1

Item No. 1 Application Reference Number P/14/0777/2 Application Type: Outline Planning

Permission Date Valid: 28/04/2014

Applicant: Rosconn Group Proposal: Site for the erection of 103 dwellings following the demolition of

62 Iveshead Road Location: Land r/o 62 Iveshead Road, Shepshed, Loughborough Parish: Shepshed Ward: Shepshed East Case Officer:

Mike Smith Tel No: 01509 634761

Description of the Application Site The application site comprises of a current residential property at Number 62 Iveshead Road and its curtilage and two open fields to the rear extending in total to approximately 3.73 hectares. The land to the rear of No 62 slopes down from the north-east towards the south west and towards existing properties on Iveshead Road and The Pastures. The field closest the rear of Iveshead Road is somewhat overgrown containing a number of shrubs and with an existing hedgerow along its eastern boundary where it adjoins the second field. The second field is generally more open grassland surrounded by mature hedgerows but also with some mature and significant sized trees particularly along its boundary with Iveshead Lane to the south. The Proposal This is an outline application for the development of land for 103 dwellings. The proposal involves the demolition of No 62 Iveshead Road where a new access into the site is to be created. Within the site a development of 103 dwellings is proposed with areas of open space and an on site balancing pond. Although some of the existing hedgerows will require to be removed to facilitate the development significant lengths of existing hedgerow particularly around the periphery of the site are retained. The application is accompanied by the following documents;

Planning Statement

Design and Access Statement

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Transport Assessment

Travel Plan

Ecology Report

Arboricultural Report

Phase 1 Site Investigation

Flood Risk Assessment

2

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment.

S106 Heads of Terms Development Plan Policies and other material considerations The development plan currently consists of the saved policies of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan (2004), the Leicestershire Minerals Core Strategy and Development Control Policies document and the Leicestershire Waste Core Strategy and Development Control Policies document (both 2009). Section 38 (6) of the Panning and Compulsory Purchase Act requires planning decisions to be taken in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Borough of Charnwood Local Plan was adopted 12 January 2004. The Development Plan is dated in several areas although ‘due weight’ can be given to those policies that are consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework. The policies that are relevant to this proposal include: Borough of Charnwood Local Plan 1991-2006 (adopted 12th January 2004) (saved policies) Policy ST/1 - Overall Strategy for Charnwood - This seeks to set the overall framework for development in the Borough, ensuring that needs of the community are met, and that features of the natural and built environment are protected and safeguarded where necessary. The policy aims to improve the quality of development through the layout of sites and to achieve sustainable development in a co-coordinated, comprehensive and consistent basis. Policy ST/2 - Limits to Development - This policy seeks to restrict development to within the existing Limits to Development boundaries of existing settlements to ensure that development needs can be met without harm to the countryside or other rural interests. Policy ST/3 - Infrastructure - seeks to ensure that developers provide financial contributions for things which have an impact on related infrastructure or community facilities. Policy EV/1 - Design - This seeks to ensure a high standard of design and developments which respect the character of the area, nearby occupiers, and which are compatible in mass, scale, layout, whilst using landforms and other natural features. Developments should meet the needs of all groups and create safe places for people. Policy EV/17 - Safety in New Development - The policy aims to secure improvements to ensure public safety in the design and layout of new development. Policy EV/20 - Landscaping in New Development - This seeks to ensure that a high standard of landscaping is provided on all new development sites, particularly where these are in areas adjacent to countryside, or principle transport corridors.

3

Policy H/5 - Affordable Housing on Unallocated Sites - This seeks to secure the provision of the appropriate amount of affordable housing with a range of house types on windfall sites. Policy H/16 - Design and Layout of New Housing Developments - This policy seeks to ensure that proposed housing developments are planned to ensure that high standards of design are achieved in terms of scale, character of the area, privacy, landscaping and creating a safe and secure environment. Policy E/8 - Safeguarding Employment Land and Building - This policy seeks to safeguard employment land from uses other than those falling within Class B of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes Order), except in certain circumstances; including that; the alternative use would secure specific benefits to the advantage of the local community which would also serve a planning function and could not be achieved by other means. Policy TR/1 - Specified Road Network - This seeks to ensure that development is not granted which results in serious congestion on the main traffic routes through the Borough, or otherwise prejudice the ability to provide for safe and efficient movement of traffic. Policy TR/6 - Traffic Generation from New Development - This seeks to restrict development which, through its impact, results in an unsatisfactory operation of the highway system, or has a significant impact on the environment, unless measures are proposed to overcome any harmful effects. In all cases measures should help to reduce car dependence and usage. Policy TR/18 - Parking in New Development - This seeks to set the maximum standards by which development should provide for off street car parking dependent on floor space or dwelling numbers. RT/3 - Play Spaces in New Development - This policy seeks to ensure the provision of play space in development primarily for family occupation and sets out standards required to achieve this. It also allows for seeking commuted sum payments of developments less than 10 dwellings in areas where there would be, or is, a deficiency in play space in an area. RT/4 - Youth/Adult Play in New Development - This seeks to ensure the provision of youth/adult play provision on developments of more than 10 units. Where this is not feasible on the site, then a commuted sum can be negotiated. RT/5 – Amenity Open Space in New Development - This policy requires the provision of 38sqm per 10 dwellings for additional amenity open space on all developments over 10 dwellings. National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF) The Framework sets out the Government’s planning policies for England, how these are expected to be applied and taken into account in the preparation of local and

4

neighbourhood plans, and as a material consideration in the determination of planning decisions (Para2). The Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there are 3 dimensions to this;

An economic role – contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places to support growth and innovation

A social role – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations, and by creating a high quality built development with accessible local services;

An environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment.

At the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision making. For decision making, 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, granting permission, unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or where specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted (Para 14 and 197).

Section 4: Promoting Sustainable Transport Paragraphs 29 – 32 indicate that transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development, but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives. Smarter use of technologies can reduce the need to travel. The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. However, the Government recognises that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas. All developments that generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment. Plans and decisions should take account of whether:

the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;

safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and

improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limits the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

5

Section 6: Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes. To boost significantly the supply of housing, local planning authorities should identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer of 5% (moved forward from later in the plan period) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. Where there has been a record of persistent under delivery of housing, local planning authorities should increase the buffer to 20% to provide a realistic prospect of achieving the planned supply (Para 47). Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing site (Para 49). Section 7: Requiring good design Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development is indivisible from good planning and should contribute positively to making places better for people (Para 56). In determining planning applications, great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which help raise the standard of design more generally in the area (Para 63). Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions (Para 64). Section 10: Climate change and flooding In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should expect new development to:

Comply with adopted local plan policies on local requirements for decentralised energy supplies.

Take account of landform, layout, building orientation, massing and landscaping to minimise energy consumption (Para 96).

It says that inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere. Opportunities offered by new development to reduce the causes and impacts of flooding should be used. Decision taking The Framework sets out that local planning authorities should approach decision-taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development. The relationship between decision making and plan-making should be seamless, translating plans into high quality development on the ground (Para 186). It therefore requires LPA’s to approve development proposals which accord with the local plan without delay, and where the plan is absent, silent, or its policies are out of date, planning permission should be granted for development unless its adverse impacts

6

would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. In assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development (Para 197). It is important to note that the document states that if a local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date, and applications for housing should be considered in the context of a presumption in favour of sustainable development (Paragraph 49). Local Plan Core Strategy The Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is currently the subject of an examination. Initial hearings were held in March of this year and are due to recommence in December. Although it is not yet part of the Development Plan for Charnwood the document sets out the most up to date expression of Council policy, having been approved for submission by the Council following widespread consultation. Decision takers may give weight to relevant policies in the Core Strategy depending on the extent and significance of unresolved objections to a particular policy and the degree of consistency with the NPPF. Policy CS1 – Development Strategy sets out the development strategy for both the Leicester PUA (Principal Urban Area) and Loughborough/Shepshed and identifies sustainable urban extensions and directions of growth to meet the need for growth. The policy also makes provision for up to 6ha of employment land adjoining Loughborough/Shepshed and housing and employment within and adjoining Service Centres. Policy CS2 - High Quality Design requires developments to make a positive contribution to Charnwood, reinforcing a sense of place. Development should respect and enhance the character of the area, having regard to scale, massing, height, landscape, layout, materials and access; protect the amenity of people who live or work nearby, provide attractive well managed public and private spaces; well defined and legible streets and spaces and reduce their impact on climate change. Policy CS3 - Strategic Housing Needs sets out affordable housing requirements and an appropriate mix of types, tenures and sizes of home. For developments in the Shepshed direction of growth there is a target of 30%. Policy CS 11 - Landscape and Countryside provides support and protection for the character of Charnwood’s landscape and countryside. New development should reinforce sense of place and local distinctiveness by taking account of landscape character assessments and should maintain separate identities of our towns and villages. Rural economic development will be supported where there are strong relationships with operational requirements of appropriate rural businesses. Rural local need housing will be supported along with community services and facilities that meet proven local need identified by the community in an appropriate plan.

