Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Hodgkins, Ladkin, Roberts, Sutton and Wright, with the following substitutions authorised in accordance with council procedure rule 10:

Councillor Lynch for Councillor Hodgkins

Councillor Morrell for Councillor Sutton.

It was noted that Councillor Crooks would be arriving late.

It was moved by Councillor Ward, seconded by Councillor Taylor and

RESOLVED – Councillor Cook be appointed vice-chairman for this meeting only.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2017.

It was moved by Councillor Witherford, seconded by Councillor Hollick and

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2017 be confirmed and signed by the chairman.

Councillor Cook referred to applications 15/00441/FUL and 17/00776/FUL and stated that she had taken no part in the discussions on them at parish council level.

Councillor Lynch declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 17/00690/HOU as a member of Burbage Parish Council’s Planning Committee.

It was noted that all decisions had been issued.

Application for demolition of existing industrial unit and erection of 61 dwellings.

Late items:

Introduction:-

Submission of a Phase I and II Site Appraisal and further discussions have been undertaken with regards to contamination on the site.

Additional consultation responses have been received.

An amended house type plan has been submitted.

Consultations:-

Environmental Health (Pollution) – no objection subject to conditions

County Councillor P Bedford – Objects to the application due to the lack of provision of contributions towards infrastructure.

Appraisal:-

Design and impact upon the character of the area

An amended plan for the design of house type P113 has been submitted. The plan removes the proposed corbelling detail to the eaves and replaces t with barge boards. Although the finish of the amended design is not as a high quality as the originally submitted, the design and appearance of the dwelling would is considered acceptable and will complement the area. The proposed development would still be in accordance with Policy DM10 of the SADMP and condition 2 should be updated to reflect the submission of the amended plan.

Contamination

An additional Phase I and II Site Appraisal has been submitted. The report demonstrates that there is no identifiable contaminants on the site at this stage other than asbestos, landfill gas monitoring is being undertaken and will continue. The applicant has stressed the need to progress with demolition of the existing buildings as soon as possible and that sufficient information has been submitted to allow safe demolition of the building. Following further discussion it has been agreed with the Environmental Health Officer that further land contamination investigation is acceptable post demolition. However, a Demolition Traffic Management Plan and Asbestos Removal Method Statement are required prior to demolition. Condition 4 should be updated to allow demolition prior to further investigation and the additional details required prior to demolition should be secured through additional conditions. The proposed development would still secure appropriate remediation of contaminated land in accordance with Policy DM7 of the SADMP.

Planning obligations and viability

An additional consultation response has been received from County Councillor Bedford commenting that the application should be refused as it does not deliver contributions towards infrastructure required in the village and the proposed development would therefore be to the detriment of the village. The balance between the harm and benefits of the scheme with regards to planning obligations has been adequately assessed through paragraphs 8.66-8.72 of the case officer’s committee report.

Recommendation:- Approve subject to conditions as set out in paragraph 11.4 of the case officer’s committee report and the following amended conditions:

2)            The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted plans:

70170 D00 rev A – Site Location Plan (received on 23 June 2017)

70170 DO1 rev T – Site Layout (received on 25 September 2017)

70170 D10 rev D – House Type 1A (received on 29 August 2017)

70170 D11 rev B – House Type P113 (received  ...  view the full agenda text for item 170.

Application for demolitions of existing industrial unit and erection of 61 dwellings.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, it was moved by Councillor Boothby and seconded by Councillor Smith that the application be refused due to the lack of need for affordable housing in Bagworth. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was LOST.

Councillor Crooks entered the meeting at 7.02pm.

It was moved by Councillor Hollick, seconded by Councillor Witherford and

RESOLVED – permission be granted subject to:

(i)            the prior completion of a S106 agreement to secure the following obligations:

·         100% affordable housing provision

·         £82,831.00 to primary education

·         Off-site acoustic fence details, provision and maintenance

·         Off-site landscaping details, provision and maintenance;

(ii)           the conditions outlined in the officer’s report and late items.

Councillor O’Shea left the meeting at this juncture.

Application for residential development up to 49 dwellings (Outline – all matters reserved).

Late items:

Introduction:-

Further consultation responses have been received.

Further assessment of the principle of development of residential development is considered below.

Consultations:-

Environment Agency – object to the application as submitted because the applicant has not supplied adequate information to demonstrate that the risks of pollution posed to surface water quality can be safely managed.

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) – The Applicant has failed to demonstrate the impact of the proposed development, such that if it were permitted could result in the unsafe and unsatisfactory operation of the surrounding highway network.

