Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from 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.

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

Councillor R Boam declared a registerable interest in item A2, application number 25/01523/PIP, and item A3, application number 25/00916/PIP, of the agenda as ward member. He stated that he would leave the Chamber for item A2 and return to speak for item A3 before leaving the meeting.

Councillors R Blunt, R Canny, D Everitt, J Legrys, N Smith and A Woodman declared an other interest in knowing the applicant of item A2 of the agenda, as they were a former councillor.

Councillor R Canny declared a registerable interest in item A1 of the agenda as she had participated in parish council discussions regarding the matter but 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 23/00883/FULM

Councillors J Legrys, D Bigby, and R Canny.

Item A3, application number 25/00916/PIP

Councillors R Canny and J Simmons.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 26 November 2025.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 26 November 2025.

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

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 November 2025 be approved and signed by the Chair as an accurate record of proceedings.

The 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 North of Hilltop Farm, Hill Top, Castle Donington.

Land North of Hilltop Farm, Hill Top, Castle Donington.

Officer’s Recommendation: Permit, subject to Section 106 obligations, and subject to conditions.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report.

Mark Rogers, speaking as parish councillor on behalf of Castle Donington Parish Council, addressed the Committee. He stated that the application did not take suitable alternative sites into consideration. He expressed doubt as to whether the proposed development adhered to several Local Plan policies and noted that it could cause a risk to life and an increase of traffic. He urged the Committee to refuse the application.

Julia Redfearn, speaking as an objector, addressed the Committee. She expressed concern over the potential the development had to increase traffic in the village and exacerbate highway safety. She stated she did not believe the development was vital for employment and emphasised the importance of maintaining green belts in the area.

Jon Imber, speaking as the agent on behalf of JMI Planning Ltd, addressed the Committee. He spoke in support of the application and noted that the proposed development was fully compliant with local and national policies. He encouraged the Committee to approve the application.

After the planning officers addressed several questions of clarity, a discussion was had during which members put forward arguments both for and against the application. They questioned the weight of Policy Ec4 which promoted growth of the neighbouring East Midlands Airport: if the application was approved, this policy would not be as effective.

The Planning and Development Team Manager replied that Policy Ec4 received a number of objections as part of recent consultations and that the policy carried little weight at this stage. It was confirmed that an option was to defer the application.

Members also questioned the immediate demand for this site, noting a recent increase in industrial developments being built across the District, with some raising concern about how this would impact surrounding villages. It was commented that the signs which advised HGV drivers of alternative routes could not be effectively enforced, and that, if the application were deferred, different access to the site from the relief road would be an area to be investigated.

The Legal Advisor made members aware that if they did decide to defer the application, it would risk an appeal for non-determination.

Councillor D Bigby moved that the application be deferred to allow for clarification following further investigation of immediate demand, site access from the relief road and additional weight restriction signage. It was seconded by Councillor C Sewell.

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

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be deferred to allow for clarification following further investigation of immediate demand, site access from the relief road and additional weight restriction signage.

Having declared a registerable interest in the next item, Councillor R Boam left the Chamber.

In the absence of the Chair and Deputy Chair, Councillor P Moult moved that Councillor J Simmons be appointed as Chair for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

67 Loughborough Road, Coleorton

67 Loughborough Road, Coleorton.

Officer’s Recommendation: Permit

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report.

Steve Burd, speaking as parish councillor on behalf of Swannington Parish Council, addressed the Committee. He stated that, if granted, the development would undermine the Local Plan, and that the development conflicted with several policies included within the Neighbourhood Plan and the Local Plan.

James Mattley, speaking as the agent on behalf of David Granger Architectural Design Ltd, addressed the Committee. He emphasised that it was only the principle that was to be considered by the Committee, and that, if the application was refused, it would risk a two-tier approach to proposals. He urged the Committee to approve the application in principle.

Members had a discussion during which it was noted that the development had been refused by officers several times previously, and it was felt that the Committee were recommended to approve the application at this stage to meet the self-build quota.

The Planning and Development Team Manager advised the Committee against refusal on technical grounds. Members were reminded that reasons for refusal would have to be in principle and only consider the location, land use and amount of development.

Members noted that the Planning Inspectorate had previously upheld the decision at appeal stage to refuse the application on the grounds of location.

Councillor D Bigby moved that the application be refused on the grounds that it did not comply with Policy H2 of the Swannington Neighbourhood Plan, and Policies S2 and S3 of the Local Plan. It was seconded by Councillor P Moult.

The Chair 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 did not comply with Policy H2 of the Swannington Neighbourhood Plan, and Policies S2 and S3 of the Local Plan.

Land Rear of 71 Main Street, Osgathorpe.

Land Rear of 71 Main Street, Osgathorpe.

Officer’s Recommendation: Permit

Prior to this item, Councillor R Boam returned to sit in the public gallery until he was called to speak as ward member.

The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report, after which a letter was read out from Osgathorpe Parish Council requesting the Committee refuse the application.

Emma Pearson, speaking as objector, addressed the Committee. She highlighted that the area was not suitable for the development as it would be overbearing on nearby buildings. She added that the applicant did not live within the District and believed the development was purely for profit. She urged the Committee to refuse the application.

James Mattley, speaking as the agent on behalf of David Granger Architectural Design Plan Ltd, addressed the Committee. He stated that the objection in the report was not relevant to the principle of the application. He urged the Committee to approve the application.

Councillor R Boam, speaking as ward member, addressed the Committee. He stated that the application did not comply with Policies S2 and S3 of the Local Plan and highlighted a lack of shops and bus stops nearby. He doubted the development’s potential to encourage employment and urged the Committee to refuse the application.

After addressing the Committee, Councillor R Boam left the meeting.

A discussion was had during which several questions of clarity were addressed by the planning officers and the Legal Advisor, including whether the area concerned was a highway, bridleway or public footpath, and the implications of this. Members felt there was a lack of information, and they were advised that the option to defer the application would allow time for further research to be undertaken.

Councillor R Blunt moved to defer the application due to a lack of information or clarity to make a well-informed judgement in respect of the lane and highway safety. It was seconded by Councillor C Sewell and

RESOLVED BY GENERAL AFFIRMATION THAT:

The application be deferred due to a lack of information or clarity to make a well-informed judgement in respect of the lane and highway safety.

Councillor R Boam left the meeting at 7:57pm.