BLABY DISTRICT COUNCIL

Meeting: Development Control Committee

Date: 21 August 2014

Subject: Planning Applications for Determination

Report author and contact details:

James Carpenter

Development Services Manager

james.carpenter@blaby.gov.uk

0116 272 7691

Status: Public

1. Purpose of Report 1.1 To determine planning applications as listed in paragraph 5.2 below and

detailed in the attached report

2. 2.1

Recommendation That the recommendations listed within paragraph 5.2 below and detailed in the attached report be approved.

3. Forward Plan

3.1 Not applicable. 4. Key Decision 4.1 Not applicable. 5. Matters for Consideration 5.1 To avoid unnecessary delay in the processing of planning applications, the

recommendations included in this list must often be prepared in advance of the closing date for the receipt of representations. This list was prepared on 12 August 2014 and information of representations received will be updated at your meeting. This updating will also cover any other information which may come to hand in the intervening period. Closing dates are given where they fall on or after the day of preparation of the list.

5.2 Application No. Page

No. Site Address

Recommendation

14/0186/1/OX 14/0498/1/PX 14/0569/1/PX 14/0595/1/OX 14/0651/1/PX 14/0675/1/PX

10 19 29 49 57 66

Land rear of 1 & 3 Hillsborough Road and 57-65 Leicester Road Glen Parva Oak Tree Cottage Hinckley Road Sapcote Land off Forest House Lane Leicester Forest East Land rear and side of Church View House Cooks Lane Sapcote Land to the rear of 28 The Roundhills Elmesthorpe Bumble Bee Farm Bumble Bee Lane Sharnford

REFUSE APPROVE APPROVE APPROVE APPROVE APPROVE

5.3 Other Options Considered These are included where appropriate as part of the reports relating to each

individual application. 6. Appropriate Consultations

Details of organisations / persons consulted in relation to the applications are included in the reports for each individual application. Members will be aware that full copies of correspondence received are available to view on the respective planning file.

7. Resource Implications

There are no specific financial implications arising from the contents of this report.

8. List of Background Papers

Background papers are contained in files held in the Planning Division for each application being considered.

CE DR: MO:

CPH:

14/0186/1/OX Registered Date Mr. Stuart Chalmers 29 May 2014 Demolition of existing bungalow and outbuildings and

erection of 2 pairs of semi-detached bungalows and 6 terraced dwellings and associated access and parking (Outline).

Land Rear of 1 & 3 Hillsborough Road and 57-65 Leicester

Road, Glen Parva. Report Author: Satu Pardivalla, Planning Officer Contact Details: Council Offices. 0116 272 7692 RECOMMENDATION: THAT APPLICATION 14/0186/1/OX BE REFUSED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON:- It is considered that the proposal would be harmful to the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring and proposed dwellings by reason of noise, disturbance and loss of privacy. In addition, in an area characterised by large gardens the proposal would be undesirable as it would constitute a cramped form of development not in character with the area. As such, the proposal would not be in accordance with the guidance set out in the NPPF and the National Planning Practice Guidance, and policies CS2 and R1 of the Core Strategy and the Local Plan respectively. NOTES TO COMMITTEE Relevant Planning Policies National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Section 7 – Objective of achieving good design and contributing positively towards making places better for people. National Planning Practice Guidance (2014) Design: Aims to secure high quality design. Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013) Policy CS1: Strategy for locating new development - Seeks to direct new housing development within and adjoin the Principal Urban Area (PUA) of Leicester. The PUA comprises of “built up” areas which includes Glen Parva. Policy CS2: Design of new development – Promotes the application of good design principles including layout to achieve high quality places.

Policy CS5: Housing Distribution – Seeks to distribute new development in the most appropriate locations. Glen Parva is identified as a settlement of focus within the PUA. Policy CS8 – Housing Mix - Requires proposals for development of 10 or more dwellings to provide an appropriate mix of housing types. This is guided by the Housing Mix and Affordable Housing SPD. Policy CS10 – Transport Infrastructure - Indicates that the District Council will seek to reduce the need to travel by private car by locating new development so that people can access services and facilities. Policy CS11 - Infrastructure, Services and Facilities to Support Growth - Indicates that new developments should be supported by the required physical, social and environment infrastructure at the appropriate time. CS12 – Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions - Seeks to ensure that the requirements for infrastructure, services and facilities arising from any development will be sought in accordance with the Council’s latest Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions SPD. Policy CS15 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation - Seeks to ensure that all residents have access to sufficient, high quality, accessible open space, sport and recreation facilities. Policy CS24 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development - Reflects the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) (1999) Policy R1 - In relation to new housing development in primarily residential areas and relationship with neighbouring development having regard to considerations of privacy, light noise, disturbance and overbearing effect. Other Supporting Documents None relevant. Consultation Summary Blaby District Council, Waste Operations – No objections - Consideration should be given to the emptying of waste bins due to the length of the private drive and presents two solutions:

• The proposed access should be designed to accommodate refuse vehicles, and a turning area provided.

• A bin storage area is provided at the end of the access adjacent to its junction with Hillsborough Road.

Blaby District Council, Housing Strategy – No objections - The housing mix is acceptable. Blaby District Council, Environmental Health – No objections - Recommends a condition requiring landfill gas. Leicestershire County Council, Highways– No objections - Recommends approval; subject to conditions. Leicestershire County Council Developer Contributions – No objections - No developer contributions required. Leicestershire County Council, Ecology – No objections - The Ecology Survey is satisfactory. The building to be demolished has been assessed as having moderate potential for the presence of bats; surveys of nocturnal emergence/re-entry have to be carried out before permission is granted. Glen Parva Parish Council – Objections – the Parish Council comments are reiterated in full below.

• “This is an over-intensification of the site and with high density, with an adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

• The proposed development is out of keeping with the area and the local scene.

• The proposed car park layout is inadequate.

• The access is restricted for emergency vehicles and refuse vehicles.

• Clarification is required about the responsibility of the condition of the existing boundary wall.

• Clarification is required about the existing pedestrian access to 55A & 55b Leicester Road. Will this be retained?

• If approved, this development should be constructed as ‘Eco Build’ with renewable energy, rainwater harvesting, permeable blocks and grey water flushing.”

Severn Trent Water – No objections - Subject to a condition requiring details of foul and surface water drainage. Third Party Representations Six letters of objections have been received from the occupier/s of Nos 3, 11 and 13 Hillsborough Crescent; and 1, 3 and 7 Hillsborough Road. A summary of the representations received is set out below:

• Lack of information on building heights and boundary treatments.

• Noise, air and light pollution.

• Out of keeping with the character of the area.

• Overlooking and loss of privacy.

• Disturbance during the construction phase.

• Increased traffic which would be detrimental to highway safety.

• Security problems and damage to property.

• Loss of wildlife.

• Loss of views.

• Property maintenance.

• Potential damage to external walls and foundations. Recent Relevant Planning History 92/0214/1/OX - Proposed erection of five retirement bungalows - Approved 11.6.1992. 95/1136/1/OX - Erection of three bungalows - Refused 16.11.1995 - Appeal dismissed. EXPLANATORY NOTE The Proposal The proposal is for outline planning permission to erect ten dwellings comprising of a mixture of four semi detached bungalows, and two rows of three (two storey) terraced houses on an area of land which currently forms the curtilage of No 55b Leicester Road. As part of the application details for approval have been submitted for access, layout and scale; details of appearance and landscaping have been reserved. The application site is an area of backland behind dwellings with long gardens which front onto Leicester and Hillsborough Roads. Access in the form of a drive some 9.2 metres wide and 70 metres long will be from Hillsborough Road, between Nos 3 and 7 through an area of land formerly occupied by No5 Hillsborough Road which was demolished due to its derelict condition. Supporting Documents The following documents have been submitted as part of the planning application:-

• Design and Access Statement

• Ecological Report. Planning Considerations Section 38(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other material considerations which indicate otherwise. This section of the report will first consider the proposed development against the policy background and then consider any other material considerations. There are a number of themes which run through national guidance as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework and these are generally in line with local policies expressed through the Development Plan. Key themes in the case of this application are that new development should be sustainable and the promotion of

good design. NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) The National Planning Policy Framework establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. The emphasis is on development plans to allow for development of sufficient housing in sustainable locations, and that new development is of good design. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (2014) provides supporting guidance to the interpretation of the NPPF and reiterates its objective of achieving good design. DEVELOPMENT PLAN Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) The adopted Core Strategy (February 2013) is now part of the Development Plan for the District of Blaby. It is an up-to-date plan that is consistent with National Policy and therefore, the policies of the Core Strategy should be given full statutory weight. The following policies are the most relevant to the proposed development. Policy CS2 – Design of New Development Policy CS2 seeks to ensure that a high quality environment is achieved in all new development proposals, respecting distinctive local character and contributing towards creating places of high architectural and urban design quality. The design of new development should also be appropriate to its context. Policy CS5 – Housing Distribution Policy CS5 aims to focus new development in the most appropriate locations and the District Council seeks to distribute housing by settlement in accordance with the figures contained within the Core Strategy. Policy CS8 – Housing Mix Policy CS8 requires proposals for development of 10 or more dwellings to provide an

appropriate mix of housing types. This is guided by the Housing Mix and Affordable Housing SPD. Policy CS10 – Transport Infrastructure Policy CS10 indicates that the District Council will seek to reduce the need to travel by private car by locating new development so that people can access services and facilities. Policy CS11 - Infrastructure, Services and Facilities to Support Growth and Policy CS12 – Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions Policy CS11 indicates that new developments should be supported by the required physical, social and environment infrastructure at the appropriate time. Policy CS12 seeks to ensure that the requirements for infrastructure, services and facilities arising from any development will be sought in accordance with the Council’s latest Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions SPD. Policy CS24 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy CS24 reflects the overarching principle of the NPPF that the Government wishes to see in relation to the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Policy CS24 requires that when considering development proposals the District Council will take a positive approach and will always work proactively with applicants to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible. Your Officers have worked with the applicant to ensure that the development is acceptable with regards to planning policy and it is considered that the proposals are in accordance with Policy CS24. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) (1999) Although the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) has been adopted a number of policies from the Blaby District Local Plan (1999) continue to be saved. The following policy is of relevance to this application. Policy R1 – Primary Residential Areas Policy R1 states that planning permission will be granted for residential development in Primarily Residential Areas except where the proposed development would have an unsatisfactory relationship with other nearby uses and detrimental to amenities of occupiers of those properties by reason of loss of privacy, light, noise disturbance and overbearing effect. Other Material Considerations Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise, and whether those material considerations are of such weight that the adopted policies of the Development Plan should not prevail in relation to any proposal.

In addition to the policy considerations set out above, the main issues that need to be taken into account in the consideration of this application are as set out below. Principle of backland development The application site can be described as backland in that it is for residential development on land which lies to the rear of existing properties. Residential backland developments have a role to play in delivering housing targets for the District, however, they also have potential for creating significant impacts in the communities they are located. Although the principle of such development can be acceptable, the issue that needs to be addressed in the consideration of this application is whether the impacts generated are acceptable – these are considered below. Planning History and Appeal Decision The principle of backland development on this area of land was accepted when a planning application for five retirement bungalows (92/0214/1/OX) was approved on 11 June 1992. On this occasion however access was to be provided along the western boundary of the application site, from Hillsborough Road between Nos: 1a and 3 through a gap to be provided by the demolition of No 1 Hillsborough Road. Permission 92/0214/1/OX could not be implemented as the purchase of No 1 to facilitate the access proved not to be possible. What this meant in essence was the access had to be re-sited, in a position closer to the existing bungalows on Hillsborough Crescent. Subsequently application 95/1136/1/OX with a reduced number of dwellings (three) and revised access arrangements was submitted. The proposal was to demolish No 5 Hillsborough Road (this dwelling has since been demolished) to provide an access route further to the east of the access proposed under 92/0214/1/OX. The application was refused on grounds of adverse impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the dwelling located on Hillsborough Crescent arising from bringing the access closer to these dwellings. The appeal was dismissed. The critical difference between applications 92/0214/1/OX and 95/1136/1/OX being that under the former the access drive was set a considerable distance away from the bungalows which front on Hillsborough crescent but which back onto the application site. Thereby any adverse impact of the earlier proposal on the amenities of the occupiers of the dwellings on Hillsborough Crescent was considerably less In considering the appeal against the decision to refuse 95/1136/1/OX the Inspector was particularly concerned at the impact of the activity associated with the proposed access drive and concluded that the impact would be harmful to the living conditions by reason of disturbance and intrusion. The current application is similar to the appeal application in relation to its access arrangements.

Site and Access The main impacts that need to be taken into account are the size of the site, capacity of the access and the impact of the development on the neighbouring properties in particular through loss of privacy and nuisance arising through noise and disturbance. The application site is an area of land measuring some 37 metres by 68 metres, a total of ten dwellings are proposed. Access to the site will be from Hillsborough Road through a strip of land around 10 metres in width and about 80 metres in length. The Highways Authority has recommended approval for a drive with a width of 4.5 metres subject to conditions relating to visibility splays and construction details. The proposed access will be about 10 metres away from the rear elevations of Nos 1a, 1, 3, 9 and 11 Hillsborough Crescent, about 17.5 metres away from Nos 5 and 7. The passing of traffic and pedestrians by reason of the width and length of the access and closeness will be an intrusion to the occupiers of these dwellings. A strip of land, about one and a half metre wide, separates the drive from the boundaries of these dwellings. An effective barrier against disturbance and intrusion could not be provided on this strip without being oppressive and aesthetically displeasing. Vehicular and pedestrian movements generated by the development will flow in front of proposed plots 1-4, and to a lesser extent the remaining plots. Such traffic activity will be detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers due to noise, disturbance and loss of privacy. Privacy and Overlooking The submitted draft layout plan indicates that plots 1-4 are two pairs of semi detached dwellings bungalows, Plots 5-7, and 8-10 are two rows of three two storey terraced houses. Plots 1-4 will face the rear of bungalows (Nos 5-11) facing Hillsborough Crescent) with a separation distance of some 24.5 metres. The gable end of Plot 10 will be some 20 metres away from the gable end of No 13 Hillsborough Crescent. To protect privacy nationally accepted good practice requires a minimum distance of 21 metres between “living area” windows of facing properties. The separation distances to neighbouring dwellings are therefore acceptable. Having said this, the draft layout plan shows that the front of the proposed properties will be sited behind the access road. It would not be feasible to adequately protect the privacy and amenities of future occupants of the proposed dwellings from vehicular and pedestrian moments directly in front of these properties. It is therefore considered that the proposal will result in an unacceptable level of loss of amenity of future occupants of the proposed dwellings through noise, disturbance and loss of privacy arising from vehicular and pedestrian traffic along the drive.

Garden Development New developments on parts of large gardens are not uncommon. Gardens are often in excess of modern lifestyles, and are well beyond the needs of their existing owners with maintenance a burden and not a pleasure. Notwithstanding this, in some areas large gardens are a defining characteristic of the place, usually instances such as this where frontage development predominates. In these areas piecemeal higher density backland development with small gardens is out of character and should be resisted. Conclusion Backland development has a role in delivering housing targets, with the presumption in favour of sustainable development being the golden thread running through national and local policy. In this instance it is considered that the proposal would be harmful to the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring and proposed dwellings by reason of noise, disturbance and loss of privacy. In addition, in an area characterised by large gardens the proposal would be undesirable as it would constitute a cramped form of development not in character with the area. As such, the proposal would not be in accordance with the guidance set out in the NPPF and the National Planning Practice Guidance, and policies CS2 and R1 of the Core Strategy and the Local Plan respectively. This position was supported at appeal by the Inspector in deciding application ref 92/0214/1/OX. For these reasons it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

14/0498/1/PX Registered Date Mr R Smith 20 May 2014 Change of use of land to form Gypsy caravan site (11

pitches) and conversion of existing stable block to form day room/welfare facilities -

Oak Tree Cottage, Hinckley Road, Sapcote Report Author: Ian Davies, Development Management

Team Leader Contact Details: Council Offices. 0116 272 7688 RECOMMENDATION: THAT APPLICATION 14/0498/1/PX BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE IMPOSITION OF FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Statutory time condition – 3 Years. 2. Occupation restricted to Gypsies only. 3. Permission limited to 11 pitches only. 4. No commercial activity (including external storage). 5. Landscaping scheme to be submitted. 6. Landscaping scheme to be carried out and retained thereafter. 7. Drainage details to be submitted and agreed and subsequently implemented. 8. No development to commence until Severn Trent approval given for foul

sewage from amenity block to be accommodated by the mains sewer. 9. Details of boundary fencing to be agreed and subsequently implemented. 10. No additional fencing or ancillary domestic buildings to be erected without

permission. 11. Scheme for proposed lighting of the site to be submitted and agreed and

subsequently implemented. 12. Construction Management Plan to be submitted, agreed and implemented, to

avoid adverse effect on adjacent SSSI.. 13. Existing stable block to be converted to welfare facilities in accordance with

the approved plans prior to construction of the pitches. 14. Access drive not to be widened nor altered nor resurfaced without agreement

first being obtained in writing from the District Council. 15. Concrete bases not to be provided to the individual pitches due to potential

impact on site drainage and adjacent SSSI. 16. Permission relates to amended plans. NOTES TO COMMITTEE Policy National Planning Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (2012) Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013) Policy CS1 – Strategy for locating new development Policy CS9 – Accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers Policy CS18 - Countryside Policy CS24 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) Policy C2 – Other Development in the Countryside. Other Supporting Documents Gypsy and Travellers Accommodation Assessment (April 2007) – Study commissioned jointly between all authorities within the Leicester and Leicestershire housing market area. Leicestershire and Leicester Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment Refresh (May 2013) Consultations Blaby District Council Environmental Health Officer – Has raised comments on the submitted details but has no objections in principle. Elmesthorpe Parish Council – Has combined their comments for both this application and application 14/0501/1/VY (which has not yet come before Committee) and has no objections and comments as follows: “Elmesthorpe Parish Council has been consulted regarding the two above applications under the Adjacent Parish Notification procedure. These two applications appear to be closely linked, both applications relating to land at Oak Tree Cottage and the Applicant being the same person in both cases, and the Parish Council has accordingly considered the overall effect of both applications. In view of the Applicant’s proposal to replace the 11 pitches involved in Application 14/0501/1/VY with 11 new ones at the same address under Application 14/0498/1/PX, together with the provision of new facilities with a day room/welfare facilities, the Parish Council does not object to these applications.” Environment Agency – Has no objections to this proposal. Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council – Has no objections. Leicestershire County Council Ecology – Initial holding objection on the basis of the potential impact on protected species and adjacent SSSI. Following the submission of additional information/ecological surveys, their objection has been

removed and they are recommending approval. Leicestershire County Council Highways – Has no comments to make. Leicestershire County Council Traveller Sites and Liaison Officer – Supports the application. Natural England – Initial holding objection on the basis of the potential impact on protected species and adjacent SSSI. Following the submission of additional information/ecological surveys, their objection has been removed and they are recommending approval, subject to the imposition of conditions. Sapcote Parish Council – Has combined their comments for both this application and application 14/0501/1/VY (which has not yet come before Committee) and objects as follows: “There is a history of pitches at this location being sold for financial gain by the applicant family. The occupants of this site who, contrary to the conditions of the application, are not of gypsy heritage allege that they were misled into purchasing their mobile homes as they were not informed that they were restricted to occupation by gypsy families only. These sales were clearly undertaken for financial gain and in the knowledge that they were contrary to the conditions of approval. The adjoining site referred to in the report, Castlewood Mobile Home Park (formerly known as Firs Farm and later Oak Tree Cottage) became a private site by default because of an oversight by Blaby District Council and the Planning Inspector. The original applications for what is now known as Castlewood park, were for gypsy and traveller accommodation and the justification in the applications for more pitches was because of insufficient provision in the area, the approvals however erroneously failed to include a written restriction in the conditions to occupation to gypsy and travellers only. This failure subsequently led to their sale on the open market to non-gypsy families despite all three applications stating that they were being submitted to address the considerable demand for gypsy accommodation in the area. These applicants appear to be adept at giving Blaby District Council the run around in their cynical money making schemes and now they are at it again with the applicant trying to take advantage of the lucrative mobile home market by converting even more sites, approved for gypsy families, into mobile home sites for the general public. In the supporting evidence for the application 08/0193/1/PYCS it is stated that the application was being submitted because of a “substantial unmet need for gypsy sites” and your Authority was obviously convinced by that argument because it allowed the application. No sooner had the approval been granted than these sites, which were to meet the “substantial unmet need for gypsy sites”, were being peddled to non-gypsy families on the open market. We consider that this application is a cynical ploy to make money and completely undermines the justification for the previous application together with the justifications in the other applications for the renamed Castlewood Park.

We are flabbergasted by the breath-taking cheek of the applicant who on the one hand blatantly and knowingly sells pitches in contravention of the previous planning consent which itself was approved because of a “substantial unmet need for gypsy sites” and then submits an application to replace those sold pitches because “the proposal meets a genuine need.” Clearly there is always going to be a need for gypsy sites if the owners keep selling approved pitches to non-gypsy families.” Representations 6 letters of objection have been received against the proposal. These letters raised the following issues:

• Loss of privacy;

• Out of character with the area;

• Noise and disturbance;

• Applicant’s keep misleading residents and the Council;

• Concerns over impact on ecology;

• Environmental concerns. 2 letters of support have also been received. These letters raised the following issues:

• There is a need for more Gypsy accommodation;

• Permission will allow the existing residents on the adjoining site to stay in their own homes.

Relevant History 14/0501/1/VY Removal of condition 2 attached Pending to planning permission decision 08/0193/1/PYCS to remove occupancy restriction (resubmission) 13/0736/1/VY Removal of condition 2 attached Refused to planning permission 10/1/2014 08/0193/1/PYCS 10/0174/1/PX Change of use of stable block to Refused residential. 24/5/2010 10/0014/1/PY Change of use of land for 8 transit Refused pitches & 1 wardens mobile home April 2010

(Whitegate Stables) Appeal allowed March 2011 09/0618/1/PY Change of use of land for 6 gypsy Refused families with 6 mobile homes (Land March 2010

rear of Oak Tree Cottage) Appeal dismissed May 2011 08/0193/1/PYCS Change of use of land to gypsy Approved caravan site for 11 families with 28/4/2008 11 caravans (re-submission). EXPLANATORY NOTE The Proposal This application has been submitted alongside a separate application for the removal of an occupancy condition on the adjoining site at Oak Tree Cottage (application ref: 14/0501/1/VY). Members are advised that this current application for 11 new pitches needs to be determined on its own merits, and without regard to the existing situation pertaining to the previous refusal of application 13/0736/1/VY and the new application 14/0501/1/VY for the removal of the occupancy condition on the adjoining land at Oak Tree Cottage, which will be reported to Committee at a later date. This application is for the change of use of an existing paddock/grassland area to form a gypsy caravan site to accommodate 11 pitches. Vehicular access would be gained via an existing gated access off the internal access road known as Smithy Lane. The scheme also proposes that an existing stable building on the site be converted to form an amenity/welfare block comprising a laundry room and male and female toilets and showers. It is intended that the site area shall be surfaced with gravel over a sub base of Type 1 MOT (a crushed aggregate specification with good load bearing qualities). This will mean that no permanent concrete bases will need to be constructed and the site can more easily drain surface water. The foul drainage from the site is intended to go into the existing foul drainage system on an adjoining site also in the control of the applicant. Soft landscaping is proposed to the site boundaries, along with fencing, the final details of which will need to be the subject of planning conditions. Planning Considerations Section 38(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other material considerations which indicate otherwise. This section of the report will first consider the proposed development against the policy background and then consider any other material considerations. There are a number of themes which run through national guidance as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework and these are generally in line with local policies expressed through the Development Plan. Key themes in the case of this

application are that new development should be sustainable and previously developed land should be developed before greenfield sites come forward. National Planning Guidance National Planning Policy Framework This essential national policy framework establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. The emphasis is that development plans allow for development of sufficient housing (including gypsy sites) in sustainable locations and that new development is of good design. It also sets out the planning approach that the Government wishes to see in relation to many aspects of the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (March 2012) The Government’s overarching aim is to ensure fair and equal treatment for Travellers in a way that facilitates the traditional nomadic way of life of Travellers while respecting the interests of the settled community. In decision taking the Government advises that Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) should consider the following issues, amongst other relevant matters when considering planning applications for Traveller sites:

• the existing level of local provision and need for sites;

• the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation for the applicants;

• other personal circumstances of the applicant;

• that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come forward on unallocated sites;

• that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections.

Para. 23 indicates that Local Planning Authorities (LPA) should strictly limit new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements or outside areas allocated in the development plan. LPAs should ensure that sites in rural areas respect the scale of, and do not dominate the nearest settled community, and avoid placing an undue pressure on the local infrastructure.

LPAs should attach weight to the following matters (para. 24):

• effective use of previously developed, untidy or derelict land;

• sites being well planned or soft landscaped in such a way as to positively enhance the environment and increase its openness;

• Promoting opportunities for healthy lifestyles, such as ensuring adequate landscaping and play areas for children;

• Not enclosing a site with so much hard landscaping, high walls or fences, that the impression may be given that the site and its occupants are deliberately isolated from the rest of the community.

When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, local planning authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community (para. 12). DEVELOPMENT PLAN Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) The adopted Core Strategy (February 2013) is now part of the Development Plan for the district of Blaby and the following policies are relevant to the proposed development: Policy CS9 indicates that provision for 81 residential pitches should be provided between 2012 and 2029. 20 permanent pitches should be provided between 2012 – 2017; 23 between 2017 and 2022; 26 between 2022 and 2027; and 12 between 2027 and 2029. Since 2012 16 additional pitches have been approved in the District. In this respect, there is still a need to provide additional pitches in the District at present. Provision should be made through a combination of the development management process (i.e. determining submitted applications as in this current case) and the allocation of sites through an Allocations Development Plan Document, taking into account the most up-to-date Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment. A five year supply of deliverable and developable sites or broad locations for the rest of the plan period will also be identified (Policy CS9). Para 7.9.4 indicates that proposals for Gypsy and Traveller pitches will be supported within the District where the proposal meets the criteria in Policy CS9, taking into account other material considerations. Policy CS9 indicates that sites for new and extensions to existing Gypsy and Traveller sites should meet all of the following requirements:

• Located within reasonable distance to a settlement and has access to a range of services;

• Avoid significant adverse impact on landscape, countryside and the built environment including by reason of its scale, prominence or layout. Sensitive landscaping and screening will be required to ameliorate any adverse visual

impacts. New development should be in accordance with the “Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites, Good Practice Guide”;

• Capable of being accessed without detriment to highway safety and adequate parking, turning and servicing space provided;

• Of appropriate scale in relation to the settlement to which it relates, and its local services and infrastructure;

• Capable of providing satisfactory living conditions for residents without hazards/nuisance caused by (amongst other things) flooding, noise or land contamination;

• Capable of implementation without causing unacceptable nuisance to existing neighbours by virtue of noise and other disturbance caused by movement of vehicles to and from the site.

When considering whether a proposal is of appropriate scale to the settlement it relates to, the existing level of local provision should also be considered to ensure that sites do not dominate the nearest settled community as required in national policy as set out above. The application proposal would relate primarily to Burbage/Hinckley. Taking into account the size of the Burbage/Hinckley area, and the existing gypsy accommodation within the immediately adjoining area, it is not considered, on balance, that the proposed provision of 11 pitches would dominate the nearest settled community nor be of an inappropriate scale in this context. Countryside The site lies in countryside. One of the 12 core principles of the NPPF recognises the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. Policy CS18 – Countryside indicates that planning permission will not be granted for built development, or other development which would have a significantly adverse effect on the appearance and character of the landscape. Your Officers consider that due to the location of the site to the rear of established gypsy accommodation which shields it from long range views, the impact on the appearance and character of the surrounding wider landscape is minimal. Any limited and localised adverse visual impact of this development can be satisfactorily mitigated by the imposition of conditions requiring the submission and implementation of appropriate landscaping. Your Officers therefore feel that an approval on this site would not, on balance, result in significant visual harm to the wider character of the landscape. Policy CS18 also indicates that the need to retain Countryside will be balanced against the need to provide new development (including housing) in the most sustainable locations, and that the boundaries of Countryside will be determined through the Allocations, Designations and Development DPD. The Blaby District Local Plan (1999) Policy C2 Countryside The site is located outside any settlement boundary and is located in Countryside and would therefore conflict with Policy C2 Countryside. However, for the reasons set out above in relation to the consideration under Policy CS18, your Officers do not

consider that a reason for refusal could be sustained under Policy C2 on adverse landscape impact, especially when balanced against the outstanding need for the provision of gypsy sites within the District. Other Material Considerations Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Gypsy and Traveller Needs Assessment Refresh (2013) (GTAA) Policy CS9 indicates that provision will be made, taking into account the most up-to-date Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment. The GTAA (2013) contains the most up-to-date evidence of need in the District and differs slightly from the figures identified in Policy CS9. CS Para. 7.9.2 indicates that at the time of the Examination into the Core Strategy the GTAA was being refreshed and that the Interim Report for Blaby District Council (September 2012) provided the basis for the figures in Policy CS9. The final version of the GTAA was published in 2013 after the adoption of the Core Strategy and indicated that in the first 5 year tranche (2012 – 2017) 13 pitches should be provided (7 less than the 20 identified in Policy CS9), of which 50% (approx. 6.5 pitches) should be private residential pitches, and 50% social rented pitches. All other 5 year tranches are the same as identified in Policy CS9. In this context, Local and National planning policy indicate that a 5 year supply of deliverable sites should be identified. Sufficient deliverable sites should therefore be identified for the 5 year period 2013 – 2018, taking into account any shortfalls in provision since 2012. Conclusion The NPPF does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Development proposals that accord with an up-to-date plan should be approved, and proposals which conflict should be refused unless material considerations indicate otherwise (NPPF para. 12). Local and National planning policy indicate that a 5 year supply of deliverable sites should be identified. The Core Strategy and GTAA (2013) provide an assessment of pitch requirements from 2012. Since 2012 additional pitches have been provided and, notwithstanding the differing pitch requirements in the Policy CS9 and the GTAA (2013), the proposal would make a significant contribution towards meeting (and exceeding in terms of the GTAA (2013)) the identified need for addition residential pitches. Given the size of Enderby, it is not considered that this level of provision would dominate the community nor be of an inappropriate scale in this context. Whilst, the proposal would conflict with Policy CS18 and C2 (countryside), land will have to be released for Gypsy and Traveller sites in order to meet the identified needs and the criteria for identifying sites in Policy CS9 does not specifically preclude development in the countryside. Furthermore, there are no technical objections raised by any of the statutory

consultees to this proposal and any adverse impact on the character of the countryside can be satisfactorily be mitigated by the imposition of suitable conditions. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal accords with Policy CS9 and other relevant policies and material considerations including national planning policy, and therefore the proposal is recommended for approval. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14/0569/1/PX Registered Date David Wilson Homes 13 June 2014

Residential development of 160 dwellings including associated access, parking, landscaping and infrastructure (Revised Scheme)

Land off Forest House Lane, Leicester Forest East

Report Author: Kristy Ingles, Development Management Team Leader Contact Details: Council Offices. 0116 272 7565 RECOMMENDATION: THAT APPLICATION 14/0569/1/PX BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANTS ENTERING INTO EITHER A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT OR UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING TO SECURE THE FOLLOWING:- 1. On-site public open space maintenance contribution or an agreed

maintenance programme; 2. Provision of 25% affordable housing; 3. A financial contribution towards healthcare; 4. A financial contribution towards public transport and provision of travel

packs and bus passes; 5. A financial contribution towards education; 6. A financial contribution towards library facilities; and, 7. All CIL compliant capital infrastructure for Policing necessitated by the

Development. AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS; 1. Statutory 3 year time limit. 2. Approved plans. 3. Materials as specified. 4. Landscaping scheme to be agreed. 5. Landscaping scheme to be carried out. 6. Existing hedgerows to be retained at a height to be previously approved in

writing by the District Planning Authority (apart from hedgerows required to be removed to provide vehicular or pedestrian access)

7. Existing trees and hedgerows to be retained to be protected during development.

8. Finished floor levels as specified.

9. Boundary walls to rear/side garden boundaries adjacent to access roads and open space to be erected.

10. Details of foul drainage to be agreed. 11. Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk

Assessment and specified mitigation measures. 12. Details of the design of the balancing pond and other water treatment trains to

be agreed. 13. Details of future management arrangements and maintenance of public open

space to be agreed. 14. Play equipment to be provided before occupation of the 50th dwelling. 15. Biodiversity management plan to be agreed. 16. Lighting to be installed adjacent to footpaths. 17. Full details of the noise attenuation bunds to be submitted. 18. Noise mitigation measures to be implemented. 19. If contamination not previously identified is found remediation strategy to be

implemented. 20. No development to commence until further archaeological investigations have

been carried out. 21. No development to commence until further details of any necessary

archaeological mitigation have been agreed. 22. Waste Collection Strategy to be agreed. 23. Submission of Construction Site Management Plan. 24. Scheme for improvements to Public Footpath to be agreed. 25. Pedestrian links to be provided. 26. Details of garages for plots 26, 83, 114, 132, 138 and 146 to be agreed. 27. Off street parking to be provided. 28. Shared private driveways to be at least 4.25 metres wide. 29. No doors or means of enclosure to be erected to enclose parking provision for

plot 50. 30. No surface water drainage onto public highway. 31. No vehicular access between the site and the Sustainable Urban Extension. NOTES TO COMMITTEE Relevant Planning Policies National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Planning Practice Guidance (March 2014) Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013) Policy CS1 – Strategy for locating new development Policy CS2 – Design of new development Policy CS5 – Housing distribution Policy CS7 – Affordable housing Policy CS8 – Mix of housing Policy CS10 – Transport infrastructure Policy CS11 – Infrastructure, services and facilities to support growth Policy CS12 – Planning obligations and developer contributions

Policy CS15 – Open space, sport and recreation Policy CS18 – Countryside Policy CS19 – Bio-diversity and geo-diversity Policy CS20 – Historic environment and culture Policy CS21 – Climate change Policy CS22 – Flood risk management Policy CS23 - Waste Policy CS24 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) (1999) Policy C2 – Other Development in the Countryside Policy T3 – Highways Standards Parking and Service Provision Policy T6 – Parking and Servicing Policy CE22 – Landscaping Other Supporting Documents Housing Mix and Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (July 2013). Blaby District Supplementary Planning Document “Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions” (February 2010). Strategic Green Wedge Review (June 2009). Blaby Landscape and Settlement Character Assessment (May 2008). Consultation Summary Blaby District Council, Environmental Health – Comments that the submitted air quality assessment is acceptable and shows that the predicated impact of the development on air quality would be negligible. Blaby District Council, Housing Strategy – Raises no objections to the proposals. Blaby District Council, Neighbourhood Services – Makes comments on the requirements for bin presentation points on private drives and communal parking areas. Environment Agency – Raises no objections to the application provided a condition is imposed to ensure that the measures detailed in the Flood Risk Assessment are implemented. Kirby Muxloe Parish Council – Makes the following comments: “the only access to this development appears to be via Forest House Lane enabling access to the A47 via the Beggars Lane and Warren Lane junctions. The Parish Council have concerns that the development would increase the existing congestion and danger at the junction of Warren Lane and Beggars Lane with the A47 (Hinckley Road)”. Leicestershire Constabulary – Requires a contribution of £53,269 due to the lack of capacity in existing police infrastructure to accommodate the population growth and associated demands occasioned by the development.

Leicestershire County Council, Archaeology – No comments received. Leicestershire County Council, Ecology – Comments that the ecology assessment is satisfactory and that the planning layout shows retention of the boundary hedges and the stream/ditch through the middle of the site with adequate buffer zones alongside. The balancing pond creates opportunities for the enhancement of wildlife. Conditions are requested. Leicestershire County Council, Education – Requires a contribution of £918,661.16 as none of the school sectors have capacity to accommodate any pupils from the development. Leicestershire County Council, Highways – Raises no objections to the development subject to the imposition of conditions and S106 Contributions to travel packs and bus stops and shelters. Leicestershire County Council, Libraries – Requests a contribution of £9,490 towards library facilities. Leicestershire County Council, Waste Management – No contribution request received. Leicester Forest East Parish Council – Strongly objects to the application as follows: “I have been asked to write to you to advise you of the Parish Council’s strong objections to the above revised planning application. We set out below our observations, some of which have already previously been set out to you together with further observations.

1. Previously the site was considered suitable for allocation as Green Wedge and its development at this time would therefore be premature.

2. The scheme would interfere with and cause harm to the safe and free flow of traffic and harm residential amenity.

Green Wedge and Prematurity As identified by the Key Diagram in the BDC CS, this area was identified as a potential site for a new green wedge. The site carries out green wedge functions and so development, in our opinion, should be refused on the grounds that it is on land which should be considered as a green wedge in accordance with the BDC CS document and the saved policies of the BDC Local Plan 1999. The green wedge for BDC CS is contained in Policy C16 of the adopted Core Strategy and commits the Council to define the boundaries of a Green Wedge between Glenfield, Kirby Muxloe, Kirby Fields and towards Ratby, Groby and Leicester. The object of a Green Wedge is to guide development form, prevent the

merging of settlements, provides a “green lung” and a recreational resource. The application site performs all of those functions. That is why the District Council has previously identified it as potential Green Wedge. The land is highly valued by local people as a recreational resource. It also helps to maintain the separate character of Leicester Forest East. Moreover, keeping the land open has helped to prevent sprawl and guided development in a way that maintains local identity. If planning permission is granted, the potential of the land to continue to perform each of those functions will be lost. That loss would occur before local people are able to have their voices heard at an examination in public into the Allocations, Designations and Development Management DPD. That is a matter of great concern. The green wedge policy originates from the Leicestershire Structure Plan 1987 and it was the principle of protecting strategically important areas of open land between the built up areas on the fringes of Leicester. The primary function is to prevent coalescence of distinct settlements and provide potential as an important recreation resource in areas that are often mainly “built up”. This is also a key issue of the CS as set out in paragraph 4.22. The proposed development is located on land between Kings Drive/Kings Walk/ Forest East Park (on the northern and western edges of the site and the motorway retail services and the proposed public transport route on the eastern edges of the site) and Lubbesthorpe development south of the site. The land conveys green wedge functions and this development would be an inappropriate use because it would result in the lands functions being undermined. This development would result in Leicester Forest East merging with the motorway services retail site and the transport route into the SUE. It would remove valuable open land and would result in the coalescence of Leicester Forest East, the motorway services retail site and Lubbesthorpe. Leicester Forest East lies within an Air Quality Management Area. The area focuses on the A47 and the M1 motorway. This area has been specifically identified under paragraph 4 of the CS as being a key issue and that balancing the need for growth with the impact that this will have on new and existing residents in terms of air quality. The Lubbesthorpe development will remove a extremely large green lung which operates between the M1/Leicester Forest East/Enderby. It is strategically important to protect remaining open spaces in order to prevent further “green lungs” being removed. This serves not only the existing residents of the area but also those of the future Lubbesthorpe development. The land as it is currently provides a green lung and a barrier between the M1 and Leicester Forest East and this will be lost if the site is developed. The land is open and agriculture in nature. There are a number of features such as hedges, streams and a small copse as well as open fields which are used for growing crops.

Policy CS15 of the BDC CS states that existing open spaces and recreational facilities will be protected where development is proposed on existing open space, sport and recreation facilities, land should not be released, either in total or in part unless it can be demonstrated that:

i) It is surplus to requirements for its current play and open space function; and ii) Alternative provision of equivalent quantity, quality and accessibility or better

can be provided in the local area. There will be no surplus open space function surrounding Leicester Forest East. There is also no equivalent quantity and quality open space in the local area. Whilst there is a park adjacent to the site, it is only a small maintained site with a constructed tarmacadam footpath. It does not have the same characteristics or use as the proposed development site. There are several footpaths going through the proposed site and these footpaths are well used for dog walkers, joggers or people walking and enjoying the countryside. It is a very popular area for the residents of Leicester Forest East. The site is a valuable, informal recreation source, the importance of which is enhanced by its proximity to the built up area of Leicester Forest East, the motorway services and the new town and Lubbesthorpe. The parish now has to contemplate enormous changes to the local environment as a result of the District Council’s decision to pursue a sustainable urban extension on our doorstep. That greatly increases the value local people attach to remaining areas of open land on the edge of, and between, Leicester Forest East and neighbouring settlements. They wish to have an opportunity to show that the need for new homes can and should be met on less sensitive areas. It is wrong in principle to pre-empt the plan making process on this site. A grant of planning permission would be premature. We appreciate it is sometimes said that prematurity cannot be prayed in aid on anything other than the largest proposals. In 2013 an Inspector upheld a decision by Hinckley and Bosworth District Council to refuse planning permission for around 90 new homes on land in the Green Wedge at Groby. One reason for his decision to dismiss the appeal was that the scheme was premature pending the consideration of alternatives in the Council’s Site Allocations DPD. His concern was that where there are other possible sites for development and a Site Allocations DPD is in the offing, a decision which plainly pre-empts a DPD in relation to a site which has raised strong local interest is inconsistent with the NPPF’s emphasis on “plan-led” decision making. The Groby decision was challenged in the High Court on 5 grounds, including the Inspector’s treatment of the prematurity issue1. The application was upheld on one ground (which was about the Inspector’s treatment of a 10% discount for large sites). His approach to prematurity was upheld. We attach a copy of the High Court’s decision for your information. The relevant paragraphs are 136 to 153. The Parish Council believes a direct analogy may be drawn with Groby in this case. 1. Bloor Homes v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Hinckley and Bosworth Council (2014) EWHC 754 (Admin) 1. The Council is preparing a Site Allocations DPD. That could result in the site

being notated as Green Wedge. 2. There is strong local support for the site’s allocation. 3. The site performs Green Wedge functions. 4. If planning permission is granted it would prejudice Green Wedge notation. 5. The application is therefore premature. Highway Issues The “Transport Assessment” by BWB is a document of the kind that is generally used to try and “blind with science”. That should not dissuade the Planning Committee’s preference for common sense. There is much theory and analysis which is of little relevance. It does not get to grips with the actual transport situation in Leicester Forest East. There is substantial dysfunction between the computer based, theoretical analyses and the actuality of the traffic flow in Leicester Forest East. In addition, traffic projections for 2018 are made using the unproven LLITM model for traffic flow. If the statements in the BWB document are compared with reality, then the extent of the dysfunction is evident. Section 7.3.1 (second sentence) “The junction sometimes experiences congestion in the morning peak hours but this is due to queues blocking back preventing exits from Beggars Lane rather than a lack of capacity at the junction itself.” That is an inaccurate and misleading statement – the capacity of the junction is the capacity of the whole junction, not just one leg of that junction. The reality is that if BWB had accurately observed the Beggars Lane junction in the morning peak flow they would see that it is completely saturated for a major part of that time. That means it does not work and is a major source of delay. The statement at S.7.3.1 is factually incorrect. The result is it plays down the harmful impact of the scheme. S.7.3.3-5 – The difference between the actuality of traffic flow at Beggars Lane and the claimed result of “LINSIG” shows the lack of reality inherent in that modelling exercise. It is completely contrary to the actuality to state: “that existing A47 Hinckley Road/Beggars Lane traffic signal controlled junction would operate within the normally accepted limits of performance when modelled in any of the traffic flow scenarios described above”. The Parish Council trusts District Councillors, who know the area, to reject that statement as simply wrong. “The highest degree of saturation on any one traffic link is less than 90% and there is

a positive practical reserve capacity in each flow scenario.” Again, the Parish Council anticipates District Councillors will reject this statement as simply wrong. The reality of morning traffic flow is that the two arms of the Beggars Lane/Hinckley Road junction is 100% saturated in morning peak traffic flow. It is frequently jammed solid. S.7.3.6 – Not only are the claimed improvements in the Hinckley Road corridor untested and fanciful, the overload on the Hinckley Road Corridor is now so substantial that any improvements will have little effect. The time baseline taken is 2018 by which time very little improvement work will have been built into the Hinckley Road Corridor from the SUE. S.7.3.6 – Conflates a substantial overestimate of the Beggars Lane/Hinckley Road junction capacity, a substantial underestimate of the Hinckley Road Corridor capacity and its current overload and a rejection of the actual current morning peak hour traffic flow. S.8.8 – The claims made in S.8.8 are completely contrary to daily experience. The dysfunction between the actuality of the traffic flows on the Hinckley Road Corridor and at the Beggars Lane/Hinckley Road junction. That means no faith can be placed in the modelling. Overall, we invite members of the Planning Committee to conclude the BWB transport assessment is a classic example of a theoretical construct which whilst superficially impressive exemplifies the rule “rubbish in – rubbish out”. Its baseline bears little resemblance to what is experienced on the ground. Consequently, this elegant, computer based “house of cards” is certain to collapse if the houses were to be built, causing a hazard and inconvenience to local people. Section 5 of the BWB report states that in order to determine the likely distribution pattern of the proposed residential development traffic, reference was made to the 2001 National Census “Origin” – Destination data. The data provides information on the in moves and the out moves to and from a ward. The site is located in the Forest Ward and the data was studied to determine where people living in the Forest Ward would travel to. From this information, the travel route was estimated and the proportions using each highway route were identified. 5.3 – shows that 75.4% of traffic would travel to and from the north-east via the A47, to travel to and from Leicester and to reach the A46, M1 (northbound and southbound) and the M69. 18% would travel to and from the south via Beggars Lane. 6.6% would travel to and from the west via the A47. We would argue that given it has been calculated that only 18% of traffic goes down Beggars Lane towards Enderby and 6.6% of traffic uses Beggars Lane/Hinckley Road to travel towards Hinckley, that the BWB Report has made a serious error by incorrectly assessing how the 75.4% travelling towards Leicester on the A47 would

in reality access the A47. Far from all 75.4% using Beggars Lane to reach the A47 we would suggest that in reality the vast majority would actually use Forest House Lane/Warren Lane. We are of the opinion that the BWB Report has not undertaken any work on the Warren Lane/A47 junction which is frequently a problem during rush hour and is surely a serious omission from a transport assessment. The Parish Council is very much aware of the strain and pressure already on the local medical facilities and school facilities within the parish. The local medical centre, Forest Medical Centre, has now said that they will not be taking on any new patients and the local primary school, Stafford Leys Primary School, is near to full capacity. Should Blaby District Council decide to, notwithstanding the Parish Council’s objections, proceed and grant planning approval, the Parish Council’s position is that it would be completely inappropriate in traffic capacity terms to allow any traffic access from new Lubbesthorpe and that a Planning Obligation should be included that prohibits any through route for motor vehicles between this development and the Lubbesthorpe SUE. More particularly, we believe the following objectives are both reasonable and necessary.

a) Construction traffic must access the site only from Baines Lane and the motorway access road.

b) The access to Forest House Lane must only be opened once the first houses on the site have been sold and occupied.

c) Once the Forest House Lane access road is opened, construction traffic must continue to use Baines Lane until completion of the development.

d) Access from Baines Lane must be closed when the site is not working for the purpose of avoiding rat runs at evenings and weekends.

e) When construction of the site is complete, traffic access from the development is closed off permanently.

f) Leicester Forest East Parish Council requests the District Council notes that an extra 160 dwellings would generate an increase in use of the facilities on offer at the parish hall. We would ask that a sum of money is allocated in the S.106 Agreement to address the increase and to further improve the facilities at the parish hall.”

Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service – No comments received. NHS England (Leicestershire and Lincolnshire Area) – Requests a contribution of £60,407.52 to provide additional accommodation for the residents of the proposed development. Severn Trent Water – Has no objections subject to the inclusion of a drainage condition. Western Power Distribution – No comments received. Third Party Representations

Nine representations have been received objecting and commenting on the development proposals. The representations make comments on the following issues:

• Application does not overcome the reasons for refusal of 13/0931/1/PX

• Cumulative impact of the proposed development, the Beggars Lane development and the Sustainable Urban Extension

• Why was the site not included as part of the Sustainable Urban Extension?

• The proposed development is not part of the core strategy for Blaby District

• The area has already had its fair share of development

• Capacity of schools, health facilities and other amenities and infrastructure

• Loss of countryside, green belt and recreational resource

• Loss of community identity

• Impact on flood protection land

• Impact on wildlife

• Air pollution

• Noise pollution

• Impact on residents’ quality of life

• Increased traffic and construction traffic

• Road capacity

• Unsuitable access

• Limited consultation and no contact from the developer Recent Relevant Planning History 13/0931/1/PX Residential development 160 dwellings including Refused associated access, parking, landscaping and 03.06.2014 infrastructure EXPLANATORY NOTE Description of Application Site and Proposed Development The application site comprises of a total of 8.93 hectares of land which is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is within the Parish of Leicester Forest East and it is located to the east of Forest House Lane, Forest East Park and Kings Drive, to the west of Baines Lane and to the north of the Lubbesthorpe Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE) site. The application site also includes land for the vehicular access from Forest House Lane which is to the south of an existing flood relief basin. The application site lies outside the limits to development as defined on the proposals map of the Blaby District Local Plan (1999) and is designated as Countryside. This application seeks permission for the development of 160 single storey, two storey and two and a half storey dwellings with open space, sustainable urban drainage system, noise attenuation bunds and associated infrastructure. Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would be off Forest House Lane and footpath links

are proposed between the site and the SUE, Baines Lane, Shanklin Gardens and Forest East Park. The application is a revised scheme to planning application 13/0931/1/PX which was refused by the Development Control in May 2014 for the following reasons:

• Detrimental highways impact

• Detrimental air quality impact

• Loss of countryside. Therefore, contrary to Policy CS18 of the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2013.

The revisions to application 13/0931/1/PX include an increase in the size of the garages on selected plots, details of the boundary wall treatment, details of materials of construction and finished floor levels. Supporting Documents The following documents have been submitted as part of the planning application:-

• Planning Statement

• Design and Access Statement

• Statement of Community Involvement

• Transport Assessment

• Travel Plan

• Air Quality Assessment

• Noise Impact Assessment

• Flood Risk Assessment

• Archaeological Assessment

• Ecological Appraisal The applicants have also confirmed their willingness to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure, where appropriate, any requirements for developer contributions, i.e. affordable housing, public open space maintenance sums, education etc. Planning Considerations Section 38(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other material considerations which indicate otherwise. This section of the report will first consider the proposed development against the policy background and then consider any other material considerations. There are a number of themes which run through national guidance as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework and these are generally in line with local policies expressed through the Development Plan. Key themes in the case of this application are that new development should be sustainable and the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed is encouraged. NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) The National Policy Framework establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. The emphasis is that development plans allow for development of sufficient housing in sustainable locations and that new development is of good design. It also sets out the planning approach that the Government wishes to see in relation to many aspects of the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. DEVELOPMENT PLAN Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) The adopted Core Strategy (February 2013) is now part of the Development Plan for the District of Blaby. It is an up-to-date plan that is consistent with National Policy and Blaby District has a housing land supply which exceeds 6 years. Therefore, the policies of the Core Strategy should be given full statutory weight. The following policies are the most relevant to the proposed development: Policy CS1 – Strategy for Locating New Development Policy CS1 seeks to focus new housing development in the most sustainable locations in the district, close to the principal urban area (PUA) of Leicester and more sustainable towns and villages. Leicester Forest East is part of the PUA and therefore is considered to be one of the most sustainable locations for new development within Blaby District. Policy CS2 – Design of New Development Policy CS2 seeks to ensure that a high quality environment is achieved in all new development proposals, respecting distinctive local character and contributing towards creating places of high architectural and urban design quality. The design of new development should also be appropriate to its context. Your Officers are of the opinion that the layout achieves a high quality design and development of the site in the manner proposed would not be out of keeping with the character and

appearance of the surrounding residential areas. Policy CS5 – Housing Distribution Policy CS5 aims to focus new development in the most appropriate locations and the District Council seeks to distribute housing by settlement in accordance with the figures contained within the Core Strategy. As of 1 April 2014, there is a minimum residual housing requirement of 146 dwellings in the PUA. Whereas this current proposal would exceed that residual requirement by 14 dwellings, your Officers do not consider that exceeding the minimum housing requirement by 14 dwellings is excessive or will cause demonstrable harm to the spatial housing distribution strategy of the Core Strategy. Accordingly, the proposal accords with Policy CS5. Policy CS7 – Affordable Housing Policy CS7 aims to optimise the provision of affordable housing within the District. The latest update of the SHMA indicates that the affordable housing requirement (i.e. the annual level of affordable housing required in order to eliminate affordable housing requirements over a 7.5 year period) in the District of Blaby is 344 dwellings per annum (dpa). Between 2006 and 2012, 254 affordable homes (an average of 42 dpa) have been provided. In light of the shortfall in delivery, the proposed provision of affordable housing is a material consideration in favour of the scheme. Accordingly the proposal accords with Policy CS7. Policy CS8 – Mix of Housing Policy CS8 requires proposals for development of 10 or more dwellings to provide an appropriate mix of housing types. This is guided by the Housing Mix and Affordable Housing SPD. Your Officers sought amendments to the original development proposals to ensure that the affordable and market housing mix meets the requirements of the Housing SPD. The proposals are therefore considered to be acceptable with regard to the requirements of Policy CS8. Policy CS10 – Transport Infrastructure Policy CS10 indicates that the District Council will seek to reduce the need to travel by private car by locating new development so that people can access services and facilities. The site is located within the PUA and is a sustainable location for new development. Footpath links are proposed from the site to provide access to local bus services, each household will be provided with a travel pack and developer contributions are required to improve and provide bus stops. The development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policy CS10. Policy CS11 – Infrastructure, services and facilities to support growth and Policy CS12 – Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions Policy CS11 indicates that new developments should be supported by the required physical, social and environment infrastructure at the appropriate time. Policy CS12 seeks to ensure that the requirements for infrastructure, services and facilities arising from any development will be sought in accordance with the Council’s latest Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions SPD.

This proposal will generate the need to provide financial contributions towards essential infrastructure, services and facilities and the requests for financial contributions from consultees are detailed above. Developer contributions are required where necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, where it is directly related to the development and is fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. Members should note that Leicestershire Constabulary has requested a developer contribution of £55,405. However, it is not considered that the request is fully compliant with the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations. The recommendation on this application includes provision for a developer contribution towards all CIL compliant capital infrastructure for Policing necessitated by the Development. Members should also note that Leicester Forest East Parish Council have requested a financial contribution as the development would generate an increase in the use of facilities on offer at the Parish Hall. However, a specific sum of money has not been requested and, at the time of writing this report, no information had been submitted to demonstrate that this request is compliant with the CIL Regulations. Policy CS14 – Green Infrastructure and Policy CS15 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation Policy CS14 aims to protect existing and provide new networks of multi-functional green spaces. Green infrastructure can include formal open spaces for sport and recreation, green areas that can be used for informal recreation and areas that are valuable for their bio-diversity. Policy CS15 indicates that Blaby District Council will seek to ensure that all residents have access to sufficient, high quality, accessible open space, sport and recreation facilities. The development proposals include the provision of green infrastructure and open space as an integral part of the design. The existing public footpath through the site will be retained within areas of green infrastructure. New footpath links are incorporated into the site layout and there will be pedestrian access from the site to the surrounding residential areas, the SUE and the proposed Baines Lane bus corridor. It is therefore considered that the proposals comply with Policy CS14 and CS15. Policy CS18 – Countryside Policy CS18 seeks to prevent inappropriate development within the countryside. The Policy states that planning permission will not be granted for built development, or other development which would have a significantly adverse effect on the appearance or character of the landscape. However, the Policy goes on to state that the need to retain Countryside will be balanced against the need to provide new development (including housing) in the most sustainable locations. The Council’s Landscape and Character Assessment designates this area as the

Lubbesthorpe Agricultural Parkland. It recognises that the northern and eastern boundaries of this character area are enclosed by built form and that Leicester Forest East has a slightly fragmented and sinuous edge to the north with limited boundary structure.

The site is currently agricultural fields with the M1 motorway, motorway service station and proposed public transport route for the Sustainable Urban Extension to the east, residential development to the north, residential development and a recreation ground to the west and the site of the proposed Sustainable Urban Extension to the south. The site is relatively well contained within the existing pattern of residential development. This proposal is for a small extension into countryside in an area that is not readily visible from long range public views. It is therefore considered that residential development on this site would not have a harmful impact on the prevailing character of the area. Policy CS19 – Bio-diversity and Geo-diversity Policy CS19 refers to the importance of creating, protecting and enhancing ecological habitats and biodiversity. The application has been accompanied by an ecological site appraisal. The Planning Ecologist at Leicestershire County Council advises that the submitted ecological appraisal is satisfactory and recommends the imposition of conditions. With the recommended conditions it is considered that the proposals comply with the requirements of Policy CS19. Policy CS20 – Historic Environment and Culture Policy CS20 states that the Council takes a positive approach to the conservation of heritage assets and the wider historic environment. An archaeological assessment has been submitted and it has been reviewed by the Planning Archaeologist at Leicestershire County Council. It is concluded that the archaeological potential of the site is such that a condition requiring further archaeological work to be carried out before development commences is acceptable and appropriate. Policy CS21 – Climate Change Policy CS21 states that development which mitigates and adapts to climate change will by supported. The application site is located within the PUA which is the most sustainable location for new development in Blaby District. The layout of the development incorporates walking and cycling routes as an integral part of the design. The development will comply with government requirements with regard to building design and energy efficiency. A sustainable drainage system will be provided. It is therefore considered that the development will generally comply with the requirements of Policy CS21. Policy CS22 – Flood Risk Management Policy CS22 states that the Council will ensure all development minimises vulnerability and provides resilience to flooding taking into account climate change. The application site is not located in the flood plain. However, due to the size of the application site a flood risk assessment has been submitted. The Environment

Agency has raised no objections to the development of this site provided conditions are imposed. Policy CS23 – Waste Policy CS23 refers to a hierarchy of dealing with waste. A condition is recommended to ensure that the applicant submits a waste management plan for the site to ensure that the development complies with the requirements of Policy CS23. Policy CS24 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy CS24 reflects the overarching principle of the NPPF that the Government wishes to see in relation to the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Policy CS24 requires that when considering development proposals the District Council will take a positive approach and will always work proactively with applicants to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible. Your Officers have worked with the applicant to ensure that the development accords with adopted policies and thus the development is in accordance with Policy CS24. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) (1999) Although the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) has been adopted a number of policies from the Blaby District Local Plan (1999) continue to be saved. The following policies are of relevance to this application. Policy C2 – Other Development in the Countryside The application site is located within an area of countryside where there is a general presumption against development unless it is essential for the needs of agriculture, etc. The policy does allow for small scale uses and a range of criteria against which any proposals for development will be measured. Accordingly, under Policy C2, residential development is not normally considered to be an appropriate use within countryside. However, and as mentioned earlier in this Report, the need to retain Countryside must be balanced against the need to provide new development (including housing) in the most sustainable locations. Any decision made as part of this balancing exercise must have regard to the demonstrable harm (if any) that will be caused to the wider landscape character as a result of allowing this proposal. As stated previously, this proposal is for a small extension into countryside in an area that is not readily visible from long range public views and your Officers consider that the loss of this small area will not have an adverse effect on the appearance or character of the wider landscape. Policy T3 – Highways Standards Parking and Service Provision Policy T3 states that planning permission will only be granted for development involving a new access, road scheme or improvement if;

• Appropriate facilities for pedestrians and cyclists are provided; and

• Safeguards for living and working conditions and the environment are incorporated.

The Highway Authority has raised no concerns in relation to the proposed development and the criteria of Policy T3. Policy T6 – Off Street Parking Provision Policy T6 states that new residential development should accord with the adopted car parking standards of the District Council. The submitted plans demonstrate that the level of off street parking for each new dwelling would either meet or exceed the Council’s minimum parking standards. Other Material Considerations Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise, and whether those material considerations are of such weight that the adopted policies of the Development Plan should not prevail in relation to any proposal. In addition to the policy considerations set out above, there are substantive material considerations that relate to the development of this site, which are:

• Impact on Character and Appearance of the Area;

• Relationship with adjacent residential properties;

• Noise;

• Air Quality;

• Highway Considerations. Impact on Character and Appearance of the Area The 12 core land-use principles that should underpin plan-making and decision-taking are set out in paragraph 17 of the NPPF. The fifth principle requires that the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside be recognised. Your Officers are of the opinion that the release of the application site would not detract to any material nor measureable extent from the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside in the wider context, nor the site specifics of this particular location, and as such the proposal would not conflict with the thrust of the NPPF and would be in accordance with the national presumption in favour of sustainable development. The NPPF encourages Local Authorities to make efficient use of land by re- using land that has been previously developed (brownfield land). However, the nature of the District of Blaby is such that there are few brownfield sites. As such, it is acknowledged that there is insufficient brownfield land in the District of Blaby to meet the housing requirements in the Core Strategy and that a large proportion of new development will have to take place on greenfield sites in sustainable locations. As stated previously, Leicester Forest East has been identified within the Core Strategy as within the PUA and it therefore is a sustainable location for new development and the housing needs for the PUA cannot be met on brownfield sites. This must also be taken into account when considering this proposal for a small scale incursion into

countryside. The application site is located with an area designated as Countryside on the proposals map of the Blaby District Local Plan (1999). However, the Parish Council has suggested that the application site could be designated as Green Wedge. Blaby District Council’s Green Wedge Review (2009) does include an area of search for a new Green Wedge within the northern, eastern and southern boundaries of the Lubbesthorpe Sustainable Urban Extension and the masterplan for the Lubbesthorpe development includes the provision of green infrastructure within this search area. Development of the current application site would not impact upon the provision of a Green Wedge in Lubbesthorpe. An area of separation between the Parish of Leicester Forest East and Lubbesthorpe will therefore still be maintained if development of the current application site is permitted. The Parish Council has also raised concerns that to grant planning permission for development of this site would be premature. However, it is concluded that to grant planning permission would not undermine the plan-making process as it is in accordance with policies of the Core Strategy and the NPPF. Furthermore, your Officers still consider that there are no robust and defendable reasons for refusal of this application on the basis of the loss of countryside. Amenity of Neighbouring Occupiers There are existing residential properties adjacent to part of the western and northern boundaries of the site. The development has been designed to ensure adequate distances between the new dwellings and the existing residential properties which adjoin the site boundaries. Vehicular access to the site will be via Forest House Lane and the vehicular access will be sufficient distance from the front elevations of adjoining properties. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of adjoining residents. Noise The application site is close to the M1 motorway and the motorway services at Leicester Forest East. The eastern boundary is also adjacent to the proposed high quality bus route from the Lubbesthorpe SUE. To ensure that the future occupants of the development would not experience unacceptable noise from the motorway, motorway services and the new bus route the development proposals incorporate a noise bund along the eastern site boundary. A noise assessment has also been submitted as part of the planning application. Blaby District Council’s Environmental Health Team has no objections to the proposals provided the development is carried out in accordance with the mitigation strategy identified in the submitted noise assessment. Air Quality An air quality assessment has been submitted with the planning application. Blaby District Council’s Environmental Health Team advise that the assessment is acceptable and shows that the predicated impact of the development on air quality would be negligible. Highway Considerations

Concern has been raised by both the Parish Council and residents in relation to highways matters, namely the capacity of the existing road network to accommodate the traffic generated by the development and the robustness of the submitted Transport Assessment. However, as stated earlier in this report, the Leicestershire County Council as Highway Authority has raised no objections to this proposal after consideration of all the facts and they are satisfied that the existing road network can accommodate the traffic that will be generated by this proposal. The scheme is therefore considered to be acceptable in relation to highway matters and a robust reason for refusal on highway concerns could not be sustained. The Highway Authority has provided the following information to explain why no objections are raised to the proposed development: “The application site, located between the SUE site and the existing built up area of LFE, occupies a good location in transport terms with schools, community facilities, shops, public transport, employment areas and the town centre within a reasonable walking distance of the site. As such, the proposal is in accordance with the thrust of national and local planning/transport policy which seeks to locate development in areas where the need to travel by car is minimised. The proposed development (160 dwellings) would be served via an extension to Forest House Lane, a residential estate road constructed to modern standards. There is nothing in the construction or nature of this road that would lead the Highway Authority to raise any concerns about its suitability to serve the proposed development. It should be noted that in accordance with the standards set out in LCC’s 6Cs Design Guide, a road of this type is capable of accommodating an additional 400 dwellings. On the basis of the submitted location plan and Highway records, it is clear that the proposed access to the site would comply with the standards set out in the 6Cs Design Guide. There has only been one slight accident along the entire length of Forest House Lane (including its junction with Beggars Lane) in the last 5 years and this was due to driver error rather than the nature of the road itself. There is therefore little evidence to suggest that Forest House Lane has an existing safety problem. The Transport assessment submitted with the application has analysed the proposed traffic generation and distribution onto the network. The trip rates for the 160 dwellings have been derived from the national TRICS database and are in accordance with rates that have been accepted on other sites in the vicinity. At its busiest (in the AM/PM peak periods) the development would generate 116/124 vehicle movements respectively. This equates to 2 vehicle movements every minute. This development traffic has been added to observed levels of traffic for the 2018 assessment year (including committed developments such as the SUE) in order to assess whether the development would result in any ‘severe’ impacts on the local highway network. Using standard industry junction modelling software, the

Transport Assessment satisfactorily demonstrates that there would be no unacceptable impact at either the Forest House Lane/Beggars Lane or the Beggars Lane/A47 junction in the 2018 with development scenario. Whilst it is disappointing that this site has come forward outside of the SUE process, the Highway Authority has looked carefully at the Transport Assessment submitted by the applicant and is satisfied that its conclusions are valid. The location of the site, access arrangements, internal layout, impact on the highway network and provision for pedestrians and cyclists all accord with the relevant policies and standards set out in the Highway Authority’s 6Cs Design Guide, LTP3 and the NPPF and therefore a refusal of highway grounds could not be substantiated on appeal. The recommended s106 contributions and conditions below, will ensure that the development is compatible with and does not prejudice the delivery of the SUE”. Conclusion The three dimensions of sustainable development have been considered (economic, social and environmental) as set out in the NPPF and the proposal would provide housing contributing to the quality and choice of housing in the PUA. In addition, the proposal will help meet the identified housing need for the PUA as set out in the Core Strategy. The principle of the development is therefore acceptable and accords with adopted policies. Notwithstanding the previous recent refusal of planning permission on this site, your Officers remain of the opinion that this scheme is acceptable. There are no objections from any of the statutory bodies, and there are no technical reasons for this application to be refused. Accordingly this application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the proposed conditions and signing of the legal agreement as detailed above. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14/0595/1/OX Registered Date Mr C Jolley 26 June 2014

Erection of two dwellings with associated access (outline)

Land rear and side of Church View House, Cooks Lane, Sapcote Report Author: Debra Harrison, Planning Officer

Contact Details: Council Offices. 0116 272 7564

RECOMMENDATION THAT APPLICATION 14/0595/1/PX BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANTS ENTERING INTO EITHER A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT OR UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING TO SECURE THE FOLLOWING:-

1. Off-site open space maintenance contribution.

And subject to the imposition of the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. Statutory outline condition 2. Details of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping to be submitted 3. No approval to illustrative layout 4. Materials to be agreed in writing 5. Landscaping scheme to be carried out 6. Foul and surface water drainage to be submitted 7. No surface water drainage onto public highway 8. Off street parking provision 9. Details of development to comply with LCC design standards NOTES TO COMMITTEE POLICY National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (Adopted February 2013) Policy CS1 Strategy for Locating New Development Policy CS2 Design of new development Policy CS5 Housing Distribution Policy CS18 Countryside Policy CS12 Planning obligations and developer contributions

Policy CS20 Historic Environment and Culture Policy CS24 Presumption in favour of sustainable development Blaby District Local Plan (1999) Policy C2 Other Development in the Countryside Policy T6 Off Street Parking Provision CONSULTATIONS Blaby District Council, Environmental Health - Consider the application acceptable subject to condition Blaby District Council, Neighbourhood Services – Made the following comments: “The collection vehicle will not be able to access these properties down the private drive and as such all waste bins will need to be presented at the end of the driveway where it meets Cooks Lane”. Leicestershire County Council, Archaeology – No comments received within statutory consultation period. Leicestershire County Council, Ecology – Commented that the existing buildings on the site are an unsuitable bat habitat. Leicestershire County Council, Highways – Recommends approval subject to conditions Leicestershire County Council, Historic Buildings Officer – Made the following comments: “In my view this, and the adjoining proposed development site, are within the wider setting of the listed former farmhouse on Cooks Lane. Setting of designated heritage assets often contributes to their significance and I believe it is desirable to retain an 'open' feel to these areas as a visual reminder of the historic functional association between the farmhouse and the land which presumably sustained the agricultural use over many years. Whilst I recognise that this may be difficult to fully achieve on either site, I am aware that the principal of residential development for a number of dwellings has been agreed on the adjoining land, care with boundary treatment, design of buildings and layout may help lessen the scale of the impact of the developments. The proposal for two houses that you are considering seems very contrived, with a very long drive providing access to only two dwellings. I will be interested to see how the new dwellings actually fit onto what appears to be a fairly restricted site and the possible granting of permission for the erection of new houses on the adjoining land may result in amenity issues that will need to be considered and overcome when detailed designs are being prepared. Liaison by the applicants with the developer of the adjoining land could result in a more satisfactory, logical and less costly layout that responds to the setting of the listed former farmhouse.”

Leicestershire County Council, Footpaths – No comments received within statutory consultation period. Sapcote Parish Council – No comments received within statutory consultation period. Severn Tent Water – No comments received within statutory consultation period. Representations No representations received. Relevant History No planning history on this site. EXPLANATORY NOTE The Proposal This is an outline planning application and seeks planning permission for the principle of the redevelopment of the site to provide two, four bedroom dwellings and the access to the site. All other matters will be assessed at Reserved Matters stage. The application site is a previously developed site located on the outskirts of Sapcote and is currently used as a stable yard in association with Church View House. The site is currently occupied by stables and associated farm buildings and machinery. The application site is located off Cooks Lane, Sapcote and will be accessed via the existing driveway to Church View House. The application site is located to the rear of the curtilage of the dwelling known as The Barn and to the rear of the Grade II listed South View Farmhouse. To the east of the site is a separate development site which has outline planning permission for six dwellings and there is a full planning application for the development of eight dwellings currently being considered by Officers. To the west of the application site are the rear gardens of The Barn and Church View House and to the south in open countryside. Planning Considerations Section 38(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other material considerations which indicate otherwise. This section of the report will first consider the proposed development against the policy background and then consider any other material considerations. There are a number of themes which run through national guidance as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework and these are generally in line with local policies expressed through the Development Plan. Key themes in the case of this application are that new development should be sustainable and previously developed land should be developed before greenfield sites come forward.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) This essential national policy framework establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. The emphasis is that development plans allow for development of sufficient housing in sustainable locations and that new development is of good design. It also sets out the planning approach that the Government wishes to see in relation to many aspects of the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. DEVELOPMENT PLAN Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) The adopted Core Strategy (February 2013) is now part of the Development Plan for the district of Blaby and the following policies are relevant to the proposed development: Policy CS1 Strategy for Locating New Development Policy CS1 encourages new development to take place within and in areas adjoining the Principal Urban Area (PUA) of Leicester. Outside the PUA, development will be focussed within and adjoining Blaby and the larger central villages. Sapcote is classed as one of the medium central villages. Policy CS2 Design of New Development Policy CS2 seeks to ensure that a high quality environment is achieved in all new development proposals, respecting distinctive local character and contributing towards creating places of high architectural and urban design quality. The design of new development should also be appropriate to its context. Policy CS5 – Housing Distribution Policy CS5 aims to focus new development in the most appropriate locations, the District Council seeks to distribute housing by settlement in accordance with the

figures contained within the Core Strategy. Sapcote is noted as a Medium Central Village along with Littlethorpe, Huncote, Croft and Cosby. The villages have a combined minimum housing requirement of 815 dwellings. As of 1 April 2014, the Medium Central Villages had a residual housing requirement of forty two dwellings and it is considered that this proposal accords with Policy CS5. Policy CS12 – Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions Policy CS12 seeks to ensure that the requirements for infrastructure, services and facilities arising from any development will be sought in accordance with the Council’s latest Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions SPD. This proposal will generate the need to provide a financial contribution towards the maintenance of local play space/recreation facilities. The applicant has agreed to enter into a legal agreement in accordance with Policy CS12. Policy CS18 – Countryside Within areas designated as Countryside Policy CS18 seeks to resist development which would have a significantly adverse effect on the appearance or character of the landscape. The need to retain Countryside will be balanced against the need to provide new development including housing. Policy CS20 Historic Environment and Culture Policy CS20 seeks to preserve, protect and where possible enhance Listed Buildings and other heritage assets. Policy CS24 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy CS24 reflects the overarching principle of the NPPF that the Government wishes to see in relation to the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Policy CS24 requires that when considering development proposals the District Council will take a positive approach and will always work proactively with applicants to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible. Your Officers have worked with the applicant to ensure that the development accords with adopted policies and thus the development is in accordance with Policy CS24. Blaby District Local Plan (1999) Although the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) has been adopted, a number of policies from the Blaby District Local Plan (1999) continue to be saved. The following policies are of relevance to this application. Policy C2 – Other Development in the Countryside Policy C2 seeks to resist development within the countryside which would have a

significantly adverse effect on the appearance or character of the landscape. Policy T6 – Off Street Parking Provision Policy T6 states that new residential development should accord with the adopted car parking standards of the District Council. One bedroom flats should provide a minimum of one off street car parking space per flat. This scheme accords with and exceeds the adopted car parking standards of this Council as required by Policy T6. Material Considerations Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise, and whether those material considerations are of such weight that the adopted policies of the Development Plan should not prevail in relation to any proposal. Principle of Development The application site is currently in use as a stable yard in association with Church View House and is located outside the edge of the built up area of Sapcote within the countryside. Sapcote is classified as a medium central village which has a residual housing requirement of forty two dwellings. Outline planning permission been approved on the adjoining site, 20 Cooks Lane for the development of six dwellings and there is currently an application for full planning permission pending consideration for the development of eight dwellings on this site. Whilst the application site is located outside the edge of the built up area of Sapcote and within the countryside, when taking into account the adjacent development it is considered that the development of this application site would not result in a detrimental impact on the appearance and character of the countryside. Therefore the principle of the development of this site for residential purposes is acceptable. Impact on Setting of Listed Buildings To the north of the application site is the Grade II listed South View House and the Grade II listed Stanley Burroughs Almshouses and All Saints Church. Comments received from the Historic Buildings Officer state that this application site and the adjoining development site are within the wider setting of the South View House. It is considered that if care with boundary treatment, design of buildings and layout is taken it may help lessen the scale of the impact of the developments As the principal of residential development has been established on the adjacent site, providing a sensitive approach is taken to the boundary treatment of the site and to the layout and design of the site and buildings at reserved matters stage, this outline application is considered acceptable in terms of its impact on the historic environment.

Design, Appearance and Layout As this is an outline application, the design, layout and appearance of the proposed development are not details for consideration in the determination of this application. Scale parameters and an indicative layout have been included as part of the application and indicate that the dwellings on this site would be two storey in height with a ridge height of 8.5 metres and an eaves height of 5.5 metres. Adjacent to the site is The Barn which is a single storey dwelling which is located directly off the north west corner of the site. It is considered that the indicative layout in combination with the indicative scale parameters would not be acceptable, particularly with regard to the impact the proposed layout and scale may have on the amenity of the occupiers of The Barn. However, it is not considered that the issue is insurmountable, in the context of the position of acceptability in principle, it is reasonable to conclude that matters of design, appearance and layout and residential amenity can be satisfactorily addressed at reserved matters stage. Highway Considerations Access to the proposed site is via the existing driveway to Church View House. The driveway to the proposed development site is positioned along the western and southern boundaries of Church View House in to the site. Leicestershire County Highways Department have recommended approval of this development subject to the proposed development complying the design standards set out in the current design standards design document, The 6C’s. The proposed site is large enough to accommodate two dwellings and the necessary off street parking provision. This development proposal is considered to be acceptable in highways terms and complies with saved Local Plan Policy T6 (1999). Conclusion In summary there are two key issues in the determination of this planning application, namely the acceptability of the principle of development and the impact the proposed development would have on the setting of the nearby listed buildings. Whilst the site is located on the edge of the built up area of Sapcote, it is considered that the principle of the development of two dwellings in this location is acceptable and will comprise the development of a previously developed site. Whilst the indicative layout and scale parameters are considered to not be acceptable at this stage, this application only seeks outline planning permission for the principle of development on this site and access. It is considered that subject to the sensitive design, layout and appearance of the dwellings at reserved matters stage the development of two dwellings can be made acceptable on this site in a

manner that will not detrimentally impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings or the amenity of neighbouring dwellings. There are no highways concerns over the proposed development and it is considered acceptable in this respect. Accordingly, this application is recommended for approval subject to the proposed conditions and the signing of the legal agreement as detailed above. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14/0651/1/PX Registered Date Abraham Properties Ltd 9 July 2014 Erection of a pair of two storey semi detached dwellings with

parking and amenity space - Land to the rear of 28 The Roundhills, Elmesthorpe Report Author: Ian Davies, Development Management Team

Leader Contact Details: Council Offices. 0116 272 7688 RECOMMENDATION THAT APPLICATION 14/0651/1/PX BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANTS ENTERING INTO EITHER A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT OR UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING TO SECURE THE FOLLOWING:-

1. Off-site open space maintenance contribution.

And subject to the imposition of the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. Statutory time condition – 3 Years. 2. Materials to be agreed in writing. 3. Scheme for foul and surface water drainage to be submitted. 4. No additional windows to be constructed in side elevations. 5. Finished floor levels to be submitted and agreed. 6. Permitted development rights for extensions to the dwellings removed. 7. Car parking to be provided in accordance with submitted plans. 8. Access drive to be hard surfaced. 9. On site turning facilities to be provided in accordance with submitted plans. NOTES TO COMMITTEE Policy National Planning Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013) Policy CS1 – Strategy for locating new development Policy CS2 – Design of new development Policy CS5 – Housing distribution

Policy CS12 – Planning obligations and developer contributions Policy CS24 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development. Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) Policy R1 – Primarily Residential Areas Blaby District Council Planning Obligations & Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (2010). Consultations Blaby District Council Waste Operations Manager – No objections. Elmesthorpe Parish Council – Objects for the following reasons: “1) The footprint for the proposed dwellings has been increased from the previous application 14/0178/1/PX. As a consequence, the side blank wall of the proposed dwellings will be closer to the existing houses in The Roundhills and Bostock Close than previously proposed resulting in a greater loss of outlook. The Parish Council is especially concerned regarding the detriment of residential amenity to these properties. For example, should permission be granted, the aspect from the rear windows and garden of number 30 The Roundhills will be of a blank wall extending all the way across its garden (and into the gardens of number 28 and 32) and the situation will be the similar for houses on Bostock Close. Because of their size and proximity to the boundary, the proposed dwellings will overshadow the gardens of existing properties thereby reducing the use of enjoyment of the gardens for the people who live there. 2) The design of the proposed semi detached dwellings consists of a ground floor with the first floor accommodated in the roof. There are a total of eight windows in the roof, and the height of the roof is similar to that of a two storey dwelling. This will result in a loss of privacy for many of the existing residential properties around the site, as they will be overlooked from the first floor windows. 3) The Parish Council would like the design and appearance of any proposed development on this site to be such that (a) the development does not cause a loss of outlook and detriment to the residential amenity of the established homes around the site, and that (b) the development does not overlook established homes around the site and thereby cause loss of privacy to the residents. 4) Access is off a hammerhead at the top of The Roundhills, and is via a narrow single track private drive. Following representations from Parishioners, the Parish Council would like the width of this private drive to be measured as there appears to be a difference of opinion regarding its actual width. The Parish Council has concerns about the suitability of the drive in terms of access for emergency vehicles. The Parish Council also has concerns regarding the suitability of the drive in terms of access for construction traffic, should permission be granted, and would advise that the hammerhead at the top of The Roundhills is not of sufficient size to accommodate construction materials being unloaded from vehicles without serious

detriment to the use and enjoyment of the driveways to existing properties by the residents. 5) The Roundhills is a narrow road with residential properties on both sides of the road. The Parish Council would like an assessment to be undertaken in respect of the impact of the emissions from construction traffic on air quality before this application is determined. 6) In the event of planning permission being granted, the Parish Council would wish access for construction traffic to be restricted on a timed basis (8am-4pm) as the proposed development is within an existing residential area. The Parish Council would also like the issue of where construction traffic is to be parked to be addressed due to the restricted capacity in The Roundhills.” Leicestershire County Council Highways – Has no objections subject to the imposition of highway conditions. Severn Trent Water - No objection subject to the inclusion of a standard condition requiring drainage details to be submitted and agreed. Third Party Representations 10 letters of objection have been received against the proposal. These representations raised the following issues:

• Overdevelopment of site;

• Concerns over the traffic impact and congestion;

• Noise and disturbance;

• Overlooking;

• Loss of light;

• The proposed changes are worse than the previous scheme;

• Overshadowing;

• Out of character with the surrounding area;

• Impact on local services;

• Drainage concerns;

• Permission should be granted for bungalows only;

• Too close to existing dwellings;

• Problems with waste collection;

• Problems with emergency access.

Relevant History 14/0178/1/PX Erection of pair of semi-detached Refused dwellings with garages, parking & 1/7/2014 amenity space. EXPLANATORY NOTE This application would normally have been determined under the powers delegated

to Officers. However, Councillor Mr Freer has formally requested that the application be referred up for determination by the Development Control Committee (the Member Call-In Procedure as outlined in the District Council’s Constitution). The Proposal This application for full planning permission proposes the erection of 1 pair of 3 bedroom semi-detached dwellings. The dwellings are 2 storey but the first floor is within the roofspace. Each property will have two off-street car parking spaces. The application site was previously in use as a Council owned car park, however that use ceased a number of years ago and the land has sat vacant since that time. The application site lies within the built-up area of Elmesthorpe and is surrounded by 2 storey residential properties. The proposed development will utilise the existing vehicular access to the garage courtyard. Members will recall that the previous application on this site for one pair of 2 storey semi-detached dwellings was refused planning permission in June this year for the following reason: “The District Planning Authority considers that the proposed design and layout is unsuitable for the site and results in a cramped layout with poor access arrangements, contrary to Policy CS2 of the adopted Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013).” The applicant has redesigned his scheme and submitted this current application in an attempt to overcome the previous reason for refusal. The following table sets out the principal differences between the previous refused scheme and the current scheme: Application 14/0178/1/PX Current proposal

Ridge height

8.5m 7m

Eaves height

4.8m 2.6m

Depth of property

10.3m 9.44m

Width of property

11.25m 14.4m

Height to bottom of 1st floor windows

3.4m 3.4m

Distance off boundary from The Roundhills

2.7m 1.2m

Distance off boundary from Bostock Close

3.5m 1.8m

Back garden depths

14m (average) 8.5m (average)

Planning Considerations Section 38(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other material considerations which indicate otherwise. This section of the report will first consider the proposed development against the policy background and then consider any other material considerations. There are a number of themes which run through national guidance as expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework and these are generally in line with local policies expressed through the Development Plan. Key themes in the case of this application are that new development should be sustainable and previously developed land should be developed before greenfield sites come forward. National Planning Guidance National Planning Policy Framework This essential national policy framework establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. The emphasis is that development plans allow for development of sufficient housing in sustainable locations and that new development is of good design. It also sets out the planning approach that the Government wishes to see in relation to many aspects of the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. The location of this development is within the built-up area of Elmesthorpe and utilises previously developed land. Therefore given its location and its former use as a garage courtyard, the proposal is in line with guidance in the NPPF. DEVELOPMENT PLAN Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013)

The adopted Core Strategy (February 2013) is now part of the Development Plan for the district of Blaby and the following policies are relevant to the proposed development: Policy CS1 – Strategy for Locating New Development Policy CS1 seeks to focus new housing development in the most sustainable locations in the district, primarily within the principal urban area (PUA) of Leicester and more sustainable towns and villages. Elmesthorpe, due to its limited range of employment opportunities, services and facilities is considered to be capable of only accepting a modest amount of new development. Policy CS2 – Design of New Development Policy CS2 seeks to ensure that a high quality environment is achieved in all new development proposals, respecting distinctive local character and the design of new development should also be appropriate to its context. Your Officers consider that this revised scheme respects the context of the local area and accords with Policy CS2. Policy CS5 – Housing Distribution Policy CS5 aims to focus new development in the most appropriate locations, the District Council seeks to distribute housing by settlement in accordance with the figures contained within the Core Strategy. Elmesthorpe is noted as forming part of the Smaller Villages with a combined minimum housing requirement of 80 dwellings. Taking into account built and recently committed sites, the Smaller Villages has a residual housing requirement of approximately 15 dwellings. This current proposal will help meet that residual requirement. Accordingly, the proposal accords with Policy CS5. Policy CS12 – Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions Policy CS12 seeks to ensure that the requirements for infrastructure, services and facilities arising from any development will be sought in accordance with the Council’s latest Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions SPD. This proposal will generate the need to provide a financial contribution towards the maintenance of local play space/recreation facilities. The applicant has agreed to enter into a legal agreement in accordance with Policy CS12. Policy CS24 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy CS24 reflects the overarching principle of the NPPF that the Government wishes to see in relation to the planning system, including housing delivery - with the golden thread running through the decision making process being the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Policy CS24 requires that when considering development proposals the District Council will take a positive approach and will always work proactively with applicants to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible. Your Officers have worked with the applicant to ensure that the development accords with adopted policies and thus the

development is in accordance with Policy CS24. Blaby District Local Plan (1999) Although the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) has been adopted, a number of policies from the Blaby District Local Plan (1999) continue to be saved. The following policies are of relevance to this application. Policy R1 – Residential Development within Primarily Residential Areas This site is located within the settlement boundary of Elmesthorpe, which is an acceptable location for residential development, in principle, subject to the criteria set out in Policy R1. Your Officers consider that this revised scheme will accord with Policy R1 and will not be significantly out of keeping with the character of the area nor will it be significantly detrimental to the amenities of adjoining occupiers when weighed against the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as expressed in both the NPPF and the adopted Core Strategy. Policy T6 – Off Street Parking Provision Policy T6 states that new residential development should accord with the adopted car parking standards of the District Council. In terms of this proposal, this scheme would result in the need for 4 car parking spaces. This scheme accords with the adopted car parking standards of this Council as required by Policy T6. Other Material Considerations Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise, and whether those material considerations are of such weight that the adopted policies of the Development Plan should not prevail in relation to any proposal. In addition to the policy considerations set out above, there are two substantive material considerations that relate to the development of this site, which are:

- Design and Layout. - Highway Considerations.

Design and Layout This revised scheme has been designed to overcome the previous reason for refusal and to respect the character of the adjoining two storey properties whilst retaining an acceptable spatial separation from those properties. Given the fact that the surrounding area is characterised by 2 storey dwellings and having regard to the pattern of existing development in the wider area it is not considered that the erection of “1 ½” storey properties on this site in itself merits a reason for refusal. Your Officers are of the opinion that the revised scheme, subject to the conditions to be imposed, is the most appropriate compromise to ensure that this development can be permitted and the best use made of this previously developed land, in

accordance with the national presumption in favour of sustainable development. The concerns of both the Parish Council and residents are noted. However, your Officers consider that there are no robust and defendable reasons for refusal of this application on loss of privacy or overbearing grounds given the spatial separation and orientation of the buildings within the site. Highway Considerations Concern has been raised by both the Parish Council and residents in relation to highways matters, namely the traffic generated by the development and the safety of using the access. The Leicestershire County Council has raised no formal objections to this proposal (given its previous use as a garage/parking courtyard) and is satisfied that the existing access and road network could safely accommodate the traffic that would be generated. As stated previously, the adopted car parking standards of the District Council require 4 off-street car parking spaces to serve this development. The scheme demonstrates that 4 off-street car parking spaces can be provided, with space to turn on the site and leave in a forward manner. Accordingly the scheme complies with the adopted standards of the Council. In relation to access for emergency services, this aspect of the development is governed under the Building Regulations, and is not a matter for consideration under the planning merits of the scheme. In terms of access for refuse vehicles, and whereas this also is not a matter for consideration under the planning merits of the scheme, Members should note that the Council’s Waste Operations Manager has raised no formal objections to this scheme. The scheme is therefore considered to be acceptable in relation to highway matters. Conclusion There are two key issues in the determination of this planning application, namely the current policy position and any other material considerations. The policy position is that the site lies within the built-up area of Elmesthorpe where the principle of residential development is acceptable. The proposal will utilise previously developed land and will meet identified housing need for the Smaller Villages as set out in the Core Strategy. The principle of the development is therefore acceptable and accords with adopted policies. It is considered that the revised design and layout of the site including the proposed car parking provision is acceptable in relation to the character of the locality and in relation to the residential amenities of adjoining residents. The three dimensions of sustainable development have been considered (economic, social and environmental) as set out in the NPPF and the proposal would provide

housing contributing to the quality and choice of housing in Elmesthorpe and the Smaller Villages as a whole. Accordingly this application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the proposed conditions and signing of the legal agreement as detailed above. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14/0675/1/PX Registered Date T Smith & Sons Ltd 16 July 2014 Erection of agricultural building for the storage of cattle Bumble Bee Farm, Bumble Bee Lane, Sharnford Report Author: James Mountain, Planning Officer Contact Details: Kristy Ingles, Development Management

Team Leader - Council Offices. 0116 272 7565

RECOMMENDATION: THAT APPLICATION 14/0675/1/PX BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE IMPOSITION OF FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Statutory 3 year time limit. 2. Development in accordance with approved plans. 3. Materials as specified. NOTES TO COMMITTEE Relevant Planning Policies National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Planning Practice Guidance (2014) Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (February 2013) Policy CS18 –Countryside Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) (1999) Policy C1- Agricultural Buildings in the Countryside Consultation Summary Sharnford Parish Council – Comments awaited. Third Party Representations None. Recent Relevant Planning History 14/0279/1/PX Erection of agricultural building to house slurry Approved separator system 07.05.14

06/0627/1/PY Extension to parlour building Approved 31.08.06 The Proposal The application seeks permission for the construction of an agricultural building measuring 54.8m x 18.2m which would house cattle. The building would be located to the north west of the existing farm buildings and it would be constructed from concrete and timber panels with a grey corrugated fibre cement roof. The application is to be decided at committee due to it exceeding the 1000sqm restriction as set out in the constitution. Planning Considerations The national planning policy framework (NPPF) establishes the key principles for proactively delivering sustainable development through the development plan system and the determination of planning applications. It suggests that in decision-taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and, where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, to grant permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. The NPPF states that planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas including the promotion of agricultural businesses. The application site is located within Countryside. Policy CS18 of the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2013 seeks to prevent inappropriate development within the countryside. The Policy states that planning permission will not be granted for built development, or other development which would have a significantly adverse effect on the appearance or character of the landscape. However, the Policy goes on to state that planning permission will be granted for limited small scale employment leisure development subject to consideration of its impacts. Although the Blaby District Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Plan Document (2013) has been adopted a number of policies from the Blaby District Local Plan (BDLP) 1999 continue to be saved. Policy C1 of the BDLP specifically refers to agricultural buildings. It states that within countryside planning permission will be granted for agricultural buildings providing that the development would have a satisfactory relationship with nearby uses, including considerations of vibration, emissions, hours of working, vehicular activity, privacy, light illumination, noise, disturbance and an overbearing effect. The proposed building is designed for agricultural purposes and its appearance would be in keeping with other buildings on the site. Due to the siting of the building

adjacent to the existing farm buildings it is considered that the building would have a limited impact on the appearance or character of the landscape. The closest residential dwelling to the proposed agricultural building would be Apple Tree Cottage approximately 130m to the east. This dwelling is in the ownership of the applicant. The next closest dwelling would be Bumble Bee Bungalow approximately 470m to the east. Due to the distance between the proposed agricultural storage building and the bungalow and the established agricultural use of the site, it is not considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact on residential amenity. Conclusion The proposed building is considered to be of an appropriate design for its surrounding environment. It would have no detrimental impact on the surrounding countryside nor neighbouring amenity through way of its siting or design. Accordingly, this application is recommended for approval. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________