Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Forest Room, Stenson House, London Road, Coalville, LE67 3FN

Contact: Democratic Services  01530 454512


No. Item


Apologies for Absence


Apologies were received from Councillor D Bigby.



Declaration of Interests

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.



There were no declarations of interest.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 306 KB

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 16 August 2023


Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 16 August 2023.


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




The minutes of the meeting held on 16 August 2023 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.



Planning Applications and Other Matters pdf icon PDF 115 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

Additional documents:


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




A1 23/00012/REMM: Erection of 80 dwellings including temporary construction access, parking, pedestrian links and open space to parcel E (reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale to outline planning permission ref. 13/00956/OUTM) pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Land adjacent to Grange Road, Hugglescote, Coalville, Leicestershire

Additional documents:


Land adjacent to Grange Road, Hugglescote, Coalville, Leicestershire


Officer’s recommendation: Permit subject to conditions


The Principal Planning Officer presented the report to Members.


Ms D French, objector, addressed the Committee.  She referred to the dangers of crossing Grange Road due to the amount of traffic and felt that the approval of the application would only exacerbate it.  She referred to the assessment on the number of large goods vehicles that had been undertaken and challenged the accuracy as the result had been zero recorded. She explained that her own assessment undertaken that morning had resulted in 11 counted.  The Masterplan stated that this site had a separate access and concerns were raised that the application deviated from it.  She urged Members to refuse the application.


Ms E Overton, agent, addressed the Committee.  She explained that the applicant had met with planning officers, transport consultants and the Highway Authority to address the committee’s previous concerns.  Members were reminded that a road safety audit was only required for the minor change to junction radii and would be undertaken prior to works commencing.  The Highway Authority were happy with the assessments undertaken by the applicant as well as the existing dropped kerb crossing and it was their opinion that the puffin crossing was not necessary.  It was stated that the proposals had gone above the requirements of the Highway Authority and that if refused, the applicant would appeal against the decision.  She urged Members to approve.


Councillor R Johnson, Ward Member, addressed the Committee.  He stressed the dangers of crossing Grange Road and his disappointment that the originally proposed puffin crossing had been withdrawn.  Members were informed about the poor visibility and the difficulty for residents when attempting to cross, many residents being children going to school, he felt this proposal would cause residents to be ‘landlocked’ in their homes unable to access the local amenities.  He also had concerns that Heavy Goods Vehicles using the proposed construction access would be too dangerous and this application would go against the Council’s carbon targets regarding pollution.


The Chair opened the application up for debate.


In determining the application, several Members referred to visiting the site and the speed and volume of traffic on Grange Road was recognised along with the dangers it posed.  Most Members felt that a puffin crossing would be beneficial but due to the opinion of the Highway Authority that a crossing was not required, it was acknowledged that options for the Committee were limited. 


During discussion, Members noted the efforts made by the applicant to address highway concerns, but the consensus was that the road would still be difficult for pedestrians to cross due to the speed of traffic and poor visibility.


Members were disappointed that the Highway Authority had chosen to not undertake a full highway audit even though it was requested by committee when the application was previously considered.  A discussion was had on the lack of grounds to refuse the application and costs involved should the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
Motion to permit the application in accordance with the officer's recommendations Motion Rejected
To refuse the application on the grounds of highway safety and pedestrian crossing safety Motion Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item