application is profit led with no regard for residents and the environment. 

•           It is doubtful that the proposed car park will be used with people picking children up and dropping them off outside the school gates. 

•           If the area is not lit then it will be a tempting area for young people away from prying eyes, if lit then there will be light pollution ruining the night sky.

•           Old Dalby is a small rural village with very few amenities, and already going to have a lot of new housing

•           The main road through the village already has to cope with cars speeding through on their way to the business park.

These points are similar to those already raised and responded to within the committee report.

A further representation has been received from Old Dalby Cricket Club, who have stated that they object to the notes referring to the application in that the car park is for the benefit of the playing field/cricket field.  The cricket club have stated that this is not the case and that they have full use of the car park at the school which is totally sufficient for player/spectator parking, and that they would not like this to be used as part of the decision making as this isn’t something that has been requested or supported as license holders of the playing/cricked field.

They would also like to draw attention to the fact that the field has been, and is currently ankle deep in water since October last year, they are very concerned that this could pose a possible flooding threat to the cricket field, which would cause major problems and expense.

Along with these comments, clarification has been sought from the education authority with regards to the payment of contributions as part of this proposal should permission be granted.  The Education Authority have confirmed that the threshold for seeking contributions is usually, the development of 10 or more dwellings; however there are a number of development of less than 10 dwellings within the catchment area of the Old Dalby Primary School, cumulatively the impact of these developments will have significant implications for education provision in the area.  Section 106 contributions are therefore being sought to mitigate the impact of this and other developments.  The funding will be used to expand the Old Dalby Primary School and either the Long Field School or John Ferneley College. Therefore a contribution request of £29,534.79 as set out in the report is considered proportionate with the proposed development and is considered to be necessary and specific to the increase in pupils the propos would bring and is therefore considered compliant with CIL Regulation 122.

The agent has commented that there is a potential discrepancy in the report regarding the primary school numbers, in that the report states that there is a deficit of 19 school space, 17 existing and 2 created by this application.  At the last committee meeting application reference 17/00397/FUL – Station Lane reported a deficit of 29 school spaces after approval of that application, the agent has therefore used the figure of 31 spaces in deficit should the application is approved.

The variation is due to timings between consultation feedback on the 2 applications, if members are minded to approve the proposal they may wish to request up to date figures to be obtained prior to a Section 106 agreement being instructed upon.

The Borough is considered to have a sufficient supply of deliverable housing sites in line with current planning guidance, despite Old Dalby being considered a sustainable location for housing having access to various facilities, primary education, local shops and a regular bus service, the site is not allocated as a site for housing in either the emerging Local Plan or Neighbourhood Plan.

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF especially  in terms of housing supply, however the weight attached to the site not being allocated for housing and also the location of the site being outside of the built up confines of Old Dalby on land that provides part of the rural setting to the village outweigh the benefits in this instance, as such the application is recommended for refusal for the reason as set out in the report.

 

The Chair asked Members if they would suspend standing orders to allow two objectors to speak.

 

Cllr Holmes proposed to allow this, and was seconded by Cllr Wyatt. It was unanimously decided that it would be allowed.

 

(b)       Cllr George Schmidt, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Site is not designated for housing

•           Outside of proposed limits of development

•           Not supported by the Neighbourhood Plan

•           Designated area of separation

•           Site is separated from school land by Dalby Brook – harm to environmental setting

•           Lack of need for car park

•           Harm to setting

 

Cllr Posnett joined the meeting at 6.22pm. Due to missing the start of the application, she was unable to vote.

 

(c)        Victoria Lee, on behalf of the pre-school, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Neutral to the proposal

•           Pre-school has no requirement for a car park so should not be a reason to permit

 

A Cllr noted that houses that have already been passed will be built and there will more than likely be pre-school children from this.

 

Ms Lee stated that the pre-school is not currently at its full capacity. They are less likely to need the carpark because of the age of the children – parents will not walk the distance from the carpark to the pre-school with young children.

 

A Cllr asked if there was any school transport at Old Dalby.

 

Ms Lee stated that there was some transport to John Ferneley, and a bus to Nether Broughton but not to Melton.

 

A Cllr clarified that a service bus goes from Nether Broughton to Queensway to Old Dalby.

 

(d)       John Harper, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Contrary to Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan

•           Area of separation – contravenes Neighbourhood Plan

•           Unsustainable

•           Adverse impact

•           Harm outweighs benefits

•           Outside specifications limits to build

•           Need to protect the green space and wildlife

•           No support from residents

•           Inappropriate location

•           School adopted neutral approach, parents will not use

 

 

(e)       Richard Cooper, the agent, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Balance of competing objections

•           Benefit to community

•           Addition of open space and play area

•           Contributions of £14,000

•           Newly approved developments will add to carpark problems

•           School is landlocked

•           Community amenity – Policy CF2 supports this

•           Screening and appearance will be dealt with in full application

•           Benefits outweigh harm

•           Provides options for the future

 

A Cllr asked what process the applicant had gone through to include parking.

           

Mr Cooper stated that there was a long history, but the applicant had been approached by members of the community.

 

(f)      Cllr Leigh Higgins, as Ward Councillor representative, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Support recommendation

•           Encroaches on area of separation

•           Contrary to Local and Neighbourhood Plans

•           Carpark is not a benefit - would prefer further negotiation of what could be achieved

•           Application is only outline and could change at the full application stage

 

A Cllr asked where the area of separation is.

 

The Applications and Advice Manager showed the Members the location of the area of separation from both the Neighbourhood Plan and the Local Plan. Clarified reason for refusal and stated that the area of separation is not in the recommendation and if minded to refuse this wording needs to be added.

 

Cllr Chandler proposed to permit the application as bungalows are much needed.

 

Cllr Holmes seconded the proposal to permit and added that bungalows are affordable and elderly people like to live in bungalows.

 

A Cllr disagreed with this and stated that not all elderly people like to live in bungalows and that the argument to allow the application just because of the bungalows is insufficient.

 

A Cllr agreed with this and stated that the main factor is that it goes against the Local and Neighbourhood Plans.

 

A vote to permit the application was taken. 2 Members voted to permit. 6 Members voted against. 2 Members abstained.

 

Cllr Wyatt moved to refuse the application.

 

Cllr Cumbers seconded the proposal to refuse and added the reason of the site being an area of separation.

 

A vote was taken. 6 Members voted in favour of refusal. 2 Members voted against. 2 Members abstained.

 

Cllrs Chandler and Holmes wished for their votes against refusal to be recorded.

 

DETERMINATION: REFUSED, for the following reason:

 

In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed dwellings would occupy a site outside of the built up confines of Old Dalby on land that provides part of the rural setting to the village and forms part of a designated area of separation. The introduction of seven residential units and parking would result in the erosion of the rural character and appearance of the open countryside, eroding the clarity of the eastern approach to the village through a new development which would detract from the open nature of this rural approach. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies BE1 and OS2 of the Melton Local Plan, Policies S2, H1, ENV1 and ENV7 of the Broughton and Dalby NP, Policies SS2 and EN4 of the emerging Melton Local Plan and the NPPF. These policies seek to ensure a satisfactory appearance to development and to restrict inappropriate development in the countryside and to protect important open spaces and areas of separation.