A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Council and councillors

Agenda item

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

To receive Report No. 32/2020 from the Deputy Director for Places.

Minutes:

Report No. 32/2020 was received from the Deputy Director for Places.

 

---oOo---

Mr Baines, Mr Cross, and Ms MacCartney left the meeting.

---oOo---

 

---oOo---

Mr Razzell took the Chair.

---oOo---

 

Item 1 (2019/1076/MAF) Land at Hawksmead Business Park north of Hackamore Way, Barleythorpe.

 

New commercial development and access on allocated employment land comprising the following: New industrial unit with retail sales element - B2/A1 use for C&M Tractors. New vehicle showroom for C&M VSS - Sui generis use., 2 new office/property hub buildings for Moores - B1/A2 use.

 

(Ward: Barleythorpe; Parish: Barleythorpe)

 

Mr Waskett-Burt, Planning Officer for the council, addressed the Committee and gave an executive summary of the application, recommending approval.

 

Mr Cooper, speaking as the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

      i.        The single access serving the two sites was considered to be wide enough for HGV and other vehicles.

    ii.        The level of traffic for the development was deemed less than the traffic for Aldi and M&S and did not warrant a right-hand turn lane.

 

RESOLVED

 

2019/1076/MAF in accordance with the recommendation set out within Report No. 32/2020, that the application be APPROVED.

 

---oOo---

Mr Baines, Mr Cross, and Ms MacCartney returned to the meeting.

---oOo---

 

---oOo---

Mr Baines took the Chair.

---oOo---

 

 

Item 2 (2019/0628/FUL) Building 27, Meadow Park Industrial Estate, Essendine, Rutland PE9 4LT.

 

Change of use for parking of coaches. Construction of workshop for maintenance of coaches. Installation of 2 no. modular units to house toilets and office relating to workshop.

 

(Ward: Ryhall & Casterton; Parish: Essendine)

 

Mr Johnson, Development Manager for the council, addressed the Committee and gave an executive summary of the application, recommending approval.

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

      i.        It was questioned why the west access of the site could not be used by the coaches. The west access was too narrow to allow for two commercial vehicles to pass clear of the highway and the road couldn’t be widened.

    ii.        The Committee did not have a legal power to impose a one way system on the access roads.

   iii.        Mr Howat, Senior Environmental Health Officer for the Council stated that the dioxide and noise levels from the coaches would not make a significant impact.

   iv.        The developer had control over the access road where there were houses. It would be for the developer to place private enforcement to ensure cars did not park on the access road.

 

RESOLVED

 

2019/0628/FUL in accordance with the recommendation set out within Report No. 32/2020, that the application be APPROVED.

 

---oOo---

Mrs Harvey left the meeting.

---oOo---

 

Item 3 (2019/1228/OUT) Allotment Gardens, Brooke Road, Oakham.

 

Outline application for the erection of up to 40 no. dwellings with associated open space, landscaping and infrastructure (access and highway improvements for detailed consideration with all other matters reserved for future consideration).

 

Mr Johnson, Development Manager for the council, addressed the Committee and gave an executive summary of the application, recommending approval.

 

Mr Lewis-Roberts, speaking as the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

---oOo---

The Chairman proposed that the meeting be extended by 15 minutes in accordance with Procuedure Rule 58 and this was seconded by another member of the Committee.

---oOo---

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

      i.        Mr Johnston stated that following the report being prepared, further concerns were raised with regarding to the traffic on Brooke Road and the queuing of vehicles when the train barriers were down.

    ii.        Members were reminded that the Committee previously did not take consideration of the Highways ruling the last time the application came to the Committee and as a result partial costs were awarded against the Council.

   iii.        Mr Woodley stated the report did not mention the sound barrier construction or the impact of sound on neighbouring properties.

   iv.        The sound reflected from the sound barrier would disperse rather than ricochet. Sound would be reflected but it would cause a minimal impact.

    v.        The layout of the development had been changed from the previous application in order to minimise impact from the sound from the train line.

   vi.        The council had control over the placement of affordable housing. The affordable housing would be plotted around the development not simply in one location.

 

RESOLVED

 

2019/1228/OUT in accordance with the recommendation set out within Report No. 32/2020, that the application be APPROVED.

 

---oOo---

Mrs Harvey returned to the meeting.

---oOo---

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: