Agenda item

Land Off Forest Road Hugglescote Leicestershire

Having declared a non-pecuniary interest, Councillor D J Stevenson left the chair and the meeting and took no part in the consideration or voting thereon.

Councillor J Bridges took the chair for the consideration of the item.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report to Members.

Mr K Lawrence, agent, addressed the Committee. He stated that the application had varied during the process following discussions and all comments had been taken into account. He highlighted to Members that:

-        There would be pedestrian links to proposed sites

-        The sub-station would be relocated, but the location had not been agreed yet,

-        A surface water proposal would be adopted by Severn Trent Water and

-        A speed survey had been undertaken.

He reminded Members that there were no technical objections and urged them to approve the application.

The Senior Planning Officer advised Members that an additional note to the applicant, should the application be permitted, had been included in the update sheet.

The officer’s recommendation to permit was moved by Councillor M Specht and seconded by Councillor G Jones.

Councillor R Johnson highlighted that the report stated that there were no previous planning applications on the site and advised that an application in 1997 for a bungalow was refused. He felt that all previous planning applications were relevant for Members to consider.

Councillor N Smith stated that he could not see how the application could be refused as there were no technical objections to it.

Councillor J G Coxon queried if the sub-station move would be funded by the developer.

Councillor M B Wyatt expressed concern over the volume of traffic along Forest Road and stated that the additional cars would have an adverse effect. He added that the application should be refused.

Councillor R Johnson advised the Committee that he had called in the application and that the reason for doing so was threefold. Firstly he felt that the application was premature and prejudicial in the bigger picture of the development of south east Coalville. He stated that the second was that there was no area of separation, highlighting that the Masterplan clearly showed that the paddock of land was intended to be kept as a green buffer area from the Forest Road residents to the Davidsons first phase of 81 homes and the second phase of 190 homes application that he expected to come to Committee in the not too distant future, which were the first of many as permitted by the Committee in the previous December. He added that there was to be 625 homes built between the old railway bridge on Grange Road up to Newbridge Academy, therefore Hugglescote would be taking 39% of all development envisaged in the new proposed Local Plan. He expressed his third reason was the most important and that was the proposed access onto an already dangerous road, stating that no matter how technical someone looked at it, it was very dangerous. Councillor R Johnson advised that a speed watch campaign was held every year by the Parish Council and there was always a consistency of speeding along the stretch of road. He stated that as a responsible planning authority the Council should be planning for the future of a bigger development not a piecemeal application, highlighting that the Davidsons application would have two access points onto Forest Road and there should be no reason to add a third. He expressed further concern that the applicant had not put anything into mitigation to address safety at the junction with Breach Road. He stated that it appeared that the developer had not consulted with residents as there were a number of proposed dwellings or garages that would abutt existing boundaries. He concluded by highlighting that the land was still used for grazing and that the residents who were given notice to quit the garages were now fighting for a space to park their vehicles adding congestion to Forest Road. He stated that he would be voting against.

Councillor D Everitt stated that the past planning history was relevant as if one bungalow was refused, why should 30 dwellings be permitted. He expressed concerns that there was no affordable housing proposed and that Forest Road was used as a cut through and should have been observed at all times of the day.

Councillor J Legrys expressed his despair at the number of piecemeal applications that were coming through and that a great debate had been had with Leicestershire County Council over the highways issues and disagreed with the conclusions reached by Leicestershire County Council. He stated that as a Ward Member for part of Forest Road he was fully aware of the number of traffic accidents that had happened and that local knowledge of the area should be taken into consideration, as the road required resurfacing and there were a number of sharp bends near the proposed access. He felt that the decision should be deferred until clarification over the responsibility of the sub-station could be sought. He also expressed concern that the future development of the area would lead to the roads becoming a Coalville by-pass and that the development was not sustainable on the District Valuer calculations. He added that he would be voting against the application.

Councillor J Bridges stated that his understanding was that the sub-station was going to be adopted.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised Members that all consultees were happy with the proposed method of surface water drainage and that the Local lead Flood Authority should be satisfied with the relevant regulations.

Councillor G Jones stated that he was in support of the application as when they were out on the site visit he had not seen any traffic issues.

Councillor M Specht stated that at the current time only two thirds of the housing that was needed was being built. He highlighted that the site was sustainable and was within the Limits to Development and that the access issue could be resolved at when the full application came before the Committee.

Councillor R Johnson raised a point of order and drew Members attention to the fact the application was a full application not an outline one.

A recorded vote having been requested, the voting was as follows:

For the motion:

Councillors G A Allman, J Bridges, R Canny, J Cotterill, J Coxon, J Hoult, G Jones, N Smith and M Specht(9).

Against the motