Agenda item

Agenda item

A4 - 13/00797/FULM

Erection of 39 residential units including affordable housing and provision of sustainable urban drainage and on site public open space


(Church View) Land Adjoining 33 Measham Road Appleby Magna


Erection of 39 residential units including affordable housing and provision of sustainable urban drainage and on site public open space


(Church View) Land Adjoining 33 Measham Road, Appleby Magna


The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report to Members.


Mr F Steward, objector, addressed the Committee.  He stated that many people visited the rural area and if it was to be lost, it would be the District that would also lose out.  He stated that evidence was needed to overturn an officer’s recommendation and therefore raised the following:

-   The site is Greenfield and objections had been received from English Heritage and local residents.

-   The District has a high level of transport related emissions and this development would contribute to an increase.

-   A sustainability appraisal was undertaken in 2013 which stated that only small scale growth would make the area sustainable; this would be 5.7 per cent.  Prior to this meeting development was already much higher than that and with the addition of the previous application, that figure had been doubled.


Mr J Ottewell, agent, addressed the Committee.  He stated that he had worked closely with officers on the design of the scheme and they agreed that the site was sustainable.  He believed that the development would assist in maintaining local vitality and provided much needed affordable housing to the area.  He commented that there were no objections from the County Council Highway Authority or Severn Trent and referred Members to the report which stated that refusal on the grounds of sustainability would not be justified.


The officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor J G Coxon and seconded by Councillor D Everitt.  Both Councillors believed it was a good site for development with a good design.  Councillor D Everitt was pleased with the level of affordable housing.


Councillor G Jones spoke in support of the application but once again expressed disappointment that there were no self build units.


Councillor A Bridges expressed concerns regarding the capacity of the local school and the additional number of children the development would bring.  She stressed the need to extend the school and the importance of the Section 106 contributions.


Councillor T Neilson did not agree with the view that more people in the village would make it more sustainable and keep services running.  He believed that the site was better than the previous application but that had already been approved.  He also believed that it was not sustainable due to the oversubscribed local school, the closure of the medical surgery and the reduction in bus service.


Councillor M Specht stated that all children eventually moved through a school and if there were no more children then the school would be under threat so it was important to have more children in the area.  He also added that with regards to local shops ‘every penny counts’ and he was sure they would appreciate the extra business the development would bring.


Councillor R Johnson felt that the development would complement the village and would be supporting the application.




The application be permitted in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Regeneration and Planning.

Supporting documents: