Agenda and minutes

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

Councillor Bools for Councillor Bray

Councillor O’Shea for Councillor R Allen

Councillor Simmons for Councillor C Allen.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2024.

It was moved by Councillor Flemming, seconded by Councillor Walker and

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June be confirmed as a correct record.

Councillor Bools stated that he had openly spoken against applications 24/00488/HOU and 23/00711/FUL and would remove himself from the committee during discussion on these applications but would speak as ward councillor.

Councillor Green declared a pecuniary interest and Councillors Simmons and Smith declared other interests in application 24/00476/FUL.

Councillors Lynch and Walker stated they had sat on Burbage Parish Council’s Planning Committee during consideration of application 24/00274/FUL but had not voted.

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

Members were updated on decisions delegated at the previous meeting.

Application for a residential development for 81 dwellings with provision of access, open space and associated infrastructure.

Late item received after publication of agenda:

Since publication of the report, an updated response from LCC Highways has been received. This is set out below:

“Background

The local Highway Authority (LHA) previously advised within its formal observations dated 2nd May 2024 that additional information was required in respect of the proposals. It was stated that the access arrangements shown on Persimmon drawing number PL-EXT_ES_SRP Rev N (access through the wider SUE as opposed to Thurlaston Lane) would resolve reason for refusals 1 and 2 advised within the highways observations dated 2nd November 2023. No additional supporting information had been provided in respect of reason for refusal 3 (relating to the works on Thurlaston Lane/ site access) and the LHA advised that if access was taken solely through the SUE, that reason for refusal could also be removed.

The LHA has subsequently been engaged in ongoing discussions with both the Local Planning Authority and the Applicant in respect of the proposals. It is also noted that Earl Shilton Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE) has now been granted outline planning permission with main access from Clickers Way (A47) and that the Applicant could access the proposed development via this route and in accordance with the Local Plan policy.

The LHA has undertaken a review of the highway boundary extents along Thurlaston Lane up to King Richards Hill and obtained an AutoCAD version of Banners Gate drawing number P/1652/11 Rev. B, which details the site access, carriageway widening and proposed footway alongside Thurlaston Lane from the Applicant. The LHA is concerned that whilst the preliminary design proposals are shown within the extents of the available public highway, these do not consider the wider impacts of the proposals and their deliverability at the detailed design/ S278 stage. These concerns can be summarised as follows:

·                The LHA believes the highway boundary extents to be to the centreline of the existing hedgerows either side of the carriageway. The proposals are likely to result in considerable works in very close proximity to the centre of the hedgerows and require substantial removal of hedgerow/ roots to the north of Thurlaston Lane in particular. Carriageway construction works require at least an additional 0.45m excavation beyond the edge of the carriageway and for footway works, at least 0.1m beyond the edge of the footway. This is very likely to result in the loss of the existing third party hedgerow.

·                The proposals are likely to require the removal of non-highway third party trees to the north of Thurlaston Lane in order to accommodate the carriageway realignment.

·                The proposed footway is likely to create a long term maintenance issue alongside the hedgerow to Marlpit Farm. The proposed footway width here is 1.8m (below the 2.0m width required within the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide) and this could be reduced further should the hedge not be removed/ survive construction. This could result in pedestrians having to  ...  view the full agenda text for item 94.

Application for residential development for up to 81 dwellings with provision of access, open space and infrastructure.

The agent and two ward councillors spoke on this application.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, concern was expressed in relation to highway safety and landscaping. It was moved by Councillor Bools and seconded by Councillor O’Shea that the application be deferred to seek further information on landscaping and on deliverability of the temporary access and footpath and how long it would be in place. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – the application be deferred for further information on the temporary access and landscaping.

Having stated he had made public objections to the following application, Councillor Bools absented himself from the committee at 7.10pm and took a seat at the ward councillor’s table.

Application for two-storey side extension, creation of balcony, demolition and replacement of ancillary outbuilding and construction of a double garage (retrospective).

Application for two-storey side extension, creation of balcony, demolition and replacement of ancillary outbuilding and construction of double garage (retrospective).

A ward councillor spoke on this application.

Whilst acknowledging there were no planning reasons to refuse this application, members were unhappy that permission had not been sought for such extensive work prior to commencing construction and requested that a note to applicant be added to remind them that due process must be followed in future. It was moved by Councillor Lynch, seconded by Councillor O’Shea and

RESOLVED – permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report.

Councillor Bools retook his seat at this juncture.

Application for change of use of a building from agricultural to residential and associated works.

Application for change of use of a building from agricultural to residential and associated works.

The agent spoke on this application.

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

RESOLVED – permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report.

Having declared an interest in the following application, Councillors Green, Simmons and Smith left the meeting at 7.23pm.

Application for change of use from two dwellinghouses (class C3) to children’s care home (class C2).

Application for change of use from two dwellinghouses (class C3) to children’s care home (class 2).

The agent spoke on this application.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, members felt that the facility would be in an inappropriate location due to lack of parking and outside space. It was felt that the agent had indicated that more staff would be required than stated in the report which would require additional parking, and that the outside space provided, even by removing the fence between the two gardens, was smaller than suggested by the Good Design Guide. It was moved by Councillor S Gibbens and seconded by Councillor Bools that permission be refused for these reasons. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – permission be refused due to lack of parking and outside space.

Councillors Green, Simmons and Smith returned to the meeting at 7.53pm.

Application for change of use of part of the garden (use class C3) to accommodate storage of skips (use class B8).

Application for change of use of part of the garden (use class C3) to accommodate storage of skips (use class B8).

A ward councillor spoke on this application.

It was moved by Councillor Lynch, seconded by Councillor O’Shea and

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

Application for extensions and alterations of existing ancillary building to form early years day nursery (class E) with associated car parking.

