Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Tuesday, 20 July 2021 6.30 pm

Venue: De Montfort Suite, Hinckley Hub. View directions

Contact: Rebecca Owen  Democratic Services Manager Email: rebecca.owen@hinckley-bosworth.gov.uk

Link: There will be a limited public gallery available for this meeting and we would encourage you to view the meeting on YouTube

Media

Items
No. Item

70.

Apologies and substitutions

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors C Allen and R Allen with the following substitutions authorised in accordance with council procedure rule 10:

 

Councillor Cook for Councillor C Allen

Councillor Morrell for Councillor R Allen.

71.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 138 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 29 June 2021.

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor W Crooks and

 

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 29 June 2021 be approved as a correct record.

72.

Declarations of interest

To receive verbally from Members any disclosures which they are required to make in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct or in pursuance of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. This is in addition to the need for such disclosure to be also given when the relevant matter is reached on the agenda.

Minutes:

Councillors J Crooks and W Crooks declared a pecuniary interest in application 21/00466/HOU as the applicants.

 

Councillors Cook, Morrell, Roberts and Smith declared a personal interest in application 21/00290/OUT as the applicant was a member of their political group.

 

Councilors Bray, Cope, Findlay, Flemming, Gibbens, Hodgkins, Lynch, Mullaney and Walker declared a personal interest in application 21/00290/OUT as the applicant was a member of their political group.

 

Councillor Furlong declared a personal interest in application 20/00511/FUL as he lived near the site.

73.

Decisions delegated at previous meeting

To report progress on any decisions delegated at the previous meeting.

Minutes:

It was reported that all decisions had been issued with the exception of those that were subject to a S106 agreement.

74.

20/00511/FUL - Land off Beech Drive, Thornton pdf icon PDF 351 KB

Application for residential development of 49 dwellings with associated infrastructure, access and areas of open space.

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Introduction:-

Following the agenda the agent has submitted amended plans, following the comments from LCC Highways in regards to the adoptability of the proposed roads within the site. Additionally a soft landscaping plan has been submitted demonstrating the indicative landscaping for the site.

 

Consultations:-

Leicestershire County Council (Highways) have provided further comments on the application:

1)        The amendments have overcome the main concerns and any amendments needed at a S38 process would not be significant to require a change to the planning permission and therefore the Local Highway Authority would consider the layout for adoption should planning permission be granted.

Appraisal:-

Neighbourhood Plan

Bagworth, Thornton & Stanton under Bardon Neighbourhood Plan is currently at regulation 14 stage. The pre-submission consultation ended in May 2021 and preparation for submission is currently underway. The plan does not identify this site as an allocation for housing or any other designations and does not seek to include the site within the settlement boundary. Due to the stage the Neighbourhood Plan is within the process, limited weight can be afforded to this Neighbourhood Plan in the determination of this application to it in line with paragraph 48 of the NPPF.

Highways

The Council have sought independent Highways advice in regards to the impact of the proposal. A summary of their response is,:

‘In technical terms there is a finely balanced argument to be taken in relation to substandard visibility. The achievable visibility is a reduction of 42% in the required visibility, which is a significant shortfall, and a shortfall that could be regarded as a significant safety hazard to justify refusal of planning permission. The increase in traffic/dwellings served by this junction of some 78% would increase the number of opportunities for collisions to occur. However, to counter this argument, it is an existing junction that serves 63 dwellings and there is no history of accidents from its daily use. Furthermore, design guidance contained in Manual for Streets 1 and 2 suggests that reduced visibility can lead to drivers taking more care and that a reduction will not necessarily lead to a significant problem. Overall, there is a valid case to support both sides of the argument and the Council will need to balance this in their decision making.