7

Policy CS12 – Green Infrastructure protects and enhances green infrastructure assets including addressing the identified needs in open space provision. Policy CS13 - Biodiversity and Geo-diversity supports development that protects biodiversity and geo-diversity, requiring development to take account of the impacts particularly with regard to important sites. Development which results in the loss of these features will only be supported in exceptional circumstances where benefits clearly outweigh harm. Adequate mitigation or, as a last resort, compensation will be required where there are impacts. Policy CS15 - Open Spaces Sports and Recreation requires new development to meet the standards set out in our Open Space Strategy and to provide for long term management and investment plans for existing and new facilities. Policy CS16 - Sustainable Construction and Energy encourages sustainable design and construction including measures that reduce the need for energy and secure residual need for energy through low carbon or renewable sources to exceed Building Regulations for carbon emissions. Design and Access Statements for major developments are required to demonstrate how the need to reduce emissions has influenced the design, layout and energy source used. The policy directs development to locations within the Borough at the lowest risk of flooding by applying the Sequential Test and, if necessary, the Exceptions Test. Developments that take the opportunity to reduce flood risk elsewhere are supported and there is also a requirement to manage surface water run off so there is no net increase from that for Greenfield sites. The policy supports development which protects environmental resources including local air quality and the most versatile agricultural land. Policy CS17 - Sustainable Transport seeks a 6% shift from travel by private car to sustainable modes by requiring major developments to provide access to key facilities by safe and well lit routes for walking and cycling that are integrated with the wider green infrastructure network and by securing new and enhanced bus services where new development is more than 400m walk from an existing bus stop. CS24 - Shepshed Direction of Growth - Strategic development of at least 500 homes by 2028 to create a balanced community and a safe, high quality and accessible environment. Leading in Design Supplementary Planning Document February 2006 This encourages and provides guidance on achieving high quality design in new development. It indicates that the Council will approach its judgments on the design of new development against the following main principles:

Places for People – Successful developments contribute to the creation of distinctive places that provide a choice of housing and complementary facilities and activities nearby. Good design promotes diversity and choice through a mix of compatible developments and uses that work together to create viable places that respond to local needs.

8

Accessible Places – Successful developments are easy to get to and move through, with short, direct public routes overlooked by frontages.

Safe Places – Successful developments are safe and attractive with a clear division between public and private space. Good design promotes the continuity of street frontages and the enclosure of space by development which clearly defines public and private areas.

Sustainable Places – Successful developments are able to adapt to improve their long-term viability and are built to cause the least possible harm to the environment. It also incorporates resource efficiency and renewable energy measures to take into account the long-term impact of a development.

Distinctive Places – Successful developments respond to their context.

S106 Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (2007) This supplementary planning document (SPD) sets out the circumstances which might lead to the need for a contribution to the provision of infrastructure, community services or other facilities. However, recent appeal decisions have confirmed that Inspectors will not support obligations (even if agreed by the appellant) unless the planning authority can demonstrate that they are specifically related to the proposed development. Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations introduced on the 6 April 2010 prescribes the limitations on the use of planning obligations. Accordingly it is unlawful for a planning obligation to be taken into account when determining a planning application for a development that does not meet all of the following tests:

It is necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms

It is directly related to the development

It is fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development

The advice is that local planning authorities should ensure that the policy tests are set out in the committee or delegated reports where a section 106 agreement is to be negotiated. The obligations should be reasoned in the reports in light of the tests and clear advice that if the contributions do not satisfy the tests, that no weight should be attributed to them in the decision making process. There is a substantial risk that a decision to grant planning permission could be challenged as being unlawful if the planning authority cannot demonstrate that the tests have been met. Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (2005) Both the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan and the Affordable Housing SPD (2005) were prepared to reflect Government Guidance of that time. The NPPF no longer sets a national threshold and this part of the SPD no longer carries any significant weight. In the absence of an up to date statutory development plan policy to guide the amount of affordable housing provision for sites any relevant other material considerations must be taken into account. Appropriate material considerations include the two evidence studies (listed below) and the Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy Policy CS3: Strategic Housing Needs. Policy CS3 is, in effect, an expression of the evidence base and it is the evidence base that is a material consideration. Relevant evidence is set out in:

9

Affordable Housing Economic Viability Assessment (2010)

Leicester and Leicestershire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2014) Taken together, these material considerations point towards requests being made for affordable housing on sites of 10 or more dwellings in most areas and 5 or more dwellings in more rural settlements, requesting between 20-40% affordable housing depending on the location of the site and requesting a 80/20 split between social/affordable rent and intermediate housing (as set out in Policy CS3 of the emerging Core Strategy). In the Shepshed direction of growth area 30% affordable housing is justified. National Planning Practice Guidance This web based document provides additional government guidance to ensure the effective implementation of the planning policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. Section 8 encourages the promotion of healthy communities. It advises planning decisions should aim to deliver safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion (Para 69). CABE Building for Life This guide is a tool to help assess proposed residential developments in relation to design, layout, sustainability criteria, adaptability, and effect of existing local character and reduction of crime, amongst other things. Highway Design Guide The County Highway Authority has adopted a Design Guide for new development which contains, in Section DG6: Public Transport, advice that pedestrian access to bus routes should generally, in urban areas, be a maximum of 400m and desirably no more than 250m. In rural areas the walking distance should not be more than 800m. Update on other planning applications around Shepshed Recent decisions on planning applications in the Shepshed area include the following:

Table 1

App ref Site Dwelling Numbers Status

P/11/2724/2 Oakley Road Playing Field

133 Awaiting signing of s106 agreement

P/13/0621/2 Iveshead Road 66 Granted 19/07/2013

P/13/0146/2 Land off Crowson Close

9 Granted 25/04/2013

P/11/2697/2 Tickow Lane 85 Granted

10

15/04/2013

P/12/1997/2 Mannheim Auction Site

79 Granted 14/10/2013

Small sites 25 Granted

Total 397

Other planning applications that the local planning authority has outstanding at present include:

Table 2

App ref Site Dwelling Numbers Status

P/13/2054/2 Hallamford Road 250

Appeal Non determination (report included on this agenda)

P/13/1826/2 Tickow Lane 380 Report included on this agenda

P/13/1751/2 Tickow Lane 180 Appeal Non determination

P/14/1604/2 Tickow Lane Duplicate of above Report included on this agenda

P/13/1838/2 Oakley Road 33 Report included on this agenda

P/13/1641/2 Hathern Road 270 Appeal Non determination

P/14/1687/2 Hathern Road Duplicate of above Report included on this agenda

Total 1,113

Taken together with this planning application:

Table 3

App ref Site Dwelling Numbers

Status

P/14/0777/2 Iveshead Road 103 This application

Total approved From Table 1 397 Committed with planning permission

Total outstanding From Table 2 1,113

Total Dwellings (Table 1 + 2 +3) 1,613

Relevant Planning History

11

None Responses of Statutory Consultees Leicestershire County Council Highway Authority The Highway Authority has no objections to the proposed development subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions and S106 contributions. The Highway Authority comments that following completion of the Cumulative Impact Assessment study carried out on behalf of the Highway Authority, mitigation measures required to enable the road network to cater for the increase in traffic in Shepshed and particularly on the A512 have been identified. Whilst the cost of those measures is not yet known, the Highway Authority has agreed with the developer the percentage impact that this proposal will have at each junction which requires improvement and on that basis the developer has agreed to pay that percentage towards the cost of each improvement. The three improvements that have been identified, and which the applicant has agreed to contribute towards, are the junctions of the A512 with Tickow Lane, Iveshead Road and Ingleberry Road. The agreed impact at each junction resulting from this development is 3.8% at the Tickow Lane junction, 16.1% at the Iveshead Road junction and 10.2% at the Ingleberry Road junction. Therefore the developer will be required to contribute this percentage share. At this moment in time the only known cost is the Tickow Lane improvement at £155,000 and therefore 3.8% of this cost will be £5,890. With regard to the other junction improvements, these have not yet been subjected to detail design and costing. Currently the speed of traffic on Iveshead Road passing the site is high and before development commences measures will be required to have been provided on Iveshead Road to reduce the speed of passing traffic to a maximum of 30mph. A recently approved development by Bloor Homes includes traffic calming measures on Iveshead Road that will result in the reduction in vehicle speeds, however the effect of those measures on speeds passing the site is not yet known. Therefore if this development were to commence after those works have taken place, the developer should carry a speed survey of traffic passing the site and if speeds are above 30 mph will be required to carry out further traffic calming measures in the vicinity of the site access. If the 85th percentile speed of passing traffic is 30mph or below then no further traffic calming measures will be required. If the development were to commence prior to the traffic calming measures required as part of the Bloor Homes development, then the applicants will be required to provide a comprehensive traffic calming scheme that reduces speeds to below 30mph passed the site, similar to the scheme proposed by Bloor Homes. The details of which will need to be submitted to and approved before development commences. The proposed internal layout shown would not be suitable for adoption by the Highway Authority; however, as the internal layout is not being considered for full approval at this time a suitable condition can be imposed covering this. The site access is however submitted for full approval, and whilst its location is considered acceptable, given that the access may require the provision of further traffic calming measures may be required, the Highway Authority agree to the

12

general location and type of access road serving the site, however require a condition that covers the possible future alteration of the access to include appropriate traffic calming measures. Natural England Natural England has no objections to the proposals. The site is in close proximity to:

Ives Head Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI);

Newhurst Quarry Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI);

Blackbrook Reservoir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); and

Charnwood Lodge Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

Natural England is satisfied that the proposed development being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application, as submitted, will not damage or destroy the interest features for which these sites have been notified. They advise that these SSSI's do not represent a constraint in determining the application. Should the details of this application change, Natural England draws attention to Section 28(I) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), requiring re-consultation with Natural England. Biodiversity enhancements - This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. Landscape enhancements - This application may provide opportunities to enhance the character and local distinctiveness of the surrounding natural and built environment; use natural resources more sustainably; and bring benefits for the local community, for example through green space provision and access to and contact with nature. Green Infrastructure - The proposed development is within an area which could benefit from enhanced green infrastructure (GI) provision. Multi-functional green infrastructure can perform a range of functions including improved flood risk management, provision of accessible green space, climate change adaptation and biodiversity enhancement. Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) Object to the application on the following grounds:

The proposed development is in a location set within the Charnwood Area of Particularly Attractive Countryside;

It is not in an allocated site in the Core Strategy and the planned Shepshed direction of growth is north of the A512 and west of the M1 Motorway. Therefore the character of the open area South of the A512 is expected to be retained;

13

Part of the site was part of a former market garden. There is no evidence that the best and most versatile land is protected from development; and

The applicants travel plan confirms that the site is some 650 metres from the nearest bus stop on Ashby Road. In addition the site is not in a position close to local facilities. This is therefore not a sustainable location in transport terms.

Leicestershire County Council (Developer Contributions) Education A financial contribution in total for £252,828.18 is requested to accommodate capacity issues by improving, remodelling or enhancing facilities at Shepshed High School and Shepshed Hind Leys College. No claim is made in the Primary Sector as Shepshed Newcroft Primary School currently has a surplus of spaces. Libraries The proposed development is within 1.9km of Shepshed Library on Hall croft. As the development will impact on local library services a request for £6270 is made which would be used for the provision and enhancement of library services. Civic Amenities The Council has reviewed the proposed development and considers that there would be an impact on the delivery of Civic Amenity waste facilities within the local area as a result of the size, type and scale of development. A request is made for a contribution of £4,356 Environment Agency (EA) The Environment Agency notes that the site is shown to lie outside of the floodplain and incorporates sustainable drainage and is thus in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. The EA has no objection to the proposals as submitted subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. The EA is aware of local concerns with regards to highway drainage capacity and advise that the Local Lead Flood Authority (Leicestershire County Council) and Severn Trent Water Ltd are consulted on the proposal. The National Forest Company (NFC) The NFC are pleased to note that all the boundary hedges are to be retained and the majority of the hedgerow that crosses the site will also be incorporated into the design. The application site extends to approximately 3.73 hectares and the NFC’s planting guidelines would expect 20% of the site to be woodland planting and landscaping. The Design and Access Statement identifies that the focus of this is the open space either side of the access. This would be welcomed as part of the contribution subject to the following being confirmed through the reserved matters submission:

14

The detailed designs should incorporate significant amounts of tree planting across the open space;

The balancing pond should be designed as an ecological feature with an area of permanent water, emergent planting and public access; and

The proposed play area should be designed for natural play to reflect its green setting through incorporating timber equipment, changes in landform and the incorporation of logs and boulders.

The remainder of the identified open space which consists of front gardens incidental open space and narrow strips within rear gardens would not be considered to contribute towards the expected woodland planting. Any shortfall should therefore result in a contribution in lieu calculated at £20,000 per hectare. Highways Agency The proposed development is not expected to have a material impact on the closest strategic route the M1 Motorway. Therefore the Highway Agency has no objections to the proposal. Severn Trent Water Authority Has no objections to the proposals subject to a condition requiring the submission of detailed drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water. Leicestershire Police Request a contribution of £43,877 and considers without the necessary contribution the development will be unacceptable in planning terms. The lack of capacity in existing infrastructure to accommodate the population growth and associated demands occasioned by the development means that it is necessary for the developer of the site to provide a contribution so the situation can be remedied. NHS England The development when based on average occupancy would result in an increased patient population of approximately 250 people. The Field Practice in Shepshed is a small practice with a high list size but has indicated that some new patients could be accepted. The ability to expand would be a matter for negotiation with other occupiers of the health centre. The Leicester Road practice is significantly larger and therefore proportionately likely to take the majority of the new residents. The existing premises are fully utilised and it is proposed to extend the premises. A contribution of £30,365.28 is therefore requested. Shepshed Town Council The Town Council submits the following comments:

15

Concern at the location of the SUDS which is to the side of the access road and not at the bottom of the development

Traffic would be accessing out onto a heavily used fast road

Flooding/sewerage is already a problem in this area

Shepshed Town Council wishes to write in support of the comments already submitted by local residents

This development would be in close proximity to Morley Quarry Nature Reserve, therefore, could result in loss of wildlife

If permitted, this would result in overdevelopment of the area

According to the SHLAA report part of the area was NOT recommended for housing

Although, the Town Council, is not in favour of this development, if it was to be permitted, what would be included with the S106 monies and also, request that the provision of little bins be included

Other comments received 69 letters of objection and a further 44 comments have been received in response to the consultation on the application. The concerns can be summarised as:

The site is within area 12 of the Borough of Charnwood Landscape Character Assessment and is immediately adjacent to the Morley Quarry Nature Reserve. This identifies that the land has low capacity to accommodate development due to its visual prominence and an elevated landform.

The current surface water drain in the area is clearly inadequate and does not cope with flash flooding that occurs on an increasing frequency. The ground structure of this site is not suitable for soak away drainage systems.

This site would be immediately adjacent to Morley Quarry Nature Reserve. This will place unnecessary pressure of rich local wildlife and erosion of good agricultural land.

Do not support the logic of large housing developments on Greenfield sites that are remote from the facilities and infrastructure and unsustainable transport links. The site is therefore not a sustainable location for further development and is contrary to the NPPF and the Local Plan.

The proposal would represent an unacceptable extension of the built up part of the settlement into the countryside and result in a significant adverse impact on the open character and appearance of the site and the pattern of the surrounding area contrary to the core principles of the NPPF and the Local Plan.

Shepshed is not identified as a key settlement for large housing growth in the emerging Core Strategy and the proposal would not represent a small scale infill to meet local needs and would therefore be contrary to spatial policy 2.

Existing traffic using the road gives cause for concern. Additional traffic will result in the road being gridlocked.

The impact on facilities will be too great causing further delays to already overstretched services.

Why pull one existing dwelling down to build even more when they could enter off Iveshead Lane.

The drainage pond on the site is not situated at the sites lowest level.

16

Is it feasible fore the developer and Severn Trent to establish the maximum flow rate of the sewer system to conclude once and for all that it can cope with the increased demand.

Consideration of the Planning Issues The main considerations in the determination of this planning application are:

The principle of the development of land outside the limits to development and the 5 year land supply consideration;

Sustainable location

The impact on infrastructure, services and facilities

Impact on the character of the open countryside and landscape impact

Highway capacity and safety

Flood risk

Developer contributions The principle of the development of land outside the limits to development and the 5 year land supply The starting point for decision making on all planning applications is that they must be made in accordance with the adopted development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The saved policies in the adopted Charnwood Local Plan are therefore the starting point; although, the weight that is attached to these policies is dependant upon the degree to which they are consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). The policies of the saved Local Plan set out a strategy for housing provision for the period 1991-2006 and are clearly, therefore, out of date, a position which has previously been acknowledged by the Council and been confirmed in a number of recent appeal decisions. The Framework’s presumption in favour of sustainable development (paragraph 14) 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, granting permission, unless; (i) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or where specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted. (Para 14 and 197).