Leicestershire County Council (Ecology) – Whilst some of the site has been developed, the development may impact on areas of grassland and hedgerow and are within close proximity to a pond and watercourse. Surveys should be submitted to ensure no adverse impact on features of nature conservation.

Some consultation responses are outstanding with the consultation period due to expire on 19 October 2017.

Appraisal:-

Impact upon highway safety

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) (LHA) has provided written confirmation of their objection to the proposed development commenting that: The LHA is aware that the site has previous planning history and that the site has extant planning approval for 20 caravan pitches which shall not be occupied by persons other than gypsies and travellers as defined in Annex 1: Glossary to the ‘Planning policy for travellers sites’, published by the Department for Communities and Local Government. In the absence of any supporting technical documentation, the LHA does not accept that this extant planning permission sufficiently demonstrates that in the future, vehicle movements associated with a 49 dwelling development will not impact on the safe operation of the highway. Therefore, the principle of a 49 dwelling residential development being acceptable in highway terms in this location has not been adequately demonstrated.

The proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy DM17 of the SADMP. The potential adverse impact on the safe operation of the highway should be reflected in an updated reason for refusal.

Ecology

Leicestershire County Council (Ecology) has commented that although some of the site has been developed there is potential to impact further on grassland and hedgerows which may be used for habitats and foraging for badgers and bats. Additionally, the site is within close proximity to a pond and watercourse which may be habitats for great crested newts, otters, water vole and white-clawed crayfish.

No ecological surveys were undertaken and submitted for the previous applications on the site. A large proportion of the site has been hard surfaced and therefore the impact on grassland is limited. The development may impact on some hedgerows although the majority could be retained which would be subject to detailed consideration at the reserved matters stage.

The development would not directly impact on water features and therefore consideration relates primarily to exclusion during construction and future phases which could be adequately dealt with through mitigation measures.

As this application is  ...  view the full agenda text for item 171.

Application for residential development up to 49 dwellings (outline – all matters reserved).

It was moved by Councillor Taylor, seconded by Councillor Crooks and

RESOLVED – planning permission be refused for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report and late items, subject to no new material planning considerations being raised during the remaining consultation response period to the 19 October 2017.

Councillor Allen left the meeting at this juncture.

Application for erection of 10 dwellings and associated access.

Late items:

Consultations:-

An additional seven representations have been received since the publication of the agenda. These all object to the proposal, additional points raised which are not identified in the committee report are:

1)          Planning permission has been previously refused for an adjacent development due to poor access onto Atterton Lane

2)          Parish Rooms are booked daily at a minimum of 5 days per week and is the social hub of Witherley, questions have been raised to the practicality of the day to day use and maintenance  of the proposed parking area

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) have raised no objections to the scheme subject to three conditions it is also reiterated that the proposals do not conform to adoptable standards and therefore the area currently beyond the existing adopted Highway boundary will remain private’.

Witherley Parish Council have raised additional concerns with regard to the proposed parking layout in addition to their previous comments. The parish state that the current parking provision for the Parish Room car park is 8-10 vehicles (located alongside the building), however many events attract 20+ cars. Therefore the revised plan does nothing to mitigate the lack of impact on road safety and congestion caused by the lack of alternative off-road parking provision for uses of the Parish Room.

Appraisal:-

Policy DM1 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (SADMP) states that planning applications that accord with the policies in the Local Plan will be approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the reasons outlined in the committee report the proposal is considered to be unsustainable and is therefore contrary to Policy DM1 of the SADMP. The reason for refusal has been amended to include the policy reference to DM1.

Comments have been received with regards to a previous refusal of planning permission within the near vicinity, however no details have been provided as to which application this was. Each site is assessed on its own merits and therefore one planning application cannot be easily compared with another.

The concerns raised with the proposed parking area for the Parish Rooms are discussed in paragraph 8.29 of the committee report and the additional comments received does not alter this assessment.

Recommendation:-

Amend reason for refusal 1 to read:

1. The proposal would result in unsustainable residential development in the designated countryside outside the settlement boundary of Witherley. The proposal would fail to complement or enhance the intrinsic value, beauty, undeveloped rural character of the countryside and the rural setting of the village. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 12 of the Core Strategy (2009) and Policies DM1, DM4 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (2016).

Application for erection of ten dwellings and associated access.

It was moved by Councillor Crooks, seconded by Councillor Ward and

RESOLVED – planning permission be refused for the reasons contained in the officer’s report and late items.

Councillor Taylor left the meeting at 7.48pm.

