Agenda item

Land south of Frisby on the Wreake, Leicester Road, Frisby on the Wreake

Reference:	20/00811/REM
Location:	Land South of Frisby on the Wreake, Leicester Road, Frisby on the Wreake.
Proposal:	Reserved matters of layout, appearance, scale and landscaping for the development of 40 houses (phase 1 of the development)

 

(Councillor Browne declared his intention to speak as Ward Councillor on this application and here left the Committee and moved into the public speaking gallery.)

 

The Planning Development Manager addressed the Committee and read out the following updates received since despatch of the agenda:

 

Ward Member comments

‘Over the past nine months I have worked with the Parish Council and listening also to residents about their concerns in relation to this development. The main concern raised has been the road and that fact it is outside the agreed limits to development in the neighbourhood plan. Over the past months there has been much negotiation and through dialogue a compromise position has been agreed that I can accept. The reason for this is that from an engineering perspective there would be greater ecological damage and visual impact due to the way the road would have to be built. A good compromise has been achieved.

 

In addition to the road the developer has listened to concerns about layout, ecology and lack of a small play area and addressed these issues in consultation with me and the Parish Council.

 

Concerns were also raised about access to the primary school from the new development in order to address concerns of additional traffic in the village and this has been taken on board with an access being created into the rear of the school playing fields. Some residents have raised concerns and the developer has further moved the path away from their properties.

 

Finally a concern of the village has been addressed on Gaddesby Lane with regard to pedestrians with the developer agreeing to install a footpath inside the hedge row from the road access which will be adopted by the Parish Council.

 

Overall I feel that we have nearly managed to achieve full compliance with the neighbourhood plan but due to constraints with the site and ground levels it has not been possible to have the road completely inside the limits to development. I am therefore happy to support this revised reserved matters application.’

 

Parish Council comments

‘This was discussed at the Parish Council meeting of 22nd April 2021. It was noted that the access road has now been moved to a new, 'compromise' position within the first field. In addition, it was noted that a new footpath is shown going up to the A607. Matters relating to the school access, the footpath to Rotherby Lane, and the attenuation pond, all of which had now been discussed with residents, are also now agreed, save fine detail. On this basis, it was unanimously agreed that this application can now be supported.’

 

Further Representation (Reiteration of comments previously made)

‘Please find attached document which suggests alternatives for the siting of the School path from the Bowbridge Estate to the back of the school.

 

The document suggests locating the school path beyond plot 40 into the back border of the school. The South East corner of the school grounds. Preference 1. We absolutely support this proposal for the following reasons:

 

- It is close to the original proposed access to the school - this was set out in previous plans.

- It will enable children from both the Bowbridge development and Steeplechase to access the school quickly and easily and therefore reduce traffic congestion at the top of Hall Orchard.

- It is a shorter path and therefore cheaper. Perhaps Bowbridge could support the school with the excess funds with an internal path down the bank on the internal side?

- The Hedgerow Association have asked that buildings are moved away from the boundary and therefore there is a natural space or gap.

- It does not cut across a green field that could be used for natural planting and re-establishment of the animal community that will have been disturbed due to earthworks.

- There is no loss of privacy for residents at the top of Hall Orchard Lane.

 

We have concerns about the Attenuation Basin that we have submitted in a separate document to both MBC and Frisby Parish Council 10/04/21.’

 

Pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 9, Paragraphs 2.8 - 2.28 of the Council’s Constitution in relation to public speaking at Planning Committee, the Chair allowed the following to give a 3 minute presentation:

 

·         Councillor Alex Warwick, Frisby Parish Council

In response to  Councillor Warwick’s comment, it was noted that liaison meetings were regularly held with the Ward Councillors, the Parish Council, Developers and Planning Officers to consider and work through areas of concern on planning applications and this approach worked well in bringing a mutually acceptable proposal to the Committee.

 

·         Jamie Pyper, Director, Nineteen 47

 

·         Councillor Ronan Browne, Ward Councillor

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

·         It was felt that the Ward Councillor, Parish Council, Developer and Planning Officers had worked well together to bring a mutually acceptable application to the Committee

·         Positive lessons had been learnt from this multi-agency approach and all parties were congratulated on the application and it set a good example of collaborative working for the future

·         It was requested that the affordable housing allocation was not passed to the town but made available to the villages in the south of the Borough where discount market housing was needed

·         The success of the footpath negotiation between the developer and a private landowner was particularly mentioned

 

Councillor Holmes proposed the recommendations in the report and Councillor Higgins seconded the motion.

 

RESOLVED

 

That application 20/00811/REM be APPROVED, subject to conditions set out in Appendix A.

 

(Unanimous)

 

REASONS

 

The application site is allocated for housing and outline planning permission for the development has been granted. The principle of the access and the number of units proposed were approved at the outline stage.

 

The proposal as revised would result in a form of development that would be sympathetic to the character of the locality by virtue of its appearance, landscaping, layout and scale and would not unduly compromise residential amenity, or be harmful to highway safety.

 

The scheme is considered to be respectful of, and responds to, the topography of the site with limited intrusion upon the landscape arising from engineering works. It is considered that the proposal would not cause substantial harm to the significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets.

 

It is demonstrated that greater harm to the non-designated heritage assets and the appearance of the landscape would accrue if full compliance with the Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan policies was proposed.

It is considered that for these reasons, there is sufficient justification for the access road of the proposal to depart from the applicable policies within the Melton Local Plan and Frisby Neighbourhood Plan.

 

(Councillor Browne here re-joined the meeting.)