Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Cope and Sutton with the substitution of Councillor Cartwright for Councillor Cope authorised in accordance with council procedure rule 4.

In the absence of the vice-chairman, it was moved by Councillor Ward, seconded by Councillor Cartwright and

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

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 21 June 2016.

On the motion of Councillor Crooks, seconded by Councillor Ladkin, it was

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 21 June be approved and signed by the Chairman.

Councillors Cartwright, Crooks, Hodgkins, Hollick, Taylor and Witherford declared personal, non-pecuniary interests in application 16/00444/HOU as the agent was a colleague.

Councillors Kirby, Roberts, Smith and Wright declared personal, non-pecuniary interests in application 15/01119/FUL as the neighbour of the site was known to them.

Councillor O’Shea declared a personal, non-pecuniary interest in application 15/00767/OUT as a county councillor but stated he had had no involvement in the matter at the County Council. His son also lived opposite the site.

It was reported that the section 106 agreement was still under negotiation in relation to applications 15/00188/OUT and 14/01279/OUT.

Development of 260 dwellings (use class C3), formal and informal public open space including children’s play area and associated infrastructure including highways, landscaping and sustainable urban drainage system.

Late items:

Consultations:-

NHS England has responded to the application and have requested a contribution of £143,562.96.

Leicestershire County Council (Flooding) (Lead Local Flood Authority) required some further information which has been submitted by the applicant and have revised their comments to request three conditions relating to drainage of the site.

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) have provided amended comments to the application and raise no objections subject to several additional conditions.

Appraisal:-

Access and Highways

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) have requests nine conditions to be included. Several of these conditions are included within the committee report.

A condition has been requested which requires the development to comply with the standards of the 6 C’s document and submission of details relating to internal layout. The adoption of the road will be secured by other legislation and by LCC Highways and is therefore not considered necessary to secure this by condition.

Conditions are also requested which requires all dwellings to be within 400 metres of a bus stop and provide a plan showing this and submission of details of the internal layout of the scheme. This condition is not considered necessary as the layout is to be agreed with this application and the bus strategy will identify the bus stops which can ensure properties are within 400 metres of a bus stop.

Condition 6 and 7 of the committee report will be amalgamated following comments from LCC Highways, this condition will ensure the same requirements as the previous condition 6 and 7.

An additional condition requiring car parking to be provided and retained permanently and requirement of pedestrian visibility splays are considered reasonable and necessary to ensure highway safety within the development in accordance with Policy DM17 and DM18 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD.

Impact upon Flood Risk

Additional figures have been submitted following a request by Leicestershire County Council (Flooding). Following this information LCC (Flooding) do not object to the application, subject to the inclusion of three conditions. The first condition requires the submission of a surface water drainage scheme; the second condition requires details regarding the phasing of the development and appropriate temporary

measures to be details where necessary; and the third requires the submission of surface water discharge details. These conditions will ensure that measure are taken to ensure appropriate drainage for both the construction phase and at completion and are therefore relevant and necessary.

Developer Contributions (Section 106 obligations)

Health

NHS England has undertaken an assessment of the impact of the development. It is considered that the proposed development would result in an additional patient population of 629 (using the Census household size of 2.42 per dwelling). This would result in 16.54 hours patient appointment time per week for a consulting room and 4.41 patient appointment time per week for a treatment room. The closest GP  ...  view the full agenda text for item 124.

Application for development of 260 dwellings (use class C3), formal and informal public open space including children’s play area and associated infrastructure including highways, landscaping and sustainable urban drainage system.

Whilst in support of the application, a member reminded the meeting that, when the outline application for the development had been considered at the previous meeting, the final agreement on the detail of the S106 agreement had been delegated to a group of six members. An AMENDMENT to this effect was moved by Councillor Witherford and seconded by Councillor Cartwright and subsequently CARRIED.

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

RESOLVED –

(i)            Planning permission be granted subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement and the conditions contained in the officer’s report and late items;

(ii)           Negotiation of the details of the Section 106 agreement be delegated to officers, with the final decision on the terms of the agreement delegated to a group of six members to be agreed by the chairman and the opposition representative for planning.

Councillor Bill left the meeting at 6.45pm.

Erection of 9 dwellings (regulation 3 applications).

Late items:

Consultations:-

No objection to the amended site layout plan, subject to standard highway related conditions, has been received from Leicestershire County Council (Highways).

Groby Parish Council comment that the development would be good for the parish and that it should have a local letting restriction with no right to buy. Concerns regarding parking along Martinshaw Lane if no additional restrictions (double yellow lines) are introduced were repeated.

Appraisal:-

An amended site layout plan has been submitted with minor amendments to the access road and pedestrian footways to address Leicestershire County Council (Highways) concerns in respect of the adoptability of the access road. The amendment also includes the handing of Plots 3 and 4 to retain covered parking for the wheelchair compliant unit (now Plot 3).