The applicant has acknowledged the potential difficulties for them in terms of visibility at the junction by offering two traffic calming schemes through the application process. The first scheme was seen as not comprehensive enough by LCC and following the submission of the second scheme LCC appear to have withdrawn their request for traffic calming altogether. In my view, the offer of traffic calming, if designed correctly, would be a significant benefit to highway safety. This is particularly the case in view of the close proximity of the primary school on Main Street, which adds further weight to the importance of highway safety.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 74.

Minutes:

Application for residential development of 49 dwellings with associated infrastructure, access and areas of open space.

 

An objector, the agent, the county councillor and the ward councillor spoke on this application.

 

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, it was moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor Boothby that permission be refused as the significant and demonstrable impact on the countryside would not be outweighed by the benefit of providing housing and would therefore be contrary to policy DM4 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and the substandard visibility of the junction of Hawthorn Drive and Main Street would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety contrary to policy DM17 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPDand paragraph 109 of the NPPF.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the following reasons:

 

(i)            The development, due to its incursion into the countryside to the south west of the village of Thornton would have a significant and demonstrable impact on the intrinsic value, beauty and open character of the countryside. This is not outweighed by the benefit of providing housing. The development is therefore contrary to policy DM4 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD;

 

(ii)          The substandard visibility of the junction of Hawthorn Drive and Main Street would lead to an unacceptable impact on highway safety contrary to policy DM17 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

At this juncture, Councillor Boothby declared a personal interest in the following application due to the applicant being a member of his political group.

75.

21/00290/OUT - 14 Chesterfield Way, Barwell pdf icon PDF 303 KB

Application for residential development for four dwellings.

 

Late items received after preparation of main agenda:

 

Consultations

One additional letter of objection has been received raising the following points;

1)        The proposed development is still over development and plot one is still only 1 meter away from our boundary and garden building. This will cause overshadowing loss of light and loss of privacy in to the garden and lounge and detrimental effect of well-established trees.

2)        Back land development

3)        This re submission has not addressed the planning departments concerns at all, in our opinion nothing has changed apart from the hoses being slightly turned and initial objections are still relevant.

4)        This is out 4th letter of objection

5)        Committee should decline the application

Appraisal:-

The proposed layout plans are indicative and could therefore be subject to change. However, the indicative layout does show how the site could accommodate up to four dwellings, this is one less dwelling that previously proposed.

The Officer Report to Committee considers the impact of the proposed dwellings on surrounding residential properties concluding that the scale combined with the quantum of development means the overbearing impact and potential for overlooking and loss of privacy to neighbouring properties would be minimal. The indicative layout shows how plot one could be accommodated to allow sufficient separation distances to limit any potential overbearing nature.  Furthermore, scale is proposed and this plot would accommodate a bungalow with rooms in the roof space, again the indicative layout shows how this could be accommodated close to the boundary with neighbouring residential properties, whilst protecting privacy and limiting overshadowing.

The previous reason for refusal is set out at paragraph 2.3 of the Officer Report to Committee, Officers feel the reduction in units from 5 to 4 and the re-orientation of the proposed plots overcomes the reason for refusal.

Recommendation:-

The recommendation remains as printed on the agenda.

Minutes:

Application for residential development for four dwellings (outline – access and scale).

 

An objector and the agent spoke on this application.

 

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, it was moved by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Findlay that permission be refused due to having an adverse impact on neighbours due to the proximity of the new properties to the existing properties on Chesterfield Way, being detrimental to the character of the area and constituting over development contrary to policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – permission be refused as the development would have an adverse impact on neighbours due to the proximity of the new properties to the existing properties on Chesterfield Way, being detrimental to the character of the area and constituting over development contrary to policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD.

76.

21/00251/FUL - Land East of Higham Lane, Stoke Golding pdf icon PDF 293 KB

Application for erection of building and change of use of land to form a dog day care facility.

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Introduction:-

Following the publication of the committee report, the following additional information has been received on 19.07.2021 from the applicant:

 

·                Signed tenancy agreement between applicant and land owner

 

This additional information has been provided on a confidential basis.

During the Course of the application an objection was received from Cllr. Collett as Ward Councillor. Whilst these comments are included within paragraph 5.3 of the officer report committee contained with the letters of objection, these comments should have been separated out. Cllr. Collett made the following points of objection;

·                Such a building in beautiful open countryside would be inappropriate.

Appraisal:-

The committee report already published assesses the weight given to the applicant’s tenancy agreement in the context of the application:

“Notwithstanding, it is not considered that evidence of a lease agreement would necessarily provide all “details regarding the landowner’s business” that the Planning Inspectorate believed to be lacking in order to satisfy Policy DM4 of the SADMP.” (Paragraph 8.2)

Recommendation:-

The recommendation remains as printed on the agenda.

Minutes:

Application for erection of building and change of use of land to form a dog day care facility (part-retrospective) (resubmission of 20/00570/FUL).

 

The agent and a representative of Stoke Golding Parish Council spoke on the application.

 

It was moved by Councillor Roberts, seconded by Councillor Cook and

 

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the reasons contained in the officer’s report.

77.

21/00130/FUL - The Acorns, 236 Ashby Road pdf icon PDF 232 KB

Application for erection of two dwellings.

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Consultations:-

A full formal response from Leicestershire County Council (Highways) has been received since the publication of the agenda. This response raises no objections subject to 6 conditions, including provision of visibility splays, access in accordance with plans, removal of Permitted Development for access gates, barriers, bollards, provision of parking and turning to be implemented prior to occupation, hard surfacing of access drive 5 metres behind the highways boundary and drainage details to be submitted to avoid surface water draining onto the public highway, and a number of informatives.

In addition, a condition relating to a construction management plan in respect of construction vehicle parking, unloading and storage of materials is proposed to ensure the disruption to the local highway network is minimised.

Appraisal:-

The comments from LCC Highways do not alter the assessment outlined in the agenda and there are no highway safety concerns with the proposed development. However, the conditions requested are considered reasonable and necessary to make the application acceptable in highway safety terms, with the exception of the suggested drainage condition which is already covered by recommended condition 7, in accordance with Policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management DPD.

Recommendation:-

The recommendation of approval remains; however the following conditions are also recommended in addition to those outlined within the original agenda:

13.         No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until such time as vehicular visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 73 metres and pedestrian visibility splays of 1 x 1 metres have been provided at the site access. These shall thereafter be permanently maintained with nothing within those splays higher than 0.6 metres above the level of the adjacent footway/verge/highway.

Reason: To afford adequate visibility at the access to cater for the expected volume of traffic joining the existing highway network, in the interests of general highway safety, and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

14.         No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until such time as the access arrangements shown on Vagdia & Holmes drawing number 1822 - SP - 007 Rev B have been implemented in full.

Reason: To ensure that vehicles entering and leaving the site may pass each other clear of the highway, in a slow and controlled manner, in the interests of general highway safety and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

15.         Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 of Schedule 2, Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) no vehicular access gates, barriers, bollards, chains or other such obstructions shall be erected within a distance of 5 metres of the highway boundary, nor shall any be erected within a distance of 5 metres of the highway boundary unless hung to open away from the highway.

Reason: To enable a vehicle to stand clear of the  ...  view the full agenda text for item 77.

Minutes:

Application for erection of two dwellings.

 

An objector and the agent spoke on this application.

 

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, it was moved by Councillor Gibbens and seconded by Councillor Bray that permission be refused due to constituting inappropriate back land development and therefore out of keeping with the character of the area and is contrary to policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and the Good Design Guide.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – permission be refused due to being inappropriate back land development which is out of keeping with the character of the area and contrary to policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and the Good Design Guide.

78.

20/01293/FUL - Long Barn, Tooley Farm, Earl Shilton pdf icon PDF 297 KB

Application for conversion of barn into two dwellings.

