Motion to be proposed by Councillor Bill, seconded by Councillor Bray:
“This Council notes with concern the sheer volume of major development proposals now under consideration in Hinckley and in the surrounding areas and in particular the impact of these proposals on road congestion which clearly worsens by the day. Accordingly it resolves to state this Council’s opposition to
1. The Strategic Growth Plan where this will have an adverse impact on Hinckley & Bosworth
2. The A46 Expressway as it is clear that there has been no thought given to the likely adverse impact on the B4669 Sapcote Road entrance into Burbage and Hinckley
3. The freight depot which is proposed to be adjacent to Burbage Common.
Whilst this authority welcomes any move towards encouraging the transfer of road to rail, it questions the reasons behind this particular proposal as it will result in an unknown quantity of vehicular movements emerging onto junction 2 of the M69 which is also likely to be the starting point for the A46 Expressway. It points out that there are already insufficient controls over HGV movements across the urban area either by day or night despite the weight limits which were imposed some time ago. It expresses concern that the Jacobs Consultants report which was commissioned to examine the traffic impact of the Strategic Growth Plan fails to recognise the existing traffic congestion in the Hinckley & Burbage areas and offers no solutions.
This Council further notes that the growth agenda behind these and other development proposals are based on the assumptions of the original Housing and Economic Development report (Hedna) and resolves to seek a downward revision of the growth projections now that the full significance in terms of the accumulative impact of these and other proposals is now realised.
It therefore instructs its officers to act accordingly and in support of the parish councils who have already expressed their concerns.”
Correction to motion printed in the agenda:
Point 2 should refer to the B4669 (not 4469).
Amendment to be proposed by Councillor Hall, seconded by Councillor Allen:
This Council resolves to include the following in its response to the consultation on the Leicestershire Strategic Growth Plan.
1. The proposed A5 Expressway should take priority over the delivery of the A46 Expressway, as this will go a long way to alleviate the traffic problems associated with the immediate level of development that is planned along its length. Failure to deliver on the A5 improvements could mean that some planned development cannot be achieved and could lead to the possibility of redistribution of planned growth to other areas.
2. The A46 Expressway, if delivered, should only connect to the M69 by way of a dedicated route from A46 southbound to M69 and from M69 northbound to the A46. It is not required to support growth in the Hinckley and Bosworth area and should not connect to any existing junctions of the M69.
3. The Strategic Growth Plan should be clear that industrial and housing growth beyond 2031 should largely focus on the primary growth area along the Leicester (inner) side of the A46 Expressway. It should specifically state that growth around the Greater Hinckley Urban Area (to include Burbage, Barwell and Earl Shilton), should have minimal additional growth determined only through Local Plan allocations,
Additional final wording of the Council response, to all consultation questions, is to be agreed with the Leader of the Council in conjunction with the Executive members for Planning and Regeneration following review of a draft document, which is to be provided to members of the Planning Policy Working Group.
Council also resolves to;-
a) Respond to any consultation on the rail freight interchange proposals, on land adjacent to Burbage Common, in a timely and professional manner.
b) Make Councils concerns known in any discussions about the impact that this proposal would have, in particular on Burbage Common and the road network around the site.
NOTE - This motion retains the intent of the original motion, without adding to it. More comments on the Strategic Growth Plan have been raised by members, and these will also be included in the Councils response.
Minutes:
It was proposed by Councillor Bill and seconded by Councillor Bray that:
“This Council notes with concern the sheer volume of major development proposals now under consideration in Hinckley and in the surrounding areas and in particular the impact of these proposals on road congestion which clearly worsens by the day. Accordingly it resolves to state this Council’s opposition to
1. The Strategic Growth Plan where this will have an adverse impact on Hinckley & Bosworth
2. The A46 Expressway as it is clear that there has been no thought given to the likely adverse impact on the B4669 Sapcote Road entrance into Burbage and Hinckley
3. The freight depot which is proposed to be adjacent to Burbage Common.
Whilst this authority welcomes any move towards encouraging the transfer of road to rail, it questions the reasons behind this particular proposal as it will result in an unknown quantity of vehicular movements emerging onto junction 2 of the M69 which is also likely to be the starting point for the A46 Expressway. It points out that there are already insufficient controls over HGV movements across the urban area either by day or night despite the weight limits which were imposed some time ago. It expresses concern that the Jacobs Consultants report which was commissioned to examine the traffic impact of the Strategic Growth Plan fails to recognise the existing traffic congestion in the Hinckley & Burbage areas and offers no solutions.
