Agenda item

Agenda item

Hinckley and Bosworth Local Plan 2020-39 – Regulation 19 Consultation

The report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure


The Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager presented the report to members.


Members expressed concerns over the lack of detail and evidence within Hinckley and Bosworth’s Local Plan, and being a neighbouring authority, the significant impact it would have on North West Leicestershire, which had already taken its share of employment and distribution numbers. It was felt that Hinckley and Bosworth appeared to be relying on all the other authorities of the County to pick up their needs and they were not willing to co-operate, which was unfair and therefore, the recommendations set out in the report should be supported.


Following a question from a member, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that there was a requirement for every authority to identify their needs for Gypsy and Traveller sites and make provision in their Local Plan accordingly. However, should an authority genuinely not be in a position to make any provision, evidence should be provided in the plan as to why there were unable to do so. He noted that at the present time there appeared to be no evidence detailed in Hinckley and Bosworth’s plan.


Members were advised that as Hinckley and Bosworth did not have an up to date plan they were losing appeals, and as such were putting forward a trigger policy to address the issue of any additional housing that may have to be met in Hinckley & Bosworth as a result of redistribution from Leicester City . This policy was required to ensure that if the current plan was approved that Hinckley & Bosworth had a clear commitment to address the unmet need issue, rather than ignoring it. That said, should an agreement be reached on the unmet housing need from Leicester after they had submitted their plan the Inspector may request that they address the issue earlier.


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




Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council be advised that this Council:


(I)       Objects to Policy SS02 as being not effective for the reasons set out at paragraph 3.5 of the report;


(II)        Objects to Policy SS02 as not being positively prepared and effective for the reasons set out at paragraph 3.7 of the report;


(III)       Objects to Policy SS03 as not being effective for the reasons set out at paragraph 3.13 of the report;


(IV)    Objects to Policy HO01 as not being justified for the reasons set out at paragraph 3.15 of the report;


(V)       Objects to Policy HO07 as not being positively prepared, justified or effective for the reasons set out at paragraphs 3.19 - 3.21 of the report;


(VI)    Welcomes and supports Policies NAT04 and NAT05



Before the Chairman closed the meeting, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager provided the committee with a brief update on the responses received following the closure of the consultation on North West Leicestershire’s Local Plan Review. He advised members that the authority had received 414 responses and of those, 232 were in relation to the proposed new settlement at Isley Walton and the Freeport land proposal.


A breakdown of the different groups submitted responses was given to members. Following a question from a member, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that in terms of previous consultation numbers, the response on this occasion was higher but if the responses to the Isley Walton and Freeport proposals were taken out, then the number was around the same as previous consultations. In terms of the planning process for the Freeport, the details were still being worked out. It could be that it could either be included in the Local Plan or a planning application could be submitted.


A discussion then took place around a number of planning policy concerns which members sought clarification on whether they could be included within the Local Plan or in separate guidance documents. It was noted that officers would look in to the points raised and respond to members.


Supporting documents: