Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Cope, Furlong, Lynch and Roberts with the following substitutions authorised in accordance with council procedure rule 10:

Councillor Sheppard-Bools for Councillor Lynch

Councillor P Williams for Councillor Cope.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 7 June 2022.

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor W Crooks and

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 7 June be approved and signed by the chairman.

No interests were declared.

To report progress on any decisions delegated at the previous meeting.

It was reported that all decisions delegated at the previous meeting had been issued with the exception of application 20/01250/FUL which was subject to a S106 agreement.

Application for demolition of existing outbuildings, refurbishment of a Grade II listed residential property, erection of four dwellings and associated external landscape works.

Late items received after preparation of main agenda:

Consultations:-

Comments received from Cllr Collett from local residents summarised below:

1)     A terrace of three houses in the back garden of Houghton House is not acceptable in fill in. Sibson which is a settlement that has been designated a rural hamlet .

2)     The new houses are proposed on a site which is within the village conservation area

3)     Because of the excessive number of houses proposed car parking can only be provided by some double length spaces below first floor bedrooms. The inadequacy of parking with no spaces for visitors and deliveries will result in on street parking contrary to the intentions of the Sibson Conservation Area Management Plan.

4)     On street parking is only possible by use and obstruction of the pavement. The village has two totally blind and two partially blind residents who would be severely inconvenienced and put in danger.

5)     The houses in the village below Houghton House have suffered several damaging flooding events and the residents live in fear of heavy rain . The flooding is caused by surface water run off and an increase in non permeable surfaces of the scale proposed by this application will put them in even great danger.

6)     Whist Houghton House, a heritage building, is in urgent need of restoration there is no mention in the application of any of the four new build houses being enabling development.

Conclusion:-

·           Para 10.1 (Conclusion) of the report should refer to Sibson (currently refers to Burbage).

Application for demolition of existing outbuildings, refurbishment of a grade II listed residential property, erection of four dwellings and associated external landscape works.

An objector and the ward councillor spoke on this application.

Members expressed concern in relation to the five substandard parking spaces which formed part of the application. It was moved by Councillor J Crooks and seconded by Councillor Hollick that the application be deferred to a future meeting to allow for discussions with the applicant around reducing the proposal to three dwellings to enable sufficient standard parking provision. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was unanimously

RESOLVED – the application be deferred for further discussion with the applicant.

Application for demolition of existing outbuildings and refurbishment of a Grade II listed residential property

Application for demolition of existing outbuildings and the refurbishment of a grade II listed residential property.

An objector and the ward councillor spoke on this application.

Having deferred application 21/01501/FUL on the same site to allow for discussions with the applicant around reducing the proposal to three dwellings to enable sufficient standard parking provision, it was moved by Councillor J Crooks, seconded by Councillor Hollick and unanimously

RESOLVED – the application be deferred for further discussion with the applicant.

Application for construction of entrance gates and wall (part retrospective)

Application for construction of entrance gates and wall (part retrospective).

An objector and the ward councillor spoke on the application.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, members felt that the proposal would constitute a form of uncharacteristic development that would significantly harm the open character and appearance of the application site and would erode part of the intrinsic value and beauty of the countryside contrary to policies DM4 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and specifically policy DM10(c) which requires that an application compliments or enhances the character of the surrounding area with regard to scale, layout, density, mass, design, materials and architectural features. Members also requested that enforcement action be taken against the development that had already taken place without permission.

It was moved by Councillor R Allen and seconded by Councillor C Allen that permission be refused for the aforementioned reasons. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was unanimously

RESOLVED – permission be refused as the proposal would constitute a form of uncharacteristic development that would significantly harm the open character and appearance of the application site and would erode part of the intrinsic value and beauty of the countryside contrary to policies DM4 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and specifically policy DM10(c) which requires that an application complements or enhances the character of the surrounding area with regard to scale, layout, density, mass, design, materials and architectural features.

Application for erection of palisade fencing (retrospective).

This application has been withdrawn.

This application had been withdrawn.

Application for dual hip to gable end roof extension, installation of roof lights to front and rear roof slopes and detached garage

Application for dual hip to gable end roof extension, installation of roof lights to front and rear roof slopes and detached garage.

Whilst generally in support of the application, members felt that the proposed garage would be out of keeping with the streetscene and that it should be moved away from the boundary. It was moved by Councillor R Allen and seconded by Councillor Bray that, whilst minded to grant permission, the decision be delegated to officers following discussion with the applicant to request they move the garage away from the boundary. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was unanimously

RESOLVED – the decision be delegated to the Planning Manager following discussion with the applicant in relation to moving the garage away from the boundary.

To report on progress relating to various appeals.

Members received an update on appeals. Whilst not the subject of an appeal, members requested that enforcement action be commenced on the site at Breach Lane Farm, Earl Shilton in relation to the application which had been refused by the committee in March.

The report was noted.