Agenda and draft minutes

Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Coalville

Contact: Democratic Services  01530 454512

Media

Items
No. Item

37.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

There are no apologies received

 

38.

Declaration of Interests

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

Minutes:

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

 

Councillor D Bigby declared a non-pecuniary interest in item A1, application number 21/00471/REMM, as he had opposed the associated outline permission through his role on Ashby Town Council Planning Committee, but had come to the meeting with an open mind and would make his decision on the facts presented to him at the meeting.

 

Councillor J Hoult declared a non-pecuniary interest in item A1, application number 21/00471/REMM, as the Chairman of Ashby Town Council Planning Committee and that he had voted against the application in a different context, but he had come to the meeting with an open mind.

 

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 21/00471/REMM

 

Councillors D Bigby, J Legrys and N Smith

 

 

39.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 248 KB

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2021

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2021.

 

It was moved by Councillor N Smith, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2021 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

 

40.

Planning Enforcement Update Q2 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 416 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

Minutes:

The Senior Planning Enforcement Officer presented the report to members.

 

The Head of Planning and Infrastructure took the opportunity to advise members that the Planning Enforcement team now sat within the Planning and Development service, and should members wish to discuss with him the progress of individual matters he would be happy to do so.

 

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

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The information contained within the report be noted.

 

41.

Planning Applications and Other Matters pdf icon PDF 121 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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

 

 

42.

21/00471/REMM: Erection of a road related storage, maintenance and management facility and associated site works (reserved matters to outline planning permission ref.17/01081/OUTM) pdf icon PDF 240 KB

Land Off Lountside, Ashby De La Zouch

Minutes:

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report to members.

 

Mr W Moore, objector, addressed the committee highlighting that the application sought to put a large building in the centre of a countryside area with a predicted 30 HGV movements per hour, adding that no traffic risk assessment had been completed. He raised concerns over the additional pollution that would occur into the River Mease through stormwater, sewage discharge and fuel discharged from the vehicles visiting the site, and the visual impact the unit would have on the surrounding amenities.

 

Councillor D Harrison, ward member, addressed the committee reading extracts from a letter that had been received from an objecting business. He highlighted that the land had been designated as open countryside under policy S3 and that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the businesses surrounding the area, therefore contravening policies S3 and D2. He noted that the proposal had been submitted with inadequate levels of detail, design information and technical assessment. He urged the committee to refuse the application.

 

In determining the application, members expressed concerns over the lack of information that had been provided by the applicant, the scale and height of the building that would be visually intrusive on the area, in particular the nearby hotel, and what the storage units would actually be used for. They felt that additional landscaping would be able to mitigate any noise issues.

 

Members noted that the external storage of aggregate materials had been removed and any deviation from the agreed layout would require a further application to do so, that the HGV turning had been improved, and that the proposed tree planting and design of the building had been changed to meet the request of the National Forest. They also had regard to the fact that conditions around landscaping, design and prevention of external storage of aggregate material could be added if members felt that it was required.

 

The recommendation to refuse the application on the grounds that it contravened policies S3 and D1 of the Local Plan as the proposed development, by virtue of its scale, massing, visual dominance and appearance, together with its proposed siting immediately adjacent to an existing estate road, would be out of character with existing development within the road-related services area, to the detriment of visual amenity was moved by Councillor D Bigby and seconded by Councillor J Hoult.

 

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

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The application be refused on the grounds that it contravened policies S3 and D1 of the Local Plan as the proposed development, by virtue of its scale, massing, visual dominance and appearance, together with its proposed siting immediately adjacent to an existing estate road, would be out of character with existing development within the road-related services area, to the detriment of visual amenity.

 

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
Motion to refuse the application on the grounds that it contravened policies S3 and D1 of the Local Plan as the proposed development, by virtue of its scale, massing, visual dominance and appearance, together with its proposed siting immediately adjacent to an existing estate road, would be out of character with existing development within the road-related services area, to the detriment of visual amenity Motion Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  •