Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Boothby, Flemming and Furlong, with the substitution of Councillor Cartwright for Councillor Flemming authorised in accordance with council procedure rule 10.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 30 August 2022.

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

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 30 August be confirmed 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 those that were subject to a Section 106 agreement.

Application for single storey detached dwelling.

Late items received after preparation of main agenda:

Consultation:-

Representation received raising the following points:

·         Boundary line in wrong place

·         Boundary fence previously moved to accommodate a conifer tree, tree now removed and so fence should be moved to previous position

·         Covenant on land preventing building

Officer comment:

The above points raised are considered to be civil matters. A covenant on the land, if this exists, does not prevent planning permission being granted. With regards to the boundary, the Council takes the submitted red line boundary on the location plan to be correct, with a signed certificate provided as part of the application form. Should the boundary prove to be incorrect, the applicant cannot rely on any permission and a new application should be submitted to regularise the boundary line.

Application for single storey detached dwelling.

An objector spoke on this application.

Members wished to explore whether the property could be moved back and it was moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor W Crooks that approval of the application be delegated to the Planning Manager following discussion with the applicant in relation to moving the proposed dwelling back. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – The Planning Manager be granted delegated authority to grant permission subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report following discussion with the applicant on setting the proposed dwelling back.

Application for erection of two dwellings with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space.

Late items received after preparation of main agenda:

Introduction:-

Amendments to address report discrepancies

Para 8.4 to read:

The Emerging Local Plan for 2020-39 has been out for consultation at Regulation 19 draft stage (February to March 2022). The LDS anticipates that the Plan will be submitted in spring/summer 2022, and an estimated date for examination of late summer/autumn 2022. This will increase the weight to be afforded to the new Local Plan. The LDS will be updated following the decision taken at Full Council on 6^th September to enable further work on the Local Plan evidence base to be undertaken, with submission of the Local Plan later in 2023.

Para 8.15 to read:

The Good Design Guide SPD outlines that development will need to provide high quality internal amenity space as this is critical to the quality of life of residents.  This proposal is for two dwellings on site, including demolition of the existing dwelling. Both dwellings proposed are mirror images of each other, with four bedrooms proposed and separate garages together with three off road parking spaces to serve each dwelling.

Para 8.18 to read:

As such this application is considered to be unacceptable in amenity terms and not in compliance with Policy DM10 a and b of the SADMP, The Good Design Guide SPD and the requirements of the NPPF with respect to residential amenity.

Para 8.33 to read:

The proposal is considered to be acceptable when taking into account all of the material considerations set out above.  There are no adverse impacts associated with this development that would outweigh the benefits identified.  Therefore this application is recommended for approval subject to the signing of Section 106 legal agreement and conditions set out below.

Proposed Planning Conditions:

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.    The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the submitted application details, as follows:

                      i.        Site Location Plan - Drg No. 220/PL01 Rev A (Received 29/06/2022)

                    ii.        Site Plan and Block Plan (Received 08/07/2022)

                   iii.        Floor Plans and Elevations (Received 08/07/2022)

                   iv.        Bat Report (Received 29/06/2022)

                    v.        Planning Statement (Received 29/06/2022)

Where the above plans/reports include mitigation measures, these will be delivered in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development in accordance with Policies DM1 and DM10 of the adopted Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2016).

3.    No development shall be occupied until a scheme that makes provision for waste and recycling storage and collection across the site has been submitted in writing to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details should address accessibility to storage  ...  view the full agenda text for item 148.

Application for erection of two dwellings with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space.

An objector, the agent and the ward councillor spoke on this application.

Concern was expressed in relation to the presence of bats, the materials to be used for the development and pedestrian safety. It was moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor R Allen that permission be granted with additional conditions requiring details of bat boxes to be submitted, that the construction materials be agreed with the Planning Manager in consultation with the ward councillor before commencement and that condition 4 be amended to include a warning sign for pedestrians using the footpath. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report and late items and additional or amended conditions as follows:

(i)            To require the detail of bat boxes to be submitted;

(ii)          To require construction materials to be agreed by the Planning Manager in consultation with the ward councillor;

(iii)         To amend condition 4 to include pedestrian signage.

