Issue - meetings

Application for demolition of former cottage hospital and development of new day case surgery building with associated landscaping and parking.

Late items received after publication of the agenda:

Additional Support Comments:

Since publication of the report, one additional support comment was received, stating that the building frontage of the old cottage hospital is architecturally insignificant given the huge number of similar properties still in existence.

A petition has been received with approximately 1642 signatures stating “We the undersigned support the £10m investment for a Day Case Unit in Hinckley and ask that Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council permits the planning application.”

The petition contains the names and postcodes for each signatory.

Additional Consultee Comments:

Consultee comments from LCC Ecology have been received. LCC Ecology raise no objection subject to the imposition of conditions which are set out below.

The Bat Roost Survey Report – Buildings (Tetra Tech Ltd., June 2025) found no bats emerging from the remaining building on site. LCC ecology are satisfied that there is sufficient ecological information available to support determination of this application. The mitigation measures identified in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Geosphere Environmental, April 2025) will conserve and enhance protected and Priority species particularly those recorded in the locality.

Amended Conditions:

Condition 6 is to be deleted as details of dust and construction hours are contained within Construction Environmental Management Plan included within condition 5.

Additional Conditions:

1. All ecological mitigation measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Geosphere Environmental, April 2025). This will include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) to provide on-site ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To conserve protected and Priority species in accordance with Policy DM6 of the adopted Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2016) and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (as amended).

2. Prior to commencement of the development a construction environmental management plan (CEMP: Biodiversity) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following.

a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities.

b) Identification of “biodiversity protection zones”.

c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction (may be provided as a set of method statements).

d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features.

e) The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works.

f) Responsible persons and lines of communication.

g) The role and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) or similarly competent person.

h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 110

Application for demolition of former cottage hospital and development of new day case surgery building with associated landscaping and parking.

In presenting the report, the case officer reported that a request had been submitted to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport by a member of the public to review their decision not to list the hospital building, and that should permission be granted for the planning application, the decision would not be issued until the outcome of the review was known. Officers also committed to urging the government department to expedite the review. It was noted that, should the building be listed, the application would need to be brought back to the Planning Committee.

Two representatives of the applicant spoke on the application.

Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Lynch, proposed that:

“(i)        Permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report and late items, with authority delegated to the Head of Planning to determine the final detail of the conditions;

(ii)          A note to applicant be added to urge them to continue throughout the construction of the new day case unit to look for ways to work with local heritage groups and others to seek to preserve as many heritage features as possible;

(iii)         Disappointment be expressed that the Secretary of State had not responded to the Leader of the Council’s letter urging the government to look at providing the new day case facilities whilst simultaneously protecting the locally recognised heritage asset;

(iv)         The scaremongering by the Member of Parliament for Hinckley & Bosworth, who sought to distort the position taken by those who have tried constructively to deliver the new facilities whilst seeking a better building design, be condemned;

(v)          The NHS be urged to continue to seek ways to further improve the overall health provision locally. Local people have previously been promised a walk-in / minor injuries unit and we urge the NHS to bring forward these plans.”

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED –

(i)            Permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report and late items, with authority delegated to the Head of Planning to determine the final detail of the conditions;

(ii)          A note to applicant be added to urge them to continue throughout the construction of the new day case unit to look for ways to work with local heritage groups and others to seek to preserve as many heritage features as possible;

(iii)         Disappointment be expressed that the Secretary of State had not responded to the Leader of the Council’s letter urging the government to look at providing the new day case facilities whilst simultaneously protecting the locally recognised heritage asset;

(iv)         The scaremongering by the Member of Parliament for Hinckley & Bosworth, who sought to distort the position taken by those who have tried constructively to deliver the new facilities whilst seeking a better building design, be condemned;

(v)          The NHS be urged to continue to seek  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110