Recommendation:-

Amend Condition 2 to substitute the amended Site Layout Plan and handed Plots 3 and 4.

Additional highway related conditions in respect of the access, parking and turning provision.

Application for erection of 9 dwellings (regulation 3 application).

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

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

Residential development (outline – access only).

Late items:

Consultations:-

Four further comments have been received from occupiers of two separate addresses. These raise no further issues to that already identified in the committee report.

Appraisal:-

Developer Contributions

Health

The development could result in an additional 73 patients to the local health centre. The local health centre is Groby Surgery located on Rookery Lane, Groby. The surgery is limited in terms of capacity, space and resources. 73 patients would result in 1.92 hours per week for consulting rooms and 0.51 hours per week in treatment rooms. Contributions are requested towards refurbishment of the existing building and consulting rooms to create multifunctioning treatment rooms, which would increase in the number of services which can be offered to patients in each of the consulting rooms. A contribution of £16,661.52 is requested.

This contribution is necessary, fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development proposed using Department for Health cost multipliers and is essential to relieve the impact of the development on health provision locally and provide for capacity to deal with the increased population that would arise as a result of this development.

Application for residential development (outline – access only).

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that the application be approved, concern was raised in respect of highways and flood risk, although it was acknowledged that the latter was subject to separate assessment.

It was moved by Councillor Cartwright and seconded by Councillor O’Shea that the application be refused on grounds of highway safety. Upon being put to the vote there were six votes for the motion and six against. The Chairman exercised his casting vote and the motion was LOST.

Councillor Ladkin, seconded by Councillor Hodgkins, proposed that the application be approved as per the officer’s recommendation. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was LOST with six votes for the motion and seven against.

It was subsequently moved by Councillor O’Shea and seconded by Councillors Crooks that, due to being unable to reach a decision, the application be deferred. The motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – due to being unable to reach a decision at this time, the application be deferred.

Extensions / alterations to existing 2 retail units and 1 residential unit to form 1 retail unit and 5 self-contained apartments.

Application for extensions / alterations to existing 2 retail units and 1 residential unit to form 1 retail unit and 5 self-contained apartments.

Following concerns raised about highways, the reported wells on the site and the position of the proposed property, it was moved by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Wright that this application be deferred for further information on the wells and to discuss the possibility of setting back the building.

A motion was subsequently proposed by Councillor Taylor to refuse the application due to being dissatisfied with the positioning of the building. In the absence of a seconder, the motion was not put.

Councillor Cartwright moved that it be delegated to officers to discuss the siting with the applicant and approve if an agreement could be reached. In the absence of a seconder, the motion was not put.

It was moved by Councillor Roberts, seconded by Councillor Wright and

RESOLVED – the application be deferred for further discussion on setting back the property.

Erection of one dwelling.

Late items:

Consultations:-

No objection has been received from Severn Trent Water Limited subject to a note to applicant regarding sewer connections and sewer records.

No objection has been received from the Arboricultural Officer.

Two additional neighbour responses received objecting on similar grounds to those contained in the main agenda report and loss of amenity from noise, dust and disturbance during construction.

Appraisal:-

The issues raised within the additional objection responses have been assessed and appraised within the main agenda report. Noise and disturbance during construction would be only temporary in nature and not result in any long term adverse impacts on residential amenity.

Recommendation:-

Additional note to applicant:-

5. The applicant's attention is drawn to the following advice from Severn Trent Water Limited. For the use or reuse of sewer connections either direct or indirect to the public sewerage system the applicant will be required to make a formal application to the Company under Section 106 of the Water Industry Act 1991. They may obtain copies of current guidance notes and application form from either our website (www.stwater.co.uk) or by contacting our New Connections Team (Tel: 0800 707 6600). Severn Trent Water advise that although statutory sewer records do not show any public sewers within the area specified, there may be sewers that have been recently adopted under, The Transfer Of Sewer Regulations 2011. Public sewers have statutory protection and may not be built close to, directly over or be diverted without consent and you are advised to contact Severn Trent Water to discuss your proposals. Severn Trent will seek to assist you obtaining a solution which protects both the public sewer and the building.

Application for erection of one dwelling.

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

RESOLVED – planning permission be granted subject to the conditions in the officer’s report and late items.

Single storey front extension.

Application for single storey front extension.

It was moved by Councillor O’Shea, seconded by Councillor Ladkin and

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

A report showing progress on all appeal cases was presented to the committee. It was noted that, since publication of the report, the start date of the appeal on the Good Friday site had been received and the decisions on Stretton House and Cold Comfort Farm had been received.

Officers were thanked for their involvement in the appeal on Land East of Wallace Drive.

RESOLVED – the report be noted.