Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor S Lambeth and Councillor R Morris.

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 interests declared.

To receive questions from members of the public under rule no.10 of the Council Procedure Rules.

There were two public questions received.

Question from Ms G Baker

West Whitwick Broad Location C47 was previously classified as greenfield (undeveloped) land, not greyfield, before being included in the Draft Local Plans Strategy. This is supported by multiple references describing it as productive farmland, open countryside and part of a wider greenfield allocation.

If the Council now classes this site as a greyfield site, can you explain to me please how this decision was made.

Response from the Chair of the Local Plan Committee

West Whitwick is a greenfield site and has always been identified by officers as such.

In response to a supplementary question, the Principal Planning Policy Officer stated that the Council’s housing requirement meant that they had to look at a range of options for various sites, and it was concluded that there were insufficient brownfield sites which would have enabled the Council to meet their housing requirement as part of the Local Plan.

Question from Mr C Taylor

Given the removal of the Norton Juxta / Norton Heath proposal, will North West Leicestershire District Council now review and potentially reconsider previously rejected or omitted development sites as part of meeting its updated housing requirement, especially where those previously removed sites may now be considered more viable and deliverable than some of the sites currently included in the emerging Local Plan?

Response from the Chair of the Local Plan Committee

The Council has not assumed that housing from the Norton Juxta Twycross site would contribute towards its housing requirement for the Local Plan period. Based on the current evidence, the Council considers that sufficient sites have been identified to meet its housing needs. The Local Plan will continue to be progressed through its statutory stages, including consultation on the Regulation 19 plan and examination.

As part of a supplementary question, it was asked what fallback mechanisms were built within the Local Plan should sites be deemed undeliverable as part of the Regulation 19 consultation. The planning policy officers replied that there was a flexibility allowance of 10% that allowed room for site undeliverability. The deliverability of sites will be dealt with through the examination.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 22 April 2026.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 22 April 2026.

It was moved by Councillor M Ball, seconded by Councillor P Moult and

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 April 2026 be approved and signed by the Chair as an accurate record of the proceedings.

The report of the Interim Planning Policy Team Manager.

The Interim Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report.

Members had a discussion during which support was expressed for the document. It was noted that, following a recent meeting at Battram, independently held by the Chair which was attended by many members of the public, it was made clear that there was a lack of understanding of the Local Plan among residents. Further to this, it was asked whether simplified versions of the documents could have been published in addition to those written by officers to ensure they were easier to understand and if external communications could be arranged. The Head of Planning and Infrastructure responded that he would look at options with the Communications team.

After it was asked whether a consultation could be held prior to the Regulation 19 consultation to help address issues with communication, the Head of Planning and Infrastructure stated that there would not have been sufficient time for another consultation prior to the Regulation 19 consultation. It was added, however, that there would be a future meeting with parish council clerks to brief them on the next steps for the Local Plan.

BY GENERAL AFFIRMATION, IT WAS RESOLVED THAT:

The Local Development Scheme as set out at Appendix A be agreed.

The report of the Interim Planning Policy Team Manager.

The planning policy officers presented the report, going through each policy in turn.

Policy H9 – Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

During discussion, members expressed support for the policy. It was noted, however, that there were no current provisions or transit policies in place, and members questioned the legal implications if a traveller site was proposed prior to the adoption of the Local Plan.

The Interim Planning Policy Team Manager confirmed that, in the event this happened, the site would have been judged on its own merits and added that how the site was dealt with had the potential to influence and shape emerging policies as part of the Regulation 19 consultation.

Policy Ec1 – Economic Strategy

There were no comments from members.

Policy IFx – Long-Term Management of Assets and Stewardship

Members expressed support for the policy with the amendment as set out in the additional papers, and planning policy officers addressed several questions of clarity. With reference to paragraph 3 of the policy, it was asked whether the appropriate financial contributions would have been secured. The Interim Planning Policy Team Manager responded that they would be considering how the details of funding can be better assessed in future.

A discussion followed which focused on Section 106 agreements. Members recalled instances where residents had been charged before the Section 106 agreement had been completed. Members were advised that residents were not expected to pay until public open space was at a satisfactory standard to be transferred to a management company, and the Section 106 agreement was there to secure provisions.

The Legal Advisor added that, while there was a Section 106 agreement between the developer and the purchaser, there was also a separate contract between the parties, and it was up to solicitors to ensure the purchaser was fully aware of the development and the standard of the land, and that this therefore was not the Council’s responsibility.

Policy H5 – Affordable Housing

During discussion, members were supportive of the policy, and several questions of clarity were addressed by the planning policy officers.

Members were concerned as to why officers had waited for the outcome of the viability assessment to set out the requirement figures associated with affordable housing. The Principal Planning Policy Officer acknowledged these concerns, and noted that they could have included provisional figures, but stressed that the reason the viability work had come at a late stage was because it had to test all the relevant policy requirements in the Local Plan and the Plan needed to be substantially finished for this to be done.

The recommendations including the amendment to Policy IFx as set out in the additional papers were moved by Councillor J Legrys, seconded by Councillor M Ball and

RESOLVED THAT:

(I)       Subject to the findings of the Whole Plan Viability Assessment, Policy H9: Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople as amended at Appendix A (III) of this report, be included in the Regulation 19 version of the Local Plan.

(II)     The comments received  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The report of the Interim Planning Policy Team Manager.

The Interim Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report.

Several questions of clarity were addressed by the planning policy officers.

It was moved by Councillor J Legrys, seconded by Councillor P Moult and

RESOLVED THAT:

1. The Committee object to the Oadby and Wigston Regulation 19 consultation subject to the outcomes of ongoing discussions with partner authorities.

2.     Authority be delegated to the Strategic Director of Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Infrastructure to issue a final response based on the outcome of ongoing discussions with partner authorities.