Agenda item

Report of the Barwell & Earl Shilton Scrutiny Group outlining the process followed prior to consideration of the Barwell SUE planning application and lessons learned.

The following late representation has been received from a member of the Scrutiny Group:

Having read the draft report to scrutiny prepared by the chair of the working group, I would like to make the following additional comments.
 
1). Highways
 
Throughout the meetings of the group, the highways modelling results from both the developers model and LCC's model toom a frustratingly long time to be produced.
Further the results put before the group were presented with little or no supporting information for the group to view to attempt to gauge validity of the results provided and the highway works required to accomodate the additional traffic volumes generated by the SUE developments.
 
It is fair to say that the information before the group at the date of writing makes little or no mention of highway modifications in and around Earl Shilton, whilst the plans to further restrict traffic flows in the centre of Barwell seems contradictory to the aim of drawing the additional residents of the SUE into the centre of barwell to promote the village centre and its sustainability.
 
The highway program presented by LCC very late in the day of the Barwell application at first appraisal appear little more than superficial tinkering with a handfull of junctions in the vicinity.
 
At this point I have strong concerns regarding the highways program proposed and the impact on the road system in and around Earl Shilton and Barwell, I would like to see a great deal more investigation and analysis carried out on this area before either development progresses further.
 
2).  Severn Trent.
 
As the Chair has indicated in his report, this has also been an uphill battle to establish the predicted effects and proposed measures to deal with the additional demands placed upon the systems by the additional developments.
 
At this time the group has received very little in the way of any volume data to indicate the impact of the developments upon the water and sewerage systems.
 
In essence the main points that the group has received from Severn Trent is that a new pipeline is to be installed between Barwell and Hinckley to direct sewerage away from the Earl Shilton works and an indication that the Earl Shilton plant will remain operational - probably.
 
Again I have strong concerns regarding the robustness of the plans in place to deal with the additional demands placed upon the water and sewerage systems by the SUE's and at the very least wouldlike to see some form of supporting data from Severn Trent to demonstrate what they believe the impact to be and to allow group members to attempt to assess if the proposed measures are adequate or need to be revisited.
 
3). I have queried the need for the number of additional dwellings in and around Barwell and Earl Shilton - if there is such a demand for housing it seems strange that there are high numbers of properties remaining unsold or unlet for prolonged periods and property sale and rental prices are gradually falling.
Already there a number of permitted developments where the builders are building to order.
 
It is my understanding that the council is in a position to challenge the housing numbers allocated  to it - If correct do we have an indication as to what the revised numbers would be and what steps could and have been taken to reduce the numbers? 
 
As a group I firmly believe that we still have a great deal of ground to cover.
 
 
Richard Allen
Member for Earl Shilton

The Chairman of the Barwell & Earl Shilton Scrutiny Group presented the processes undertaken and the views of the group regarding the process prior to the decision of the Planning Committee on the Barwell Sustainable Urban Extension. In particular, the following points were made during presentation and discussion thereon:

• The group had worked very well and constructively together;
• Leicestershire County Council Highways and the Developer’s inputs had not been as helpful as hoped as there hadn’t been sufficient time to consider the highways recommendations prior to the decision, as they had been received so late;
• Severn Trent Water had also been quite difficult to engage and had not carried through promises made;
• Staff in the Planning service were thanked for their support of the group.

Attention was drawn to the recommendations contained within the report which included the continuation of the Scrutiny Group to monitor the process of the application for the Earl Shilton Sustainable Urban Extension, avoiding over-development of flats, and procuring external legal advice again to ensure consistency with the Section 106 Agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy arrangements.

It was acknowledged that some recommendations were outside of the remit of the Barwell & Earl Shilton Scrutiny Group and the Scrutiny Commission and that they would be matters for determination by Council.

RESOLVED –

(i)         the Scrutiny Group continues to meet to monitor the application process for the Earl Shilton Sustainable Urban Extension;

(ii)        a close eye be kept on the proposed STW pipeline to ensure that it is completed in 2013 as promised so that no addition capacity is put on the Earl Shilton sewage systems or sewage works;

(iii)       it be RECOMMENDED that:

(a)        traffic impact and traffic modelling assessments be put to public consultation as soon as possible following validation of the Earl Shilton SUE application;

(b)        pre-application discussions take place with the developers to ensure that no more flats or apartments are built in Earl Shilton, unless the developers can prove that there is a need for them;

(c)        external legal advice be sought, if necessary, to ensure the best financing of all infrastructure improvements by Section 106 Agreement or Community Infrastructure Levy.