Late items received after publication of agenda:

Consultations:-

Since publication of the Planning Committee report, an additional comment has been received from LCC Highways which is summarised below;

“Background

The Local Highway Authority (LHA) has been re-consulted by Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council as the Local Planning Authority (LPA) on a full application for extensions and alterations of an existing ancillary building to form an early years day nursery (Class E) with associated car parking. The proposals are located at Manor View, Aston Flamville Road, Burbage, Hinckley.

The LHA previously advised additional information was required in respect of the proposals within its observations submitted to the LPA on 16th April 2024 and 15th May 2024. Most recently, the following additional information was required:

·                Further consideration of the site access in terms of visibility splays and the location;

·                Provision of an RSA1 for any new access proposals as well as a designer’s response to any problems raised; and

·                Consideration of the proximity of the roundabout proposed as part of application 23/00673/OUT.

Site Access

The LHA advised within both previous observations that given the proposals would intensify the use of the existing access and due to concerns with visibility splays in the current location and the proximity of the proposed roundabout approved as part of application reference 23/00673/OUT, the Applicant should seek to relocate the site access further to the southeast of the site.

The Applicant submitted an e-mail to the LPA dated 23rd May 2024 in response to the 15th May 2024 observations. This states that consideration was given to moving the site access, however the approval of the Jelson scheme via 23/00673/OUT where access was up for determination, it was reasonably concluded there is no material highway gain in altering the current access, therefore the existing access will be physically unchanged as justified by the Jelson access approval. Given the roundabout is yet to be constructed, the LHA feel it would be difficult to resist the proposals on the grounds of the proximity to the roundabout.

The Applicant has also reviewed the extents of the highway boundary for the northwestern visibility splay where there is an area of third party land between the back of the footway and the existing hedge.

The Applicant has stated that “…a local farmer undertakes regular highway verge and hedge maintenance, so presumably it falls under the remit of Highways Act 1980 and this will ensure this remains the case until the Jelson scheme is implemented.”.

The LHA believes this area is privately maintained and was created because of application 05/00373/FUL, whereby the Applicant for that application relocated the hedge to provide a 2.4 x 120m visibility splay. As part of that application, the area fell within the Applicants red line boundary, however it does not fall within the red line boundary for this current application.

To the southeast, the LHA would require  ...  view the full agenda text for item 99.

Application for extensions and alterations of existing ancillary building to form early years day nursery (class E) with associated car parking.

An objector and the applicant spoke on this application.

It was moved by Councillor Walker, seconded by Councillor Bools and

RESOLVED –

(i)            Permission be granted subject to:

a.    the conditions contained in the officer’s report and late items;

b.    the completion of a legal agreement as set out in the late items.

(ii)          The Head of Planning be granted powers to determine the final detail of the conditions.

Having stated he had made public objections to the following application, Councillor Bools absented himself from the committee at this juncture and took a seat at the ward councillor’s table.

Change of use from café (class E(b)) and residential (class C3) to convenience foodstore (class E(a)), construction of single-storey side extension, two-storey and single-storey rear extension (following the demolition of existing single-storey element to rear of 37 High Street / 2A Main Street and store to rear of public house) with associated landscaping and other works.

This item was deferred at a previous meeting, therefore no public speaking will be permitted in accordance with the council’s constitution.

Late items received after publication of agenda:

Consultations:-

Since publication of the Planning Committee report, an additional objection has been received which is summarised below;

“Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to reaffirm that my wife and I remain completely set against the development plan adjacent to our home (REF 23/00711/FUL Bluebell Inn)

Having attended the HBBC planning committee meeting of the 07/05/2024 and following presentations from myself and others I was pleased that many of the members felt able to support my request for a deferral. The request was approved pending further analysis and investigation for the points raised, discussed, and flagged for further attention.

A new set of documents were released on the 10/07/2024. One of the documents received is from the Marrons Consultancy. The content is a brief overview of the current plan with a reiteration of original information that now includes updates. The document states that a further sound survey has been undertaken and results processed, also that A/C plant is to be relocated to a different roof point.

I would now like to restate our ongoing concerns.

The placement of a service yard adjacent to our property with a vehicle delivery bay to the rear is and has always been totally unacceptable. Despite the officer raising this point it was dismissed on the applicants behalf as site layout prevented any feasible alternative location.

The very close proximity siting of double delivery doors to the side of our garden amenity remains not only unreasonable but also wholly inappropriate.   

The current site drawing appears to indicate the grass banking to the rear of our property is to be removed. This proposal would place visiting store vehicles within a few metres of our back door and kitchen window. 

Nominally reducing delivery hours whilst disregarding long trading hours will not as claimed reduce noise, disturbance and result in  the claimed similar levels of current parking.

A significant DMP report produced by SHARPS REDMORE refers to driver training and store staff training to handle vehicle deliveries whilst taking into account the possible impact to residents. Whilst maybe well intended I stand by my best endeavour comments made to the committee members during my presentation.

Given the location of the proposed delivery bay and service yard when compared with the  distance from our property to the existing public house delivery area how is it possible to state as in point 24 of the note "that a satisfactory living environment can be achieved for the neighbouring property at 2 main St"   

Near the end of his report/note  ...  view the full agenda text for item 100.

Application for change of use from café (class E(b)) and residential (class C3) to convenience foodstore (class E(a)), construction of single storey side extension, two storey and single storey rear extension (following the demolition of existing single storey element to rear of 37 High Street / 2A Main Street and store to rear of public house) with associated landscaping and other works.

A ward councillor spoke on this application.

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

RESOLVED –

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

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

Councillor Bools returned to his seat on the committee.

To report on progress relating to various appeals.

Members were updated on progress in relation to appeals.