Application for residential development of up to five dwellings including new car park to serve the Fenny Drayton community and demolition of existing bungalow and agricultural buildings (outline – access, appearance, layout and scale to be considered).

Late items received after preparation of the main agenda:

Consultations:-

A further objection has been received since the agenda was published. The objection raises the below points:

1.)       Consultation responses are outdated to the changes in the development

2.)       Applicant is not correctly identified

3.)      The very beginning of this proposal was the redevelopment of redundant farm buildings      only approved under planning rules for permitted development. Otherwise it was a non-starter being development into green belt land; The application before you is for development into green belt land and should be refused.

·                     Petition received on Friday 23^rd September including signatures from 154 residents of Fenny Drayton together with three further electronic confirmation of signing from abroad.

·                     Further representation received from resident raising the following:

·                     A revised tree constraints plan submitted on 31 August, once more, fails to respect six of the veteran yew trees, located in the adjacent churchyard, with an area of root protection in accordance with government standing advice.  It is possible an error has occurred with application of the calculation of 15 x tree diameter.  It appears to have been applied incorrectly to diameter rather than radius of the RPA area.  This is measured from the bark of the tree.  At any rate the RPA indicated on the drawing falls short of requirement. 

·                     I concur with Mr Julian Simpson’s estimate of diameter for Tree 24*.  Once the correct calculation is applied for this tree it is apparent underground services (a SuDs drainage system, including sewers, tank and pump) have been located within the protected root area of Tree 24.  There are many other aspects of the development design which also do not respect the required RPAs.   A tree constraints plan is a mandatory requirement, and this revised submission once more fails to give accurate detail to properly take into account impacts of the design.

·                     These magnificent veteran yew trees, form a rare circle around the church building, adding to its setting and the setting of nearby Grade II listed buildings. These trees are of value for heritage, amenity and biodiversity and are irreplaceable habitat.  Development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats, should be refused unless there are wholly exceptional reasons. NPPF Para 180 (c). 

·                     Further comments received from Julian Simpson, HBBC Tree Officer:

·                     Whilst the tree canopies are shown to be uniform, in reality they aren’t but the overhang measurements shown in red are accurate.

·                     RPA’s shown by red circle also appear to accurately represent 15x stem diameter. I do not though have a scale drawing.

·                     Parking bays are shown to be of “no-dig” construction. With an appropriate level drawing and construction specification this should be workable, especially given that the boundary wall is likely to have restricted root development.

·                     The lay-by parking is in an  ...  view the full agenda text for item 149.

Application for residential development of up to five dwellings including new car park to serve the Fenny Drayton community and demolition of existing bungalow and agricultural buildings (outline – access, appearance. Layout and scale to be considered).

An objector, the agent and the ward councillor spoke on this application.

Some councillors expressed concern about highway safety at the junction with Drayton Lane. Councillor Roberts, seconded by Councillor R Allen, proposed that the item be deferred for further discussion with Leicestershire County Council as highways authority. Following further discussion, this motion was withdrawn.

Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Roberts, proposed that approval be delegated to the Planning Manager following further discussion with the highways authority. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED –

(i)            The Planning Manager be requested to re-consult Leicestershire County Council in relation to highway safety;

(ii)          Should there be no change in recommendation from Leicestershire County Council following the aforementioned consultation, authority be delegated to the Planning Manager to grant permission subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report;

(iii)         Should Leicestershire County Council amend their recommendation, the application be brought back to a future meeting.

Application for erection of a raised patio at the rear of a dwelling.

This application has been withdrawn from the agenda.

This application had been withdrawn from the agenda.

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

Late items received after preparation of the main agenda (this relates to agenda items 12 and 13):

Introduction:-

1.1.            The initial report was sent out with an older version of the red line which did not include Houghton House or the grass verges either site of the access. The plan above is the correct red line showing all the land to which the application relates.

1.2.            At paragraph 9.55 the report incorrectly refers to five additional dwellings – it should be four.

1.3.            Conditions 10, 11 and 12 are duplicates of conditions 7, 8 and 9.

Consultations:-

1.4.            The Sheepy Parish Council now objects to the application. Sheepy Parish Council has reviewed the above applications (21/01501/FUL and 21/1502/LBC) and has considered the proposals in relation to the Sheepy Parish Neighbourhood Plan (Made May 2022) and its legally binding policies and design guide. It has also considered other evidence that has been brought to its attention. The Parish Council is keen to see the refurbishment of Houghton House, the re-development of the outbuildings and landscaping of a design and style that is of a scale and character that is appropriate the rural village setting and complies fully with the policies of both the Sheepy Parish Neighbourhood Plan (made May 2022) and the Sibson Village Conservation Area Management Plan. However, the Parish Council believes the current proposals for the site do not meet these objectives and wishes to object to the planning application. The concerns of the Parish Council are explained below:

·                       The Parish Council is disappointed that the advice of HBBC Planning Committee following its consideration of a previous version of the proposed development has not been heeded. The revised plans (August 2022) seek to accommodate a required increase in parking space provision without a reduction in the number of new dwellings proposed. This has the effect of both increasing the footprint of the development (buildings) and hard standing (parking area/driveway). As a consequence, the garden and green landscaping areas are reduced. The Parish Council consider the development as now proposed to be over-development and therefore not aligned with Sheepy Neighbourhood Plan Policy S8 - Design. The Parish Council considers the revised proposals no longer reflect a positive response to the character of the area as they do not represent development of an appropriate scale, form, and character for the area (Policy S8(D)). Further the necessary increase in the size of the properties (to accommodate the larger parking spaces) and their shift backwards will impact the amenity (privacy level) of property to the rear and the residential amenity of Unit/Plot 1. In the latter case the revised design would lead to an oppressive and over-bearing environment as a result of the proximity of other buildings, adjacent driveways and fencing.

Officer comment: The ground floor footprint of the dwellings has not increased but in order to provide greater width  ...  view the full agenda text for item 151.

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

An objector spoke on this application.

Members expressed concern about the scale, design and layout of the proposal as plot 4 was only 14.3m from the front of plots 2 and 3 and a number of the proposed gardens were undersized. It was moved by Councillor R Allen and seconded by Councillor J Crooks that permission be refused due to the proposal constituting overdevelopment and a contrived form of development and that the level of additional traffic would be detrimental to the conservation area contrary to policy DM10 of the site allocations and development management policies DPD. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the following reasons:

(i)            The proposal constituted overdevelopment and a contrived form of development due to its scale, design and layout and was therefore contrary to policy DM10 of the site allocations and development management policies DPD;

(ii)          The level of additional traffic would be detrimental to the conservation area contrary to policy DM10 of the site allocations and development management policies DPD.

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

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

It was moved by Councillor R Allen, seconded by Councillor J Crooks and

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

Application for reserved matters application in respect of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (outline reference 20/00779/OUT).

Late items received after preparation of the main agenda:

Consultations:-

1.1.             An additional four objections have been received, one of which is from the Parish Council. They reiterate objections already made regarding flooding, relocating the attenuation pond, loss of wildlife, overshadowing and overbearingness. An additional issue regarding increased light pollution is raised.

1.2.             The Parish Council reiterates concerns regarding design of the affordable dwellings and their clustering.

1.3.             As referred to in section 3 of the report the following images have been submitted by the applicant

1.)         Proposed Elevations and Floor Plans Plot 2B

2.)         Proposed Elevations and Floor Plans Plot 4B

3.)         Proposed Street Scenes

1.)

2.)

3.)

Application for reserved matters in respect of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (outline reference 20/00779/OUT).

An objector, the agent and a representative of the parish council spoke on this application.

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Cartwright and

RESOLVED –

(i)            Permission be granted subject to the conditions outlined in the officer’s report;

(ii)          Power to determine the final details of the conditions of planning permission be delegated to the Planning Manager.

Application for change of use of agricultural buildings to B8 storage and distribution.

Application for change of use of agricultural buildings to B8 storage and distribution.

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor R Allen and

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

To report on progress relating to various appeals.

Members were provided with an update on appeals.