Application for residential development for two detached dwellings (Outline – access only).

Late items:

Recommendation:-

Amend reason for refusal as follows:

1. The proposal would result in unsustainable residential development in the designated countryside outside the settlement boundary of Desford. The development would also introduce a urbanised built form within an otherwise open rural area. The proposal would fail to complement or enhance the intrinsic value, beauty, undeveloped rural character of the countryside.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DM1, DM4 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Polices DPD (2016).

Application for residential development for two detached dwellings (outline – access only).

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that the application be refused, it was moved by Councillor Surtees and seconded by Councillor Morrell that permission be granted as the development was within a garden, would not be visible from the road and the proposals had received no objections from neighbours. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was LOST.

It was moved by Councillor Crooks, seconded by Councillor Cope and

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the reasons contained in the officer’s report and late items.

Councillor Taylor returned to the meeting at 8.10pm.

Application for variation of condition 3 of planning permission 15/00611/COU to increase the number of children permitted from 42 to 64.

Late items:

Consultations:-

A full 14 day reconsultation was carried out on the amended site layout and parking.

Barwell Parish Council raise additional objections in respect of the site and building being inadequate for additional children, no suitable emergency exit, blocked bus stop during drop off and pick up times.

Six further letters of representation have been received from six separate addresses. The letters received raise the same concerns as previously as well as:

1)         Blocking of the bus stop

2)         Nursery already oversubscribed and overcrowding within the building

Appraisal:-

All letters of representations and concerns raised through the reconsultation and the initial consultation have been addressed in the officer’s report.

Concerns have arisen regarding the blocking of the nearby bus stop during drop off and picking up. The nearest bus stop is located approximately 30 metres from the entrance to the nursery and is situated on the opposite side of the road to the application site. Therefore it is considered that the any on street parking as a result of the application would be situated closer to the site and would not impact upon the existing bus stop given the distance to the

site and the fact any users of the site would have to cross the road.

Concerns have arisen regarding potential overcrowding of the building and the site as a whole being inadequate for the additional children proposed with no suitable exisitns from the premises. However these issues are not material planning considerations in the determination of this application and should any issues arise then this will be covered through Ofsted and Leicestershire County Council Children’s and Young People’s Service.

Application for variation of condition 3 of planning permission 15/00611/COU to increase the number of children permitted from 42 to 64.

It was moved by Councillor Crooks, seconded by Councillor Surtees and

RESOLVED – permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report.

Application for erection of timber post and wire fence adjacent to Kennel Lane (resubmission of 17/00310/FUL).

Late items:

Consultations:-

Four further letters of representation were received raising the same concerns as previously.

HBBC Drainage provided comments which can be summarised as follows:

1)    The planting of a new native hedgerow at the top of the bank should not affect the infiltration capacity of the drainage ditch.

2)    It should be noted that responsibility for maintenance of the drainage ditch will transfer with any change of land ownership, unless other arrangement for maintenance of the ditch are put in place.

Appraisal:-

All letters of public letters of representation and concerns raised have been addressed in the officer’s report.

It is assessed that the comments by HBBC Drainage demonstrate that the erection of the timber post and wire fence with the planting of native hedgerow in the ditch which is located to the rear of no’s 3, 4, 7 and 8 Hunters Walk would not affect the capacity of the drainage ditch to act as a storm soak away area which was a concern expressed by several objectors.

The second point raised by HBBC Drainage which raises the issue of the need to maintain the land following the granting of any permission is addressed by Condition 3 of the Officer’s report.

Application for erection of a timber post and wire fence adjacent to Kennel Lane (resubmission of 17/00310/FUL).

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that the application be approved, members felt that the fence would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area. It was moved by Councillor Cook and seconded by Councillor Surtees that they be minded to refuse permission. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – members be minded to refuse permission and the application be brought back to the next meeting.

Application for erection of fence (retrospective).

Application for erection of fence (retrospective).

Councillor Boothby left the meeting at 9.04pm.

It was moved by Councillor Cook, seconded by Councillor Lynch and

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the reasons set out in the officer’s report.

To provide an update to Members on the number of active and closed planning enforcement cases within the borough.

The committee received an update in relation to ongoing enforcement cases. In relation to the Good Friday site, it was noted that the court had not yet set a date for the trial for an injunction.

In relation to the former police station in Hinckley, it was noted that updated plans in relation to an application to regularise the breaches on the site were expected. Members expressed concern about the poor workmanship on the site.

Update on appeals since the last meeting.

Members noted the progress update in relation to various appeals.