Agenda item

Field Nos 1586 and 9982, Washstones Lane, Frisby On The Wreake

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Simon Read

Location: Field Nos 1586 And 9982, Washstones Lane, Frisby On The Wreake

Proposal: New dwelling and outbuilding.

 

The Case Officer (GBA) stated that:

 

This is a full planning application for one house on land off Washstones Lane, Frisby on the Wreake.

 

There are no updates to the report

 

This is an application for a single dwelling proposal with all matters of design, access and landscaping for consideration. Whilst located in a sustainable village and therefore being acceptable in principle the specific location on this site is deemed to be too remote from the village to be classed as part of the village.

Walking to the centre of the village to access its services is challenging and therefore this further means that the development is difficult to describe as sustainable.

 

Finally, there are unresolved concerns of flooding as an acceptable sequential test is yet to be provided.

 

As such the application is recommended for refusal.

 

Members agree unanimously to let the Ward Councillor address the committee, despite not being a registered speaker.

 

Cllr Baxter, on behalf of the Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Frisby is a small and rural village

·         This application is outside the village envelope

·         The neighbourhood plan is past examination and is going to referendum, so has significant weight

·         The local plan says that Frisby needs to take an allocation of 68 dwellings, and the neighbourhood plan allocated 78.

·         98 permissions have already been granted within the village

·         There is the risk of urban sprawl across Frisby

·         The original consent for the site has not been adhered to

·         This development is for another new dwelling

·         This application should be refused with the officers recommendation

 

Councillors had no questions for Cllr Baxter.

 

Jonathon Ball, as an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         This is a countryside development

·         This application will set a precedent within the village

·         The site is within flood zone 2

·         High risk of flooding, so a sequential test is required

·         The sequential test with this application is not sufficient

·         It is near the railway line, which cannot be mitigated against

·         There are highways issues on site, and it is near a blind bend and within a 60mph limit

·         Location is too remote to the village

 

Councillors had no questions for Mr Ball

 

Liam Doherty, as the agent, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         This is a brownfield site

·         It is on the edge of the village

·         Previous permission for barn was granted in 2013

·         This will be a carbon neutral home

·         Sequential test is sufficient

·         Gate and footpath link to the village

·         The development is sustainable

·         This is an exceptional design

·         The benefits outweigh the harm for this application

 

A Cllr questioned the increase in hardstanding area on site for the increasing flood risk.

 

Mr Doherty replied that it was not significant as it is a brownfield site.

 

Cllr Hutchinson, as Ward Councillor, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         There used to be a football pitch near this site, before a cricket pavilion was built near the site roughly 15 years ago

·         This pavilion had to be build an extra 4ft higher due to the increased flood risk

·         This site is still within flood zone 2

·         Frisby has already met its allocation in both local plan and neighbourhood plan

·         The access is on a 60mph road

·         This site is near to the railway line

 

A Cllr questioned the frequency of flooding on the site

 

Cllr Hutchinson responded that the site is within flood zone 2, and floods regularly.

 

The Case Officer (GBA) responded that the Highways issue is not significant, according to the Highways authority. The sequential test could be a lot better. Carbon neutrality is a positive, but does not outweigh all the negatives. The footpath would not be well used, and it is outside the village envelope.

 

Cllr Holmes proposed refusal of the application, in line with officer recommendations.

 

Cllr Baguley seconds the motion for refusal, due to the risk of flooding, it is outside of the village envelope and has pedestrian issues.

 

A Cllr commented that the sequential test is poor, and was seen on the site visit, and must be consistent in decisions with other applications.

 

A Cllr commented that they agree with the motion for refusal, in line with the neighbourhood plan, as it is outside of the village envelope.

 

A Cllr stated that the report was very good and agree with the reasons for refusal.

 

A Vote was taken on the motion for refusal.

 

11 Councillors supported the motion.

0 Councillors opposed the motion.

0 Councillors abstained from the vote.

 

The motion passed unanimously. The application was refused.

 

REASONS:

1.         The development, if permitted, would result in an unjustified form of sporadic development, beyond the  settlement confines of Frisby-on-the-Wreake  and remote from the village centre, and would be harmful to the rural character and appearance of the area and street scene, contrary to the aims and objectives of policy BE1 of the Melton Local Plan and objectives of the NPPF, in particular paragraphs 14, 17, 55 and 109.

 

2.         The Local Planning Authority consider insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate under a sequential test that, given the application site's status under land designated as Flood Zone 2, alternative sites with a lower probability of flooding could accommodate the proposed residential development. The proposal therefore is contrary to Paragraph 102 of the NPPF.