Minutes:
The Committee gave consideration to the report as set out on pages 6 -16 of the agenda, which asked it to determine a planning application for demolition of garage buildings and development of 36 dwellings and ancillary works, along with construction of a new roundabout junction to Welford Road.
Miss H Bareford spoke upon the application on behalf of the applicant, following which the Senior Planning Control Officer provided the Committee with a brief summary of the report.
It was confirmed that in respect of the Notes to Applicant on page 15 of the report, note 4 inadvertently referred to “the scheme required by condition 3”, whereas it should have referred to the scheme required by condition 5. The Committee were also notified that Natural England had requested that an alternative form of wording be used in relation to condition 3, albeit to achieve the same desired outcome.
A Member of the Committee noted that they had recently seen the removal of a number of large trees situated very close to the proposed development site, and asked for confirmation that these works related to another development, rather than the application site, as well as confirmation that the trees were not subject to any preservation orders. Officers confirmed that no preservation orders were in place, and undertook to check that other neighbouring developments were not interfering with trees on adjoining land.
The Committee requested clarification as to why the breakdown of 36 properties proposed in the report distinguished between standard two, three and four bedroomed properties and affordable one, two and three bedroomed properties, and requested confirmation that the building standards applied to both property types did not differ in any way. Officers confirmed that the building standards applied equally to all properties in the proposed development, and often the only visual difference in the properties was the absence of any garage(s) attached to affordable housing.
The Committee did express some significant concerns in relation to flood risk and highway safety, however it was noted that the Responsible Authorities for these functions had not raised any objections. A Member of the Committee also welcomed in particular the East Leicester and Rutland CCG seeking Section 106 funding to increase capacity at the South Wigston Health Centre, as to his knowledge this was the first time such an opportunity had arisen in the Borough.
A Member of the Committee expressed disappointed that the development did not include provision for bungalows, which were said to be in particular demand for the Borough due to the ageing demographic. It was however acknowledged that the Council had no power to force developers to include such properties in their plans. A Member of the Committee also asked that particular attention be given to ensuring the developer’s compliance with condition 14, as current construction projects in other parts of the Borough had caused a particular problem of mud being deposited onto the highway.
It was moved by the Chair, seconded by the Vice-Chair and
RESOLVED THAT:
The application be GRANTED planning permission in accordance with the submitted documents and plans, subject to the prescribed conditions (as amended).
Votes For 7
Votes Against 0
Abstentions 1