Minutes:

Application for conversion of barn into two dwellings.

 

The agent spoke on the application.

 

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Lynch and

 

RESOLVED –

 

(i)            Permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report;

 

(ii)          The Planning Manager be granted authority to determine the final detail of the planning conditions.

79.

20/00191/FUL - Paynes Garages, Hinckley pdf icon PDF 309 KB

Application for installation of 4x5 metre high lamp columns and associated lighting units (retrospective).

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Consultations:-

One additional comment was received, stating that the lights were on at 10pm on 13th July.

Further consultation with Paynes Garages Ltd has been undertaken. CCTV footage which covers the car park and the back of the houses has been reviewed from 10pm on 13 July which shows that no lights are on in the car park.

Appraisal:-

Condition 2 as set out on the agenda restricts the hours of operation and should the lights be operated outside of the suggested hours, the condition is enforceable. Currently, there are no restrictions upon the use of the lights, only the granting of planning permission would trigger these conditions.  The impact upon residential amenity is considered within paragraphs 8.2 to 8.11 of the officer report to committee. No harm to residential amenity has been found, in consultation with HBBC Environmental Health. 

Recommendation:-

The recommendation remains unchanged.

Minutes:

Application for installation of 4 x 5 metre high lamp columns and associated lighting units.

 

The ward councillor spoke on this application.

 

Whilst generally in support of this application, members expressed concern about the overall impact of the lighting on site on neighbours. It was moved by Councillor Lynch and seconded by Councillor Bray that the item be deferred for a site visit and to allow officers to approach the applicant to discuss the issues raised.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – the application be deferred for a site visit and discussion with the applicant.

80.

21/00531/HYB- Wood Farm, Stanton pdf icon PDF 514 KB

Application for hybrid application compromising of outline permission for the erection of buildings for storage and distribution uses (Class B8), general industry (Class B2) and associated infrastructure including the formation of a new access (All matters reserved except for access) and full planning permission for the demolition of existing farmstead and relocation, including the erection of 2 replacement farm managers dwellings and associated agriculture buildings and structures (revised scheme).

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Introduction:-

During the course of the application, the red line of the application has been amended. The change to the red line is limited to the west corner of the application site, adjacent to the roundabout where Victoria Road, West Lane and Stanton Lane meets. The red line has been amended to reflect the true boundary line between Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council and North West Leicestershire. The change to the red line does not result in any material impact upon the application being considered.

Consultations:-

An additional letter of support has been received making the following points

1)        Bringing growth in the local area to bring more job and trade to the surrounding towns and villages.

Further letter of objection has been received raising the following:-

1)        The Road Traffic Noise Calculation Results show that many roads around this area are already considered to have levels which are ABOVE the SOAEL, that is, significant observed adverse effect levels. Government guidelines state that further developments in these areas should be avoided.

2)        Would result in impact on health and quality of life.

3)        The bat report mentions that 24 hour working should be avoided due to risk or injury /mortality. This is relevant to development during construction and operational. 

Appraisal:-

Public Rights of Way

For clarity at paragraph 8.88, in order to improve the surrounding right of way surrounding the site, the LHA request 640m x 2m crushed stone surfacing to footpath N47 between West Lane and Bardon Business Park as well as a 100m x 3m length to footpath R31 at Stanton Lane and installation of a total of five kissing gates along the routes of N47, R9 and R33. The total value of the works would be £100,000. This request is considered reasonable to ensure wider links surrounding the site are upgraded to encourage more sustainable travel, and improvement to the existing network. The works will either be carried out by the applicant or by way of a financial contribution of £100,000 secured by legal agreement.

Recommendation:-

Grant planning permission subject to:

The completion within 3 months of this resolution a S106 agreement to secure the following obligations:

·                Coalville transportation infrastructure strategy contribution;

·                Provision of opportunities for apprenticeships and work experience and employment and skills related training during the construction of the development; 

·                One travel pack per employee from first occupation;

·                One six month bus pass per employee if requested;

·                Sustainable Travel Accreditation and Recognition Scheme monitoring fee;

·                Retention of the community woodland area within the scheme, commitment to management and ongoing  ...  view the full agenda text for item 80.

Minutes:

Hybrid application comprising of outline permission for the erection of buildings for storage and distribution uses (class B8), general industry (class B2) and associated infrastructure including the formation of a new access (all matters reserved except for access) and full planning permission for the demolition of existing farmstead and relocation, including the erection of two replacement farm managers’ dwellings and associated agricultural buildings and structures (revised scheme).

 

The agent, a supporter, a representative of the local parish council and the ward councillor spoke on this item.

 

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, members felt that this application constituted industrial incursion into the countryside and would have an adverse impact on the rural location contrary to policy DM4 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD. It was moved by Councillor Furlong and seconded by Councillor Findlay that permission be refused for these reasons.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – permission be refused due to the industrial incursion into the countryside, which is also part of the National Forest and Charnwood Forest, which would have an adverse impact on the intrinsic value, beauty, open character and landscape character of this rural location and is therefore contrary to policy DM4 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD.

81.

Extension of time

Minutes:

Having reached 9.30pm, it was moved by Councillor J Crooks, seconded by Councillor Findlay and

 

RESOLVED – the meeting be permitted to continue after 9.30pm.

82.

20/01324/CONDIT- 128 Main Street, Markfield pdf icon PDF 120 KB

Application for variation of conditions 2 and 4 of planning permission 14/01082/FUL, to remove the granite plinth from front elevations and the erection of canopies above front doors (Part retrospective).

 

Late items received after preparation of agenda:

 

Appraisal:-

The approved elevation plan granted under 14/01082/FUL sought to retain and erect the Miners Hall plaque and fix it above the entrance to the undercroft within the front elevation. The plaque was not salvageable due to the age and timber rotting, and therefore during the course of this application a suitable alternative has been sought, such as a blue plaque to match existing heritage plaques found within the wider village. It is considered that the former sign be recreated in aluminium and a blue plaque be installed in addition, which would appropriately reflect the former heritage interest of the site.

Recommendation:-

Recommendation unchanged subject to additional condition below.

Conditions:-

Proposed condition 7.

7.           Within 3 months of permission hereby approved, details of a proposed heritage signs and siting shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved signage shall be erected within 2 months of agreed scheme and thereafter maintained.

Reason: To ensure that the development has a satisfactory external appearance in accordance with Policies DM10, DM11 and DM12 of the adopted Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2016).

Minutes:

Application for variation of conditions 2 and 4 of planning permission 14/01082/FUL to remove the granite plinth from front elevations and the erection of canopies above front doors (part retrospective).

 

The ward councillor spoke on the application.

 

Notwithstanding the officer recommendation that permission be granted, Councillor Furlong proposed that permission be refused. Following further discussion, Councillor Furlong withdrew this motion and, seconded by Councillor Findlay, proposed that the application be deferred to for discussion with applicants in relation to rendering the properties.

 

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

 

RESOLVED – the application be deferred to seek rendering of the properties.

83.

Appeals progress pdf icon PDF 190 KB

To report on progress relating to various appeals.

Minutes:

Members received an update on progress in relation to various appeals. The report was noted.

 

Having declared pecuniary interests in the following application as the applicants, Councillors J Crooks and W Crooks left the meeting at 9.54pm.

 

Councillor Findlay took the chair at this juncture.

84.

21/00466/HOU - 9 Hornbeam Road, Newbold Verdon pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Application for single story rear extension.

Minutes:

Application for single storey rear extensions.

 

It was moved by Councillor Lynch, seconded by Councillor Gibbens and

 

RESOLVED –

 

(i)            Permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report;

 

(ii)          The Planning Manager be granted authority to determine the final detail of the planning conditions.