Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors A Bridgen, J Bridges and D Harrison.

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.

In accordance with the Code of Conduct, Members declared the following interests:

Councillor J Legrys declared a non pecuniary interest in Item A1 as his spouse, Councillor Dr T Eynon would speak to the meeting as ward member.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2022.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2022.

It was moved by Councillor J Legrys, seconded by Councillor J Hoult and

RESOLVED THAT

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2022 be approved and signed by the Chair as an accurate record.

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report to members.

Members were informed that compared with the period last year, the team were dealing with similar amounts of work and officers confirmed that more detailed reports and comparisons would be available as the financial year progressed.

It was moved by Councillor R Boam, seconded by Councillor J Hoult and

RESOLVED THAT

The Planning Enforcement Update Q1 2022/23 be noted.

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.

Land To The Rear Of 68 And 70 Fairfield Road Hugglescote LE67 2HG 

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report to members.

Mr Weeks, agent, addressed the committee highlighting that the development would not cause the loss of any existing buildings and stressed that the land was formerly garden land which had been abandoned. It was emphasised that full parking provision would be available on the site and a speed survey had been taken, in accordance with national requirements.

Councilllor Dr T Eynon, ward member, addressed the committee expressing concerns that the development of the land would exacerbate problems arising from lack of parking in what was already a busy street. Concerns were also raised that children used the street to walk to and from school and whether visibility would be impaired with the exit and egress of more vehicles into the area. She voiced disappointment that the trees on the plot had been felled and disputed that the land was underutilised.

It was asserted that the development did not meet a housing need as required by the Hugglescote and Donington le Heath Neighbourhood Plan as there were already many developments with properties similar in nature being erected in Hugglescote and concerns about the loss of on street parking were reiterated by other members. It was clarified that there would not be a net loss of parking as 2 spaces would be created on the drives of each of the proposed new properties.

Members raised concerns that the visibility splay were very tight and also expressed the belief that the housing need would be better met by the development of bungalows and residencies for older people.

In determining the application, a Member questioned whether there may be sinkholes under the site proposed for development. Officers advised that it would be a matter for the developer to address and that an advisory note could be added, to remind the developer of the possibility.

The recommendation to permit the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, along with the inclusion of an advisory note in relation to sinkholes was moved by Councillor J Hoult and seconded by Councillor R Boam.

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

RESOLVED THAT

The application be permitted in accordance with the recommendations of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure with the inclusion of an advisory note in relation to sinkholes.

2 The Toft Mill Lane Belton Loughborough Leicestershire LE12 9UL

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report to members.

Ms Lewis, objector, addressed the committee highlighting concerns that the proposed extension would result in a loss of privacy to neighbouring properties. Concerns were also expressed with regards to the lengthy construction process which was felt could pose a danger to other traffic, the general public and to neighbours and could also potentially cause damage to the shared access road. It was noted that the design and materials would not be in keeping with neighbouring properties nor match the wider area. It was felt that the application in its current form should be rejected.

Mr Mattley, agent, addressed the committee and stated that plans had been amended to address concerns throughout the process and the plans before the committee had only received one objection. It was confirmed that the applicant would limit the size of construction vehicles and the times that they would be able to access the property. He advised that the dimensions contained in the most recent plans were not as high as had previously been stated and were considered to be visually acceptable.

Members acknowledged that it was a difficult decision and questioned whether the site was in a conservation area, which it was not. It was also noted that it was not for Planning Committee to discuss the matter of the drive’s ownership as this was not a material consideration.

The recommendation to permit the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor J Hoult and seconded by Councillor R Boam.

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

RESOLVED THAT

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