Agenda item

Sandy Croft, 31 Sandy Lane, Melton Mowbray

 

Applicant:     Richard, Peter and Gill Kendall

Location:      Sandy Croft, 31 Sandy Lane, Melton Mowbray

Proposal:     Residential development of up to 12 dwellings on land to rear of 31 Sandy Lane, Melton Mowbray

 

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

The application seeks outline planning permission for up to 12 dwellings, the only item for consideration at this stage is access to the site which is served by an existing access onto Sandy Lane.

The site is partially brownfield land currently hosting garages, to which the leases have since expired.

The application site is in a sustainable location within the Town and would provide a housing mix of mostly smaller 2 and 3 bed dwellings along with the provision of bungalows and therefore is recommended for approval subject to Section 106 contributions and conditions as set out in the report.

 

 

(b)  David Hargrave, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

·         Objections submitted to indicative plan

·         Should be a reduction of propertied and redesign of layout

·         Site suits single storey buildings

·         Protect environment and quality of lives

·         Loss of amenities

·         Overbearing

·         Japanese Knotweed issues – this needs to be eradicated

 

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

·         Site hidden from view

·         Maintenance too excessive for owners

·         Complies with Policies SS1 and SS2

·         Sustainable travel links

·         Unallocated land

·         No objection from technical consultees

·         Mixture of dwellings

·         Existing perimeter screening retained

·         Existing access reused

·         Pedestrian access

·         Bus stop retained

·         Design will be developed at Reserved Matters

·         S106 contributions

 

A Cllr asked if the developers will make sure DEFRA treat the Japanese Knotweed properly.

 

Mr Cooper stated that it would be dealt with before the land is sold.

 

A Cllr asked if amenity land would be provided, as 10+ houses need amenity land.

 

Mr Cooper stated that the development is for houses, however there will be an improved ecology strip. There is scope for amenity land.

 

A Cllr stated there would be parking to accommodate 31 Sandy Lane, and asked how many beds this is.

 

Mr Cooper stated it is a 3 bed dwelling.

 

A Cllr asked if there was a pond on the site.

 

Mr Cooper stated there is but it was not visible during the site visit.

 

A Cllr stated that it is a viable site with substantial plots, and asked if affordable housing could be secured.

 

The Assistant Director for Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services explained that it could be inserted into the S106.

 

A Cllr asked if a condition for amenity land could be considered.

 

The Assistant Director for Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services explained that this would need to be an amendment to the proposition.

 

A Cllr stated that they were in favour of the development but had concerns on the houses facing Victoria Street. Car parking is an issue and this could worsen it.

 

A Cllr stated that the development might not need to be up to 12 dwellings and does not need to come onto Victoria Street.

 

Cllr Holmes proposed to permit the application and instructed that the subsequent ‘reserved matters’ application is presented to Committee for determination details. Conditions should be added to ensure there is sufficient car parking, amenity land, affordable housing and materials.

 

Cllr Cumbers seconded the proposal to permit and added that it is a good use of land.

 

A vote was taken. It was unanimously decided that the application should be permitted.

 

Determination:

(a)   PERMIT, in accordance with the conditions set pout in the report;

(b)   That the reserved matters application subsequent to this permission are determined by the Planning Committee (rather than under delegated powers).

 

REASON: A finalised layout for up to 12 dwellings could be agreed at reserved matters stage that would not have any significant amenity or design impacts with regards to Policies SS1, SS2, D1 and C2 of the Melton Plan 2011-2036 and the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle.