To confirm the minutes of the Development Control and Licensing Committee held on 27 October 2015.

RESOLVED

The minutes of the Development Control and Licensing Committee held on 27 October 2015 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any disclosable interests under the Code of Conduct and the nature of those interests in respect of items on this Agenda and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

To receive any petitions, deputations and questions from members of the Public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rules.

The total time allowed for this item shall be 30 minutes.  Petitions, deputations and questions shall be dealt with in the order in which they are received.  Questions may also be submitted at short notice by giving a written copy to the Committee Administrator 15 minutes before the start of the meeting.

The total time allowed for questions at short notice is 15 minutes out of the total time of 30 minutes.  Any petitions, deputations and questions that have been submitted with prior formal notice will take precedence over questions submitted at short notice.  Any questions that are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting and be the subject of a report to the next meeting.

No petitions, deputations or questions were received.

To receive any deputations from members of the Public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 94(4).

There will be no limit on the total number of deputations to be received but no more than two deputations will be permitted in respect of each planning application one of which, if required, will be from a statutory consultee.

Deputations which relate to a planning application included on the agenda for this meeting will be deferred until the application is considered by Members.

Following the deputation, the applicant or his agent will have a right of reply, the maximum time for which will be three minutes.  Members will then have the opportunity to question the deputee and if a response has been made, the applicant or agent, for a maximum of four minutes.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 93(4) the following deputation had been received:

·         In relation to Agenda Item 5, application 1, 2015/0763/FUL, a deputation was received from Mr Simon Ainge.

To receive Report No. 229/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport).

Report No. 229/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport) was received.

Application for a two storey extension and new entrance porch to front (east) elevation.  First floor extension to side (south) elevation and alterations to driveway and boundary wall.

(Ward: Lyddington; Parish: Seaton)

A deputation was received from Mr Simon Ainge, the content of which is included below:

My wife and I have a six month old son and before moving to Main Street last December, we lived around the corner in the village in a new development on West Lane for 5.5 years.

Our current house is in need of modernisation with a list of jobs including new windows, a new heating system, a new kitchen, additional insulation and decorating.  In addition to this the layout is outdated and to become a suitable family home as intended we really need an extra bedroom and a larger kitchen.

A planning application was submitted earlier this year but refused.

Before submitting a new application, I discussed my ideas with a new architect, namely Tony Ansell from Rutland Planning, who suggested before anything was submitted he would approach the planning department with a basic sketch to ensure we were on the right track.  Obviously these opinions are not to be taken as any formal indication of the final result but the meeting was encouraging.

In brief the new plans outlined a proposed extension to the first floor at the rear, an extension to the side and a removal of part of the driveway wall.  It seems that there are two main issues with the proposed plan:

1)    The size of the extension to the side (or front as it is being referred to) and the opinion that it alters the linear form of the current building.

I would ask you to consider that:

-       The extension would be sympathetic to the look of the building which has been extended at least twice in its lifetime.

-       The size of the extension has been reduced twice.  This second application compromised the extension with a footprint reduction of 71% over the original design.  A revision to this application then reduced it by a further 30%.

-       The proposed ridge height of the extension is 1m lower than the existing ridge.

-       The extension would be 12m back from the main highway.

-       The neighbouring properties, in particular no. 11 Main Street do not assist in forming a typical linear building form so please question the significance of this point that the Conservation Officer has raised.

-       The property is well screened from the highway.

-       I would emphasise that all concerns have addressed and the necessary amendments/compromises have been made to the plans in line with Patrick Gear’s email dated 16/09/15 (Schedule 1).  These included, removal of the parapet gable on the side extension, removal of the hipped design of the dormer windows, removal of the new porch design and of course the reduction in the size of the side extension.

2)    What affect does the proposed removal of part of the driveway wall have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 412.

Application for a proposed single storey rear extension and hipped roof to replace existing flat roof over the existing garage.

(Ward: Oakham South East; Parish: Oakham)

RESOLVED

2015/0878/FUL In accordance with the recommendations set out within Report No. 229/2015 Item 2 that this application be APPROVED.

Application for the development of a new 2-storey sixth form school (Use Class D1) for (up to 300) pupils aged between 16-19 years of age, with associated infrastructure and landscaping, including provision of car parking to replace temporary accommodation.

(Ward: Oakham North West; Parish: Oakham, Barleythorpe)

Mr Gale spoke as Ward Councillor. Mr Gale supported the idea in principle but voiced concerns regarding both parking and drainage.

A detailed discussion took place, during which Members expressed their concerns regarding this application.

The Chairman recommended that application be deferred until adequate information on drainage was available.

RESOLVED

2015/0899/MAJ That this application be DEFERRED until a future meeting of the Development Control and Licensing Committee.

(10 in favour; 1 abstention)

To receive Report No. 228/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport).

Report No. 228/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport) was received.

RESOLVED

That the contents of Report No. 228/2015 be NOTED.

To consider any other business approved in writing by the Chief Executive and Chairman of the Committee.

No items of urgent business had been previously notified to the person presiding.