Paragraph 49 of the Framework further states that residential planning applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of housing.

17

The Council acknowledges that it does not currently have a five year supply of deliverable housing based on the housing requirements for the period 2006-2028. The table below summarises the Borough Council’s 5 year housing supply position as at 30th September 2014.

Charnwood Borough Housing Supply Estimate as at 30th September 2014

Charnwood Total

a Charnwood Pre-Submission Draft Core Strategy

Housing Requirement (2006-2028)

17,380 790 per annum

b Completions (2006 to 30th September 2014) 5,921

c Residual Requirement 2014-2028 (a – b).

11,459 819 per annum

d Requirement for 5 years 2014-2019,

4,093

e Requirement for 5 years 2014-2019 with 20% buffer for under delivery in accordance with NPPF.

4,917

f Expected supply of deliverable sites (planning permissions likely to be built Sept 2014 -2019) 4,347*

g Surplus over requirement (e -f) -570

h Number of years supply (f divided by 983 (e divided by 5) ).

4.42 years

*includes sites that are awaiting signing of S.106 agreements.

The table above shows that, taking account of completions, commitments and sites available, the number of homes required for a five year housing supply plus an additional 20% is 4,917. The Council’s assessment of land availability shows that the amount of land available at 30th September 2014 would provide for 4,130 within the next five years, a deficit of 570 homes. Whilst the Framework makes it clear that decision makers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans, the degree of weight given to each policy prior to its adoption depends on whether or not the policy is consistent with the Framework and whether it is contentious. Although it is recognised that the Borough Council’s emerging Core Strategy is now under examination, its policies relating to development strategy and the allocation of housing (Policy CS1) still have limited weight due to the level of opposition received regarding this policy. Given, the lack of a 5 year supply of housing land across the Borough and the delay there will be before a core strategy and allocations development plan document is adopted, it is considered that the principle of housing development on this site should be supported in accordance with the guidance contained within The Framework, unless any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing the required housing or where specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted.

18

The site is located outside but immediately adjacent to the Limits to Development of Shepshed, it is a countryside location and would therefore ordinarily not be considered an acceptable site for residential development. However, members of the Plans Committee will be mindful of the recent local appeal decisions which accept the principle of releasing suitable sites for residential development - given the Borough Council’s position with regards to its delivery of housing and the shortfall in the required 5 year housing supply. In terms of the policies in the saved Local Plan, these set out a strategy for housing provision for the period 1991-2006 and can be regarded as being out-of-date. This has been the Borough Council’s agreed position in recent appeals. The principle of developing countryside land on the edge of the Limits to Development around Shepshed has previously been accepted in the granting of planning permission for 85 dwellings South of Tickow Lane in 2012 (under reference P/11/2697/2) and on appeal for 75 dwellings on land off Iveshead Road (ref P/11/1583/2). The Council’s Core Strategy identifies Loughborough and Shepshed as urban areas where housing development should be focused. It also allocates a Direction of Growth for at least 500 houses in the area indicated around the west, north and east side of Shepshed. This site is not within that general direction of growth but is broadly consistent with the Core Strategy, in particular the Development Strategy. It is considered that the development strategy policies that identify sustainable locations for development in the emerging Core Strategy do not have sufficient weight in decision making process because of outstanding objections to the plan that need to be considered at an examination in public. The Council does not have a five year supply of housing, the current local plan is out of date, and therefore in such cases, government policy is for a presumption in favour of sustainable development. In addition, significantly boosting housing supply is one of the government’s key planning policy objectives. Therefore the principle of developing this site can be supported. Sustainable location The Framework advises that there are three dimensions to sustainable development and that this is not just a function of its distance from the settlement and facilities, but includes:

Economic – contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; any by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

Social – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflects the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

19

Environmental – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and as part of this, helping to improve bio-diversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

Shepshed is identified as a main urban area in the Council’s Settlement hierarchy where there is good existing infrastructure which includes public transport, roads, schools and leisure facilities. Furthermore, in granting planning permission on appeal in 2012 for the development of 75 houses on a site the opposite side of Iveshead Road, the Inspector considered as the first main issue whether that site was in a sustainable location. He considered in detail that access to local services is a key yardstick of assessing site sustainability and that the Council’s principle concern in that case was that the site is simply too remote from local services, determining that most trips to them will be made by car. He further commented that:

“Certainly against the Council’s preferred measure of 800m as a reasonable walking distance set out in their Charnwood Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy Service Centre Capacity Assessment (Dec 2011) (CSSCCA), the site does not meet this expectation. Indeed, there are other matters aside from the roundtrip distance, such as exposure to traffic along the A512, especially on the route to Newcroft Primary School, which would deter walking, even with the attractions of a walking bus considered. Whilst Oxley Primary is closer, I accept here, as perhaps with other trips for shopping, that the preferred mode of transport would be the car. Again in relation to access to bus stops as the primary point of access to public transport, as defined in the CSSCCA, the Council assert the site lies beyond the optimally identified 400m, thus acting as a barrier or deterrent to public transport choices. Moreover, it is suggested, that all such facilities (excepting the Public House) would be to the north of the A512, a considerable barrier and deterrent to the connectivity of the site to the services in the centre. But to apply such a yardstick as a measure of sustainability is oversimplistic, both in relation to the site itself and to other considerations relevant to an assessment of its relative sustainability in the wider context. Although the 2 Km measure of a reasonable walking distance established by Planning Policy Guidance 13 Transport has not been carried through into The Framework, there is no revised assessment at a national level that suggests this is no longer a reasonable, empirically-based assessment. Whilst the Council may adhere to the CSSCCA figure, this is not as yet carried forward in adopted policy and in any event applies to service centres rather than the Sub-Regional Centre, as Loughborough/Shepshed is defined. Such a distance may indeed prove a deterrent to those with small children but to adults, as an alternative to the car it still offers, in my view, a reasonable tolerance for walking. Moreover, these distances are much more readily achievable by bike and for such trips, supported by a local cycle network, the bicycle would also offer a credible alternative to the car. The Council state that anticipated distances from the site to bus stops at

20

between 510m and 680m, and with estimates of walking time at around six minutes, would deter public transport choices. But such distances are within the 800m tolerance of the Highway Authority’s adopted policy (C6) in respect of Sub-Regional Centres and, notwithstanding the relatively low number of weekday public transport related trips anticipated for the site, this is still, in my view, within reasonable reach of the site. The site is also within approximately 700m of the main industrial estate serving Shepshed on the northern side of the A512. This is an active site with a range of enterprises apparently requiring a full spectrum of manual, technical, service and professional employees. The opportunity for these and future workers to live sufficiently close to walk to work is a legitimate consideration in this context. The A512 is certainly a hindrance to accessing the town centre, schools, services, bus stops and shops to the south. However, this is as much perceptual as actual. I had no difficulty during my visits to the junction in traversing the road at peak times and any delay here would be momentary as the traffic signals change; the road is not in my view a significant barrier to accessing facilities to the north of it. Certainly in isolation, particularly in relation to primary schools, and set against the Council’s service centre parameters, the site could be considered some distance from local services, necessitating the use of the car by residents to access some of them. However, this has to be seen in a wider context. Sharing of trips, especially to school, is ubiquitous today, and the potential for multi-purpose trips, undertaken to services within the Sub- Regional Centre, an entirely plausible outcome. These factors, coupled with a number of pedestrian and cycle trips to services and the relative proximity of bus stops, all mitigate the perceptual sense of ‘remoteness’ the site may at first suggest. Moreover, when the site is compared to others granted planning permission, especially within service centres, the proposals score reasonably well. When distances from the appeal site to primary schools are compared with those in the cases of Quorn and Rothley the appeal site fares less well. In relation to middle and upper schools however, the appeal site out-performs those in Rothley and Stanage. A similar picture emerges in relation to shopping, with local shopping being closer in the service centre locations but the appeal site doing significantly better for main shopping. For employment the appeal site significantly out-performs those other sites identified by the Council for comparison.3 In the balance of sustainability therefore, considering advantages and disadvantages, the appeal site compares reasonably favourably with other comparators. The Council themselves have had to make a similar decision in relation a substantial allocation of housing adjoining the western settlement boundary of Shepshed in their embryonic CS. This substantial tract of land between Tickow Lane and the A512 bares comparison with the appeal site. Although detailed distances cannot be determined, it is clear once again that Oxley Primary School would be closer to the extension site than the appeal site to identified schools. However, distances to Newcroft are comparable;

21

whist Shepshed High School is more distant from the proposed extension than to the appeal site. So when compared with the Council’s own preferred major housing site, the appeal site can hold its own in sustainability terms. Shepshed is identified with Loughborough as a major Sub-Regional Centre for growth in the draft CS and topping the hierarchy of settlements identified for future growth. This is explicitly recognised in the identification of the extension to Shepshed in the CS, as it can ‘contribute to the western growth hub and share the infrastructure with the west Loughborough sustainable urban extension and Loughborough Science Park…..’. The benefits of concentrating growth in Regional and Sub-Regional Centres is well established: closer and wider access to jobs and services and transport links that connect then limit the need for car-borne travel and where that mode of travel is necessary, limit the distance of such trips. Despite some shortcomings in relation to specific services, the appeal site, on a balanced assessment, performs well against others granted planning permission in the borough; it also performs creditably against the Council’s own favoured urban extension site in the town. On these terms, the site is relatively accessible and can be considered a sustainable location for development.”

Taking into account the comments of the Inspector it is considered that this site is also in a sustainable location for development. Impact on Infrastructure, Services and Facilities Respondents to the application raise concerns regarding the impact of the development on the facilities and services within Shepshed. There is, however, no evidence that the facilities and services within the area could not cope with further housing development, and various requests for contributions have been made as part of the application consultation process to support the improvements to infrastructure. The Education Authority has confirmed it has no objection to the proposal subject to a commuted sum to meet the needs generated by the development. A libraries contribution is also considered necessary. Requests have also been received from the police authority and the health authority, recognising that there are capital projects to which the developer can contribute in order to offset the projected needs of new residents subject to CIL compliance considerations that are addressed below. The proposal would therefore not lead to an unacceptable impact on social infrastructure in the area. Further the Highway Authority has been undertaking a detailed study on the Cumulative Impact Assessment on the local highway network. This proposes mitigation measures required to enable the road network to cater for the increase in traffic in Shepshed and particularly on the A512 and its junctions, not only from this site but also a number of other housing development proposals on the edge of Shepshed. This has identified specific highway improvements to three junctions on the A512 with Tickow Lane, Iveshead Road and Ingleberry Road which the applicant has agreed to contribute towards.

22

Impact on the character of the open countryside and landscape impact The application proposes development on two fields, the first being formerly used as a market garden but which has now become overgrown and the second being used for agricultural purposes having recently been used for grazing. Each proposal however needs to be assessed in terms of the significance of the actual harm any development would have on the character and appearance of the countryside and landscape. The land which is situated behind existing residential properties on Iveshead Road on generally rising ground which is surrounded and enclosed by substantial native hedgerows. To the south, the site borders Iveshead Lane which is a narrow single track road that is bordered by a native hedgerow. This border contains a number of substantial, mature trees. To the north east is the former Morley Quarry which is now a nature reserve accessed from Morley Lane. Higher land to the east is used for farming. Although the land is generally rising ground it is somewhat visually contained in the wider landscape, by existing residential properties to the west and northwest along Iveshead Road and Morley Lane. The proposed development would alter the character of the site from an undeveloped one to a site of medium density built development. However, as part of the development, substantial areas of peripheral hedgerows and trees are to be supplemented and extended. New buildings are therefore to be set back from the eastern and southern boundary thereby maintaining a buffer between the built development and the agricultural fields to the south and east. It is accepted that there would be some harm caused to the character of the area because it is currently agricultural land. However, it is considered that any harm caused would not be so significant as to outweigh the benefits of providing housing land in a sustainable location and in the identified area of growth in the Core Strategy. Design and layout This application is an application for ‘outline’ planning permission and all matters, with the exception of access, reserved for future approval including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. The proposals include a proposal for 30% affordable housing. Whilst a fairly detailed master plan has been submitted to indicate how a scheme could be developed, detailed proposals will still need to be considered as part of any reserved matters proposal. It is however considered that whilst the submitted scheme contains elements of what could form an acceptable housing development, in particular;

23

the location of a substantial area of open space along the southern boundary of the site adjoining Iveshead Lane, and trees and hedges in the vicinity of the Morley Quarry, thereby protecting the appearance of the edge of the settlement when approaching from the south;

the location of the open space and sustainable drainage pond, near the entrance to the site, providing an attractive entrance to the development;

the retention of all the hedges enclosing the site and some within the site thereby seeking to respect the visual and ecological characteristics of the site and its surroundings; and

the spatial relationship of proposed dwellings to existing residential properties on Iveshead Road and The Pastures seeking to protect the amenities of existing residents.

Furthermore, the overall layout of the proposed dwellings is somewhat unimaginative in relation to the topography of the site and overall character of the area. It is nevertheless considered that a satisfactory scheme can be achieved on this site through the consideration of further details as part of the reserved matters submission. This could provide a mix of house types, affordable units and appropriate landscaping within the design and layout of the development. Highway Capacity and Safety As indicated earlier in this report the Highway Authority has been considering the impact of not only this proposal but other proposals on the edge of Shepshed on the surrounding highway network. As a result they have concluded that improvements are required to three junctions on the A512 including works to the junction of Iveshead Road and the applicants have already indicated their willingness to contribute towards these improvements. More specifically with regard to the access from the site onto Iveshead Road, the Highway Authority has indicated that they have no objection to the junction design included in the application. They have commented in respect of traffic calming measures that may be required on Iveshead Road in the vicinity of the entrance. Proposals for this already form part of the requirements for the implementation of a planning permission for 65 dwellings on the opposite side of Iveshead Road. Depending on the timing of this development and/or the success of those traffic calming measures further work may be required. A condition is proposed to be attached to any permission to address the potential requirement for traffic calming measures. Flood risk Local concerns have been raised regarding flooding and the impact this development would have on the local flooding problems in the future and the existing foul and surface water sewers. The applicants have submitted with their proposals a Flood Risk Assessment. This identifies that the site lies within Flood Zone 1. It also includes a surface water drainage methodology. Following the submission of a number of representations, in particular regarding the diameter of the storm water sewer located immediately out side of the site and the

24

concerns regarding exacerbating local flooding problems, the applicants have undertaken further works, including a CCTV camera survey of the storm sewer. This has confirmed:

1. that the diameter of the storm sewer immediately outside of the site is 225mm and not 300mm as originally suggested (although it increases in size further down Iveshead Road), and

2. the camera survey has revealed that part of the surface water sewer have been blocked or have partially collapsed.

As a result the applicant has revised their Flood Risk Assessment to identify the diameter of the surface water pipe. They indicate that notwithstanding the size reduction, this still exceeds the minimum standards required and it is not the size of the storm water sewer that is causing flooding problems but the fact that it is damaged. The details of the CCTV survey have been forwarded to Severn Trent Water Ltd who have responsibility for maintaining the sewers. It is understood from them that they have investigations in hand to assess and address the problem. The applicant also submits that the balancing pond has been designed such that the upper limit of required storm water storage is accounted for taking into account the volume of water produced in an extreme 1 in 100 year rainfall event, as well as a 30% increase in rainfall due to climate change. The pond is situated in the lowest part of the site. The small area of the site which lies at a lower level will benefit from sustainable drainage systems as suggested in the Flood Risk Assessment i.e. permeable paving and strips of vegetated land which will attenuate and filter water. These act to store run off before it is discharged to the sewer at a controlled rate. Whilst the concerns of local residents are recognised, no objections to the proposals have been received from either the Environment Agency or Severn Trent Water Limited and the use of a balancing pond and sustainable drainage techniques is an established method for satisfactorily dealing with surface water discharges for a site. Further details will however be required to be submitted in accordance with the requirements of proposed conditions and will need to be agreed before development commences. Developer Contributions Requests have been made to secure improvements to existing community infrastructure from the relevant consultation bodies. These requests have to be tested against the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 and subsequent amendments. The proposal will have an impact in several areas. Policy ST/3 of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan provides for opportunities to secure improvements to infrastructure where there are deficiencies identified by consultees. This is supported by the Council’s SPD on Section 106 Developer Contributions and by the Affordable Housing SPD. The contributions requested are listed and assessed below.

25

Education A financial contribution in total for £252,828.18 is requested to accommodate capacity issues by improving, remodelling or enhancing facilities and Shepshed High School and Shepshed Hind Leys College. No claim is made in the Primary Sector as Shepshed Newcroft Primary School currently has a surplus of spaces. It is considered that this request is in scale and necessary to make the development acceptable based on meeting the needs of future occupiers of the development. This money would be spent within 5 years of the development commencing. It is considered that the proposed request complies with the requirements of the CIL Regulations. Libraries The proposed development is within 1.9km of Shepshed Library on Hall Croft. As the development will impact on local library services a request for £6,270 is made which would be used for the provision and enhancement of library services. It is considered that this request is in scale and necessary to make the development acceptable based on meeting the needs of future occupiers of the development. This money would be spent within 5 years of the development commencing. It is considered that the proposed request complies with the requirements of the CIL Regulations. Civic Amenities The Council has reviewed the proposed development and considers that there would be an impact on the delivery of Civic Amenity waste facilities within the local area as a result of the size, type and scale of development. A request is made for a contribution of £4,356. It is considered that this request is in scale and necessary to make the development acceptable based on meeting the needs of future occupiers of the development. This money would be spent within 5 years of the development commencing. It is considered that the proposed request complies with the requirements of the CIL Regulations. The National Forest Company (NFC) The application site extends to approximately 3.73 ha and the NFC’s planting guidelines would expect 20% of the site to be woodland planting and landscaping. Although some woodland planting and landscaping areas are indicated on the submitted plan which would go some way to meeting this requirement, as the application is in outline final details of the layout and design of the development remain to be determined. In the circumstances, it is considered appropriate to include within the S106 a contribution in lieu to be calculated at £20,000 per hectare should there be any shortfall within the final layout. It is considered that this request is in scale and necessary to make the development acceptable. This money would be spent within 5 years of the development commencing. It is considered that the proposed request complies with the requirements of the CIL Regulations. Leicestershire Police

26

Leicestershire Constabulary has stated that the development is likely to result in an increased demand for their services and have identified the key areas concerned. As a result they request a total contribution of £43,877. The Council’s Section 106 Developer Contributions SPD (2007) explains that certain contributions for Policing can be justified including contributions to new Police Stations or extensions to new stations provided they comply with planning obligations rules. Since 2007, many applications have been dealt with in the Borough, and in most cases Police contributions have not been accepted due to the requests being unspecific and not directly related to the needs of the development and therefore, failing to comply with the requirements of the CIL Regulations 2010. The largest element of the Police request is for £36,896 for premises and associated start up costs (made up of additional premises £32,075 and start up equipment £4,821). If a development has an impact on policing and would result in the need to expand existing stations to meet with this identified need then capital expenditure to achieve that would in principle be CIL compliant. Having said this it is recognised the request for the premises extensions are uncosted and undetailed, although an estimate of unit rates for build costs has been provided. It is also considered that start up costs are capable of being compliant with the CIL Regulations potentially up to a maximum of £4,821. However, the detail of this package will need to be subject to further negotiation to address whether each element of the start-up costs are compliant with the CIL Regulations. On this occasion it is considered reasonable to conclude that the Police request for a premises extension contribution is justified in principle.. The full details of the proposed extensions and start up equipment, will need to be provided before the Borough Council will release the funds which will have previously been paid to the Borough Council by the developer. Although this approach is considered reasonable and compliant with the CIL Regulations 2010 in principle. The agreement will require that the Council (or other parties) should use the contributions only for the purposes which they have been paid. The Council will be the responsible authority and should be able to be relied upon to manage contributions appropriately on receipt of a detailed scheme with appropriate evidence that the final extension and expenditure will be CIL compliant. If the money is not spent within 5 years it will be returned to the developer. A request has been made for £2,774 as a contribution towards new vehicles to serve the development. Whilst it is reasonable to expect the development to be serviced by police vehicles, the proposal is located on the edge of Shepshed, adjacent to existing residential areas. Additional vehicles, whilst considered essential by the police in seeking a contribution, are considered unlikely to predominantly serve the needs generated by the development. As such the contribution is not considered to be compliant with the CIL Regulations. A request has also been made for £229 for control room telephony on the basis that the development would result in an increase in calls to the system at Enderby. It is likely that additional telephony, workstations and monitoring screens maybe required to deal with requests created by residents and businesses within the development. However, there is insufficient evidence of the costs in relation to the direct needs of the development, and therefore it is not considered that the request is CIL compliant.

27

A request has been made for £2,713 for ANPR CCTV deployment on the main road network and close to or in the settlement. Insufficient details have been provided to conclude that this request is directly related to the development to justify its compliance with the CIL Regulations 2010, on this occasion. A further request for £500 has been made for a mobile CCTV unit. Whilst this additional camera would be a useful addition to provision of CCTV in the Borough, by the nature of it being mobile, it would not necessarily be used wholly for the development and the amount has not been appropriately justified. It is therefore considered that this would not comply with the CIL Regulations. A request has been made for £1 per dwelling to equip an access hub for the development (but the summary requires £400). It is also stated that 18 beat drop in hubs are already functioning in the District. However, the development in itself would not be large enough to create a demand for a hub and no location has been identified that would accommodate one. For this reason, in this instance, it is not considered justified or compliant with the CIL Regulations. A request for £405 has been made for additional systems and hardware to provide radio cover/capacity to carry calls from the development. A further request for £261 has been made to provide data base capacity on the basis that the current system has reached capacity. Specific evidence has not been made available, to demonstrate that these requests would be sufficiently or directly linked to the demand created by the development. The requests are not therefore considered to be CIL compliant. It is not possible to conclude whether the sum requested for new premises is fairly and reasonably related to the development. Growth of the area should also be accommodated from funding streams within the Police Grant Formula and it is not possible to see how this has been reflected when calculating the request. Similarly, the Police will receive additional revenue from Council Tax and commercial developments within the proposal. However, Police Services are constrained in their capital spending and it maybe unrealistic to expect all new policing requirements to be provided for by these funding streams. Notwithstanding the above, Planning Inspectors, and the Secretary of State, have taken the view that Police contributions, including more than just the capital costs of building directly related to the demands of a development, can be considered CIL compliant. Paragraphs 58 and 69 of the NPPF state that decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe and accessible environments where crime or disorder and the fear of crime do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion. Many of these appeal cases have been where Unilateral Undertakings were put forward and the Inspector and Secretary of State has accepted their inclusion. Each case needs to be addressed on its merits. In this instance, it is concluded that the request is not sufficiently or directly related to the specific needs of the residents of the development, are based on calculations which are not directly costed and are not justified and do not meet the necessary test set out in the CIL Regulations.

28

NHS England A contribution of £30,365.28 is requested to improve and extend The Field Practice in Shepshed which is a small practice with a high list size and The Leicester Road practice which is significantly larger and therefore proportionately likely to take the majority of the new residents. It is considered that this request is in scale and necessary to make the development acceptable based on meeting the needs of future occupiers of the development. This money would be spent within 5 years of the development commencing. It is considered that the proposed request complies with the requirements of the CIL Regulations. Highways To comply with Government guidance in the NPPF, the CIL Regulations 2011, and the County Council’s Local Transport Plan 3, the following contributions would be required in the interests of encouraging sustainable travel to and from the site, achieving modal shift targets, and reducing car use and for the A512 Improvements:

A512 Ashby Road/Tickow Lane/Charley Road - the sum of £6,355.00 towards safety improvements.

A512 Ashby Road/Charnwood Road/Iveshead Road – the sum of money equivalent to 16.1% of the total cost of the highway improvement works.

A512 Ashby Road/Ingleberry Road/Leicester Road – the sum of money equivalent to 10.2% of the total costs of the highway improvement works.

Travel Packs (can be supplied by LCC at £52.85 per pack)

6 month bus passes, two per dwelling to encourage new residents to use bus services and establish travel behaviour from first occupation. (Can be supplied through LCC at average £350.00 per pass).

Improvements to 2 nearest bus stops to support modern bus fleets with low floor capabilities (at £3,263.00 per stop)

Information display cases at 2 nearest bus stops to inform new residents of nearest bus services (at £120.00 per display)

Bus shelters at 2 nearest bus stops. (at £4,908.00 per shelter).

