Victoria Hall, 39 High Street, Oakham, Rutland, LE15 6AH
Telephone: 01572 723627
e-mail: enquiries@oakhamtowncouncil.gov.uk
REPORT
A MEETING OF
OAKHAM TOWN COUNCIL’S
PLANNING AND PARKS COMMITTEE
7.00PM WEDNESDAY JANUARY 30th 2013
APOLOGIES - were received for absence and accepted Cllr Guthrie
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked to declare, if required:
(i) Any Disclosable Pecuniary Interest they may have in respect to items on the agenda
(ii) Any other interest they may have in respect to items on the agenda
Members are also reminded to inform the Clerk of any changes in their Register of Members’
Interests
John Nowell declared item 8 (i)
Alf Dewis declared item 8 (i) both connected to The Oakham Town Partnership
3. MINUTES (Appendix A)
Cllrs confirmed the minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Parks Committee held on
Wednesday November 28th 2012
4. COUNCILLOR’S QUESTIONS
none were asked
5. MEMBER’S REPORTS
no members reports
6. CLERK’S REPORT – For information only
To receive a report from the Clerk
A very short report saying the path to the new children's play area at Royce Recreation Ground will be altered for disabled access, due to the gate being fitted the wrong way.
7. DEPUTATIONS BY THE PUBLIC
I gave a deputation about the wrong town partnership signs.
I then mentioned my concerns regarding the Horse Shoe Pub and loop wholes in planning law highlighted by CAMERA.
I also asked if the council would consider asking Jeakins Wear to improve the screening of their proposed site.
8. PLANNING APPLICATIONS
To consider the following applications received to date and to make recommendations
or observations thereon to Rutland County Council:
(i) APP/2012/0849/NT (ADV) Cllr John Nowell, Oakham Town Partnership
Erection of 1 No. Information Board (2m x 1m) 1 metre above ground level
Land near Junction of Hambleton Lane and Stamford Road
A photograph was handed around to councillors and the application was approved
(ii) APP/2012/0932/EZE (HSE) Mr L Nguyen
Construction of a single storey side extension to the north elevation of the
dwellinghouse and garage conversion
1 Don Close
Councillors rejected this application saying the plans were incomplete referring to a window not mentioned in the plans submitted.
(iii) APP/2012/0944/EZE (HSE) Mr B Jolly
Construction of a bay window extension to the side (east) elevation of the
dwellinghouse. Reposition of 1.8 metre fence to match existing fence to the side (east)
of the dwellinghouse
1 Tabberer Close
approved
(iv) APP/2012/0945/APB (FUL) Mr James Phillips
Proposed extension to front (east) and rear (west) elevation of A4 unit and change
of use at first floor from C3 to A4 classification
The Horseshoe 83 Braunston Road
rejected after comments about future use of property. Cllrs at one point wanted to defer to seek more information, they were reminded they were to consider the plans in front of them and not rumours about future use.
Cllr Lucas pointed out Mr Birches lives next door? and the extension was to big.
the application was rejected because it was to big for a pub and a pub that was already struggling
(v) APP/2012/0947/APB (PTA) Mr Kenneth Beaton
Fell 1 No. Lime tree
8 Stamford Road
Cllr Lucas complimented the author of the tree report the best she had ever seen for a tree.
It was then proposed the tree was cut down an d replaced with a Oak Tree, Cllr Dodds woke up and objected to the resident being told to plant a Oak tree. at this point Cllr lucas showed her true colours and
attacked Cllr Dodds and went on and on about it was the resident who suggested a Oak tree was planted.
The issue here is both Councillors hate each other and Cllr Dodds does not read any council documents
if she did she would not lay herself open to attack by the awful Councillor Lucas.
(vi) APP/2013/0016/DTR (LBA) Mr Lewis Hopcroft/RCC
Construction of steel fire escape following removal of existing. Alterations to 2
nd Floor doorway with associated groundworks
Catmose House, Catmose Street
Approved
(vii) APP/2013/0004/HN (MAJR) Jeakins Weir Ltd
Proposed housing development and associated works including provision of access
onto Uppingham Road
Land West of Uppingham Road
Although one can not predict the outcome of this application before it comes before Rutland County Council
You would expect Oakham Town Council to put forward some comment.
Last night they had that opportunity and they rejected it.
Once again this highlights the pointless purpose of this council.
We all know the outline planning application ended up at appeal and Jeakins Weir Ltd won
The appeal costs to residents and the County Council was a fortune.
So I assume it is highly unlikely that the full application will not be turned down.
The full application gave the Town Council a chance to comment on the plans and requests modification if needed.
They chose not to do any of that. One plan was displayed on the screen and the Clerk said this was a low density build considering the size of the site. No other details relating to the plans were shown.
Cllr Charles Haworth foolishly suggested that the planning application had been taken out of their hands by the planning inspectorate and for that reason, he proposed the council ignored the application and made no comment.
That proposal fell.
The Clerk was then questioned by Cllr Maureen Dodds who asked on what grounds did we reject the outline plans in 2010? The Clerk responded I don't know.
Cllr Lockett then proposed the council should refuse the application for the same reasons they gave in 2010.
This was approved despite most of those reason being proved to be unlawful at the planning inspectorates appeal.
If Jeakins Wear had been present at the meeting I think they would have departed with a smile on their face.
This Town Council has no interest in the concerns of residents and their handling of this application showed
them as the fools they are.
There was one councillor who made a attempt to include a comment regarding the screening of the site, Cllr Jayne Woodcock was told she was to late to include that comment before the second proposal was tabled and accepted.
It is my view Oakham Town Council failed to consider this application in accordance with planning laws.
And as a resident I feel the councils handling of this application marked major, was a disgrace
(viii) APP/2013/0013/APB (HSE) Alan Cushing
Construction of garage following demolition of existing.
Construction of a single storey rear extension to the west elevation of the dwellinghouse
171 Brooke Road
Approved Subject to the next door neighbour not losing light a request from Cllr Dewis.