This Council further notes that the growth agenda behind these and other development proposals are based on the assumptions of the original Housing and Economic Development report (Hedna) and resolves to seek a downward revision of the growth projections now that the full significance in terms of the accumulative impact of these and other proposals is now realised.
It therefore instructs its officers to act accordingly and in support of the parish councils who have already expressed their concerns.”
Councillor Hall referred to his amendment which was printed in the supplementary agenda, setting some context for the amendment. He stated that, whilst the strategic growth plan had been a key priority of his when taking office and that there were merits in agreeing a strategic plan, there were some key issues which needed to be considered, particularly regarding infrastructure delivery and alleviating the current problems felt by borough residents. Councillor Hall, seconded by Councillor Allen, subsequently proposed the following amendment:
“This Council resolves to include the following in its response to the consultation on the Leicestershire Strategic Growth Plan:
1. The proposed A5 Expressway should take priority over the delivery of the A46 Expressway, as this will go a long way to alleviate the traffic problems associated with the immediate level of development that is planned along its length. Failure to delivery on the A5 improvements could mean that some planned development cannot be achieved and could lead to the possibility of redistribution of planned growth to other areas.
2. The A46 Expressway, if delivered, should only connect to the M69 by way of a dedicated route from the A46 southbound to the M69 and from the M69 northbound to the A46. It is not required to support growth in the Hinckley and Bosworth area and should not connect to any existing junctions of the M69.
3. The Strategic Growth Plan should be clear that industrial and housing growth beyond 2031 should largely focus on the primary growth area along the Leicester (inner) side of the A46 Expressway. It should specifically state that growth around the greater Hinckley urban area (to include Burbage, Barwell and Earl Shilton), should have minimal additional growth determined only through Local Plan allocations.
Additional final wording of the Council’s response to all consultation questions is to be agreed with the Leader of the Council in conjunction with the Executive members for Planning and Regeneration following a review of a draft document, which is to be provided to members of the Planning Policy Working Group.
Council also resolves to:
a) Respond to any consultation on the rail freight interchange proposals on land adjacent to Burbage Common in a timely and professional manner.
b) Make Council’s concerns known in any discussion about the impact that this proposal would have, in particular on Burbage Common and the road network around the site.”
Councillors Bill and Bray, as mover and seconder of the original motion, supported the amendment, and following discussion on the motion as amended it was
RESOLVED –
(i) The following be included as a response to the consultation on the Leicestershire Strategic Growth Plan with final wording of the Council’s response to all consultation questions being agreed with the Leader of the Council in conjunction with the Executive members for Planning and Regeneration following a review of a draft document, which is to be provided to members of the Planning Policy Working Group:
1. “The proposed A5 Expressway should take priority over the delivery of the A46 Expressway, as this will go a long way to alleviate the traffic problems associated with the immediate level of development that is planned along its length. Failure to delivery on the A5 improvements could mean that some planned development cannot be achieved and could lead to the possibility of redistribution of planned growth to other areas.
2. The A46 Expressway, if delivered, should only connect to the M69 by way of a dedicated route from the A46 southbound to the M69 and from the M69 northbound to the A46. It is not required to support growth in the Hinckley and Bosworth area and should not connect to any existing junctions of the M69.
3. The Strategic Growth Plan should be clear that industrial and housing growth beyond 2031 should largely focus on the primary growth area along the Leicester (inner) side of the A46 Expressway. It should specifically state that growth around the greater Hinckley urban area (to include Burbage, Barwell and Earl Shilton), should have minimal additional growth determined only through Local Plan allocations.”
(ii) Any consultation on the rail freight interchange proposals on land adjacent to Burbage Common be responded to in a timely and professional manner;
(iii) Council’s concerns be expressed in any discussion about the impact that the rail freight interchange proposals would have, in particular on Burbage Common and the road network around the site.