Contribution towards equipping nearest bus stops with Real Time Information signs. (at a total of £5,150)

Travel Plan monitoring sum of (£6,000) Public Art It is suggested that this can be met on-site either in the built development or in the public open spaces to give the development a distinctive character which reflects the local area and is therefore expected to be provided on site by the developer. Shepshed Town Centre Improvements Developer contributions from residential development may contribute towards town centre improvements and it is suggested that £20,600 (£200 per dwelling) should contribute towards these requirements if a clear project is identified to enhance the

29

public realm to meet the requirements of the Master Plan. This would support and accord the aims of policy in the Core Strategy for the identified Shepshed Direction of Growth to contribute towards the regeneration of Shepshed. A scheme is proposed for improvements to the Town Centre which is currently being evaluated and finalised and such a contribution is considered to be justified in accordance with the CIL Regulations Affordable Housing The request is based on the Council’s Housing Officer’s recommendation requiring the provision of affordable housing at 30%. This is considered appropriate given the latest findings of the evidence base of the emerging core strategy. This means at least 31 units are proposed to be affordable housing. The mix of house types is currently unknown. The proposed request for affordable housing is considered to be compliant with Government guidance and Local Plan policy H/5 and would be CIL compliant. The details of the exact arrangement and layout can be agreed in a reserved matters application. Conclusion The central issue in this application is the need to balance the requirement to make land available for new housing, as set out in the Framework, against the considerations of the impact of new housing development in Shepshed including the impact on the landscape, highway infrastructure and safety and the other factors discussed above. At the current time there is still, based on recent analysis, an identifiable shortage measured against the 5 year + 20% land supply required by the Framework. In these circumstances recent appeal decisions, including those at Rearsby Roses, Bramcote Road, Loughborough, Iveshead Road, Shepshed, Rempstone Road, Wymeswold and Mountsorrel Lane Rothley, reveal the considerable weight that appeal inspectors are placing on the need for a supply of housing land, set against landscape and other considerations. It is therefore concluded that the need for housing at the present time remains a consideration of significant weight in the determination of housing proposals. It is considered that this development, taking into consideration the recent conclusions of the Planning Inspector in dealing with an appeal on a nearby site, meets the three dimensions identified in the Framework which conclude the proposal is sustainable and there is therefore a presumption in favour of granting planning permission unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Although there will be some impact of the character and appearance of the countryside the significance of this impact is considered limited and any impact can be largely mitigated by appropriate landscaping and layout. Although concerns have been raised about the drainage of the site and the impact that this will have on local flooding problems the applicants have sought to demonstrate that a suitable scheme can be designed to deal with the surface and foul water drainage from the site. In doing so they have identified that there are

30

current problems with the storm water sewer outside of the site. This is however the responsibility of Severn Trent who has been advised of the applicants findings. Overall, therefore there are no objections to the proposals from either the Environment Agency or STWA and it is considered that subject to appropriate conditions a suitable scheme for the drainage of the site can be designed. Finally there are no highways objections to the proposal although off-site works will be required. In conclusion, therefore, it is considered that there are no impacts of the development of this site that cannot be mitigated and that would be so significant and demonstrably harmful as to outweigh the benefits of providing the required housing land in a sustainable location. The application should therefore be support subject to appropriate conditions being attached and contributions being secured to support local infrastructure. RECOMMENDATION Recommendation A That authority is given to the Head of Planning and Regeneration and the Head of Strategic Support to enter into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to secure infrastructure improvements, on terms to be finalised by them, as set out below:

30% of the dwellings constructed on site to be affordable housing – 75% Affordable social rented/ 25% shared ownership.

Appropriate contributions towards the transfer and maintenance of the open spaces and play areas,

Education contribution - total requirement of £252,828.18 towards the provision of enhanced facilities at local schools

Libraries - £6,270 to meet the additional demands on the library facilities at Anstey

Civic Amenities - £4,356 to meet the additional demand on waste facilities

Health Authority - £30,365.28 from the developer towards providing additional capacity for additional consultations arising from the increased population.

Highways and Transportation – contributions:

A512 Ashby Road/Tickow Lane/Charley Road - the sum of £6355.00 towards safety improvements.

A512 Ashby Road/Charnwood Road/Iveshead Road – the sum of money equivalent to 16.1% of the total cost of the highway improvement works.

A512 Ashby Road/Ingleberry Road/Leicester Road – the sum of money equivalent to 10.2% of the total costs of the highway improvement works.

Travel Packs (can be supplied by LCC at £52.85 per pack)

6 month bus passes, two per dwelling to encourage new residents to use bus services and establish travel behaviour from first occupation. (Can be supplied through LCC at average £350.00 per pass).

31

Improvements to 2 nearest bus stops to support modern bus fleets with low floor capabilities (at £3263.00 per stop)

Information display cases at 2 nearest bus stops to inform new residents of nearest bus services (at £120.00 per display)

Bus shelters at 2 nearest bus stops. (at £4,908.00 per shelter).

Contribution towards equipping nearest bus stops with Real Time Information signs. (at a total of £5,150)

Travel Plan monitoring sum of (£6,000)

A contribution in lieu of any shortfall in the provision of National Forest woodland planting to be calculated at £20,000 per hectare

Contribution towards the capital costs of extending Police premises and start up costs up to £36,896.

Recommendation B: Grant planning permission conditionally subject to the following conditions:

1. Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made within three years of the date of this permission and the development shall be begun not later than two years from the final approval of the last of the reserved matters. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development shall not commence until approval of the following reserved matters has been obtained in writing from the local planning authority: - a. layout, b. scale, c. appearance and d. landscaping. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

3. No development shall take place on site, until such time as the applicant has commissioned a traffic speed survey carried out to the written approval of the LPA, to determine the speed of traffic passing the site on Iveshead Road and the results of that speed survey have been submitted to the LPA. If the results of the speed survey show vehicle speeds are in excess of 30mph, the applicant shall then submit a scheme of traffic calming measures aimed at bringing the speed of passing traffic down to 30mph or below for the written approval of the LPA in consultation with the H.A. The approved traffic calming scheme shall then be implemented before first occupation of any dwelling on the site. REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

4. Notwithstanding the details submitted, the proposed access road serving the site shall be designed and constructed fully in accordance with Highway Authority standards, to include if required as a result of the condition above, suitable traffic calming measures. The access road shall then be provided fully in accordance with the approved details before any dwelling is first occupied and shall thereafter be

32

permanently so maintained. REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

5. Notwithstanding the details submitted, all details of the proposed development shall comply with the design standards of the Leicestershire County Council as contained in its current design standards document. Such details must include parking and turning facilities, access widths, gradients, surfacing, signing and lining and visibility splays and be submitted for approval by the local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority before development commences. Note: Your attention is drawn to the requirement contained in the Highway Authority's current design guide to provide Traffic Calming measures within the new development. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and in the interests of highway safety.

6. No development shall commence on the site until such time as a construction traffic/site traffic management plan, including wheel cleansing facilities and vehicle parking facilities, and a timetable for their provision, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details and timetable. REASON: To reduce the possibility of deleterious material (mud, stones etc) being deposited in the highway and becoming a hazard to road users, and to ensure that construction traffic/site traffic associated with the development does not lead to on-street parking problems in the area.

7. Before the development commences, details of the routing of construction traffic shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) in consultation with the Highway Authority. During the period of construction, all traffic to and from the site shall use the agreed route at all times. REASON: To ensure that construction traffic associated with the development does not use unsatisfactory roads to and from the site.

8. There shall be no direct access, vehicular or pedestrian from the site on to Iveshead Lane, any existing such access shall be permanently closed before development commences. REASON: In the interests of highway safety

9. No part of the development as approved shall be brought into use until details of a Residential Travel Plan has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall address the travel implications of the use of the whole site as if the development approved were to have been fully completed and occupied. The Plan shall specify facilities and measures with measurable out put and outcome targets designed to:

Reduce single occupancy vehicle use, reduce vehicular travel at peak traffic

33

times and reduce vehicle emissions for journeys made for all purposes to and from the developed site,

Increase the choice and use of alternative transport modes for any journeys likely to be made to and from the developed site and, in particular, to secure increases in the proportion of travel by car sharing, public transport use, cycling and walking modes and the use of IT substitutes for real travel,

Manage the demand by all users of the developed site for vehicle parking within and in the vicinity of the developed site.

The Plan shall also specify:

The on-site Plan implementation and management responsibilities, including the identification of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator,

The arrangements for regular travel behaviour and impact monitoring surveys and Plan reviews covering a period extending to at least one year after the last unit of development is occupied or a minimum of 5 years from first occupation, whichever will be the longer.

The timescales or phasing programmes for delivery of the Plan’s proposals and for the achievement of the specified output and outcome targets, and

Additional facilities and measures to be implemented if monitoring shows that the Plan’s targets are not likely to be met, together with clear trigger dates, events or threshold levels for invoking these measures.

The Plan, once agreed, shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, and thereafter, the implementation of the proposals and the achievement of targets of the Plan shall be subject to regular monitoring and review reports to the LPA and, if invoked, to the implementation of the specified additional measures. REASON: To ensure that adequate steps are taken to achieve and maintain reduced travel, traffic and parking impacts and to provide and promote use of more sustainable transport choices to and from the site in order to relieve traffic and parking congestion, promote safety, improve air quality or increase accessibility in accord with Section 4: ‘Promoting Sustainable Transport’ of the NPPF 2012.

10. No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until such time as a surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall include the utilisation of holding sustainable drainage techniques with the incorporation of two treatment trains to help improve water quality; the limitation of surface water run-off to equivalent greenfield rates; the ability to accommodate surface water run-off on-site up to the critical 1 in 100 year event plus an appropriate allowance for climate change, based upon the submission of drainage calculations; and the responsibility for the future maintenance of drainage features. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.

34

REASON: To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of and disposal of surface water from the site.

11. Finished floor levels should be set at least 150mm above existing ground levels. REASON: To protect the development from overland flow.

12. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to dispose of foul drainage has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme should take into account the following:

The increased amount of waste water and sewage effluent produced by the new development will need to be dealt with to ensure that there is no deterioration in the quality of the watercourses receiving the extra volume of treated effluent. Therefore the sewerage undertaker, Severn Trent Water Limited, will need to confirm that Shepshed Sewage Treatment Works has enough capacity in the permitted dry weather flow to accept the foul flow from the proposed development. NB: If there is insufficient headroom then the consent to discharge for the sewage treatment works will have to be reviewed to accommodate the additional flow. If river modelling shows that the consent limits need to be tightened beyond Best Available Technology in order to comply with no deterioration in the watercourse under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) then the volume of foul flow arriving at the sewage treatment works may be limited.

It should be demonstrated by Severn Trent Water Limited that the increase in foul waste water entering the sewerage system will not cause any deterioration in the operation of any combined sewer overflows on the system either upstream or downstream of the development. There must be no increase in the spill frequency or volume of the combined sewer overflows on the sewerage network and the additional flow must not create the need for any new combined sewer overflows. If the sewerage network does not have the capacity to accept the flows then development must be phased in with the upgrading of the network and foul flows can only enter the system once the upgrading work is complete. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

REASON: To protect the water environment. The Humber river basin management plan requires the restoration and enhancement of water bodies to prevent deterioration and promote recovery of water bodies. Without this condition, the impact could cause deterioration of a quality element to a lower status class and/or prevent the recovery of and/or cause deterioration of a River Soar water body because it would result in the release of priority hazardous substances (ammonia).

13. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. REASON: To minimise the risk of pollution of the water environment.

35

14. The hedge located on the boundary of the application site shall be retained and

maintained at a height no lower than 3 metres. Any part of the hedge removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased shall be replaced, with hedge plants of such size and species as previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority, within one year of the date of any such loss. REASON: The hedge is an important feature in the area and its retention is necessary to help screen the new development and prevent undue overlooking of adjoining dwellings.

15. No development, including site works, shall begin until the hedge located on the boundary of the application site has been protected, in a manner previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The hedge shall be protected in the agreed manner for the duration of building operations on the application site. REASON: The hedge is an important feature in the area and this condition is imposed to make sure that it is properly protected while building works take place on the site.

16. The existing trees along the boundaries of the site as indicated on the plan attached to this permission shall be retained and shall not be felled, lopped, topped or uprooted without the previous written agreement of the local planning authority. Any trees removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased shall be replaced with trees of such size and species as previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority within one year of the date of any such loss, for a period of 5 years from the date development begins. REASON: The trees are important features in the area and this condition is imposed to make sure that they are properly protected while building works take place on the site.

17. No development, including site works, shall begin until each tree shown to be retained on the approved plan has been protected, in a manner which shall have first been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Each tree shall be protected in the agreed manner for the duration of building operations on the application site. Within the areas agreed to be protected, the existing ground level shall be neither raised nor lowered, and no materials or temporary building or surplus soil of any kind shall be placed or stored thereon. If any trenches for services are required in the protected areas, they shall be excavated and back-filled by hand and any tree roots encountered with a diameter of 5cm or more shall be left unsevered. REASON: The trees are important features in the area and this condition is imposed to make sure that they are properly protected while building works take place on the site.

18. No development, including site works, shall begin until a landscaping scheme, to include those details specified below, has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority: i) the treatment proposed for all ground surfaces, including hard areas;

36

ii) full details of tree planting; iii) planting schedules, noting the species, sizes, numbers and densities of plants; iv) finished levels or contours; v) any structures to be erected or constructed; vi) functional services above and below ground; and vii) all existing trees, hedges and other landscape features, indicating clearly those to be removed. REASON: To make sure that a satisfactory landscaping scheme for the development is agreed.

The landscaping scheme shall be fully completed, in accordance with the details agreed under the terms of the above condition, in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Any trees or plants removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased, within 5 years of planting shall be replaced in the following planting season by trees or plants of a size and species similar to those originally required to be planted. REASON: To make sure that the appearance of the completed development is satisfactory and to help assimilate the development into its surroundings.

19. No dwelling or building on the site shall be occupied until a landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than domestic gardens, has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The agreed landscape management plan shall then be fully implemented. REASON: To make sure that the appearance of the completed development is satisfactory and to help assimilate the development into its surroundings.

Information Notes The following notes should be taken into account when carrying out the development: 1. The decision has been reached taking into account paragraphs 186-187 of the

National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010 (as amended).

2. The Local Planning Authority acted pro-actively through positive engagement with the applicant during the determination process. This led to improvements to the scheme to secure a sustainable form of development in line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraphs 186 and 187) and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010 (as amended).

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES RELEVANT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT -

37

Policies ST/1, ST/2, EV/1, CT/1 and CT/2 of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan (adopted 12th January 2004) have been taken into account in the determination of this application. The proposed development complies with the requirements of these saved Local Plan policies and there are no other material considerations which are of significant weight in reaching a decision on this application.

4. Your attention is drawn to the requirement contained in the Highway Authority's design document to provide Traffic Calming measures within the new development.

5. This planning permission does NOT allow you to carry out access alterations in the highway. Before such work can begin, separate permits or agreements will be required under the Highways Act 1980 from either the Adoptions team (for 'major' accesses) or the Highways Manager. For further information, including contact details, you are advised to visit the County Council website as follows: - For 'major' accesses - see Part 6 of the "6Cs Design Guide" at www.leics.gov.uk/6csdg For other minor, domestic accesses, contact the Service Centre Tel: 0116 3050001.

6. C.B.R. Tests shall be taken and submitted to the County Council's Area Manager prior to development commencing in order to ascertain road construction requirements. No work shall commence on site without prior notice being given to the Highways Manager.

7. You may have a duty to register the water-retaining structure with the County Council as the proposed development may be subject to the provisions of the Reservoirs Act 1975 and should contact the County Solicitor for guidance/advice.

8. You will be required to enter into a suitable legal Agreement with the Highway Authority for the off-site highway works before development commences and detailed plans shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Highway Authority. The Agreement must be signed and all fees paid and surety set in place before the highway works are commenced.

9. If the roads within the proposed development are to be adopted by the Highway Authority, the Developer will be required to enter into an agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 for the adoption of the roads. Detailed plans will need to be submitted and approved, the agreement signed and all sureties and fees paid prior to the commencement of development. If an Agreement is not in place when the development is to be commenced, the Highway Authority will serve APCs in respect of all plots served by all the roads within the development in accordance with Section 219 of the Highways Act 1980. Payment of the charge MUST be made before building commences.

10. Any street furniture or lining that requires relocation or alteration shall be carried out entirely at the expense of the applicant, who shall first obtain the

38

separate consent of the Highway Authority.

11. If the applicants do not wish to seek adoption of the roads, the Highway Authority will serve APCs in respect of all plots served by all the roads within the development in accordance with Section 219 of the Highways Act 1980. Payment of the charge MUST be made before building commences. Please note that the Highway Authority has standards for private roads which will need to be complied with to ensure that the APC may be exempted and the monies returned. Failure to comply with these standards will mean that monies cannot be refunded. For further details see www.leics.gov.uk/htd or phone 0116 3057198.

12. To accord to Highway Authority standards, car parking spaces should have minimum dimensions of 2.4 metres in width and 5.5 metres in length. Where bounded by walls, fences, vegetation or other similar obstruction, a minimum additional 0.5 metre clear margin will be required to allow full access to and from all car doors (including the boot). For a garage to count as a parking space, it must have minimum internal dimensions of 3 metres width and 6 metres length.

13. Please be aware that Leicestershire County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) are currently not a statutory consultee to the planning process for drainage matters. When Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 is implemented Leicestershire County Council will become the SuDs Approval Body (SAB) and also a statutory consultee of the planning process. You will need to contact Leicestershire County Council if you have an aspiration for us to adopt any SuDs features associated with the development. Please e-mail roadadoptions@leics.gov.uk if you wish to discuss further.

39

This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her

Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Licence No: 100023558

This copy has been produced specifically for Council purposes only. No further copies may be made.

Application No: P/14/0777/2 Location: Land r/o 62 Iveshead Road, Shepshed, Leicestershire

LE12 9ER Scale: 1:2500

IVESHEAD LANE

Pond

Issues

JOLLY FARMERS LANE

Drain

MORLEY LANE