Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors R Canny and N Smith.

Under the Code of Conduct members are reminded that in declaring interests you should make clear the nature of that interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest, registerable interest or other interest.

Members declared that they had been lobbied without influence in respect of the following applications but had come to the meeting with an open mind.

Item A1 – application number 23/00129/FULM: Councillors R Boam, D Bigby, D Everitt, J Legrys, R Morris, P Moult, C Sewell, J Simmons and A Woodman.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2023

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2023.

It was moved by Councillor J Legrys, seconded by Councillor R Morris     and

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2023 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

Consideration was given to the report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure, as amended by the update sheet circulated at the meeting.

Molehill Farm,Ashby Road, Kegworth

Molehill Farm, Ashby Road, Kegworth

Officer’s recommendation: Refuse

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report.

Ms C Chave, agent, addressed the Committee.  She informed the committee about the lack of training for the sport and the impact the facility proposed would provide for the midlands area.  Reference was made to the robust noise assessment and the management plan.  Members were reminded that permission had already been previously granted for the site and the highway access already improved.  Reference was also made to Highway Authority’s response to the application, which she felt did not justify the reasons for refusal in front of Members.  The applicant felt that the suggested improvements to the site access was not viable.  Members were urged to approve the application.

As the Ward Member, Councillor R Sutton, was unable to attend the meeting, a written statement in support of the officer’s recommendation to refuse had been submitted and was read out to the Committee by the Democratic Services Officer.  It highlighted the proximity to the airport runway, the intense development for commercial purposes and major trunk roads close to the site access.  Reference was also made to the nearby approved and anticipated future applications for housing and the adjoining farm that would be impacted by noise should the application be approved.  To conclude, comments were made in relation to the application not satisfying the Highway Authority’s access requirements.

In determining the application Members considered the comments of the Highway Authority and shared concerns in relation to the site access and its proximity to the junction.  Concerns were also raised in relation to the noise that would be produced on the site and the significant impact this would have on the nearby homes.

Some discussion was had in relation to the possible deferral of the application to allow further negotiations with the Highway Authority.  Officers were also asked if it was possible to add conditions to control the activities on the site and permit temporary approval so that it could be reviewed.  Officers advised that as the Highway Authority had submitted a fundamental objection, it was unlikely that they would withdraw their objections, therefore Members were advised not go against the officer’s recommendation.  However, Members were reminded that the Highway Authority had offered a solution which the applicant had deemed not viable, which the applicant could review before submitting an amended application which the committee consider with appropriate conditions such as a temporary consent.

The officer’s recommendation to refuse the application was moved by Councillor J Legrys and seconded by Councillor R Morris.

The Chair put the motion to the vote.  A recorded vote being required, the voting was as detailed below.

The motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be refused in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

Land West of Ashby Road, Packington

Land West of Ashby Road, Packington

Officer’s recommendation: Permit

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report.

Mr D Harris-Watkins, agent, addressed the Committee.  He commented that the reason the application was being considered by the Committee was due to the company director being a relative of a current sitting Councillor and referred to the fact that no objections had been received.  It was confirmed that the application met the biodiversity requirement and that the applicant had worked proactively with planning officers.  He went on to highlight the main changes to the site as detailed within the report and urged Members to permit the application.

In determining the application Members discussed the monitoring and enforcement of the Biodiversity Net Gain, and the possibility of a ‘community orchard’ was raised.  Officers advised that the Section 106 Agreement would address these matters, along with a 30-year monitoring plan in relation to measurement of the biodiversity.

The officer’s recommendation to permit the application was moved by Councillor M B Wyatt and seconded by Councillor J Legrys.   

The Chair put the motion to the vote.  A recorded vote being required, the voting was as detailed below.

The motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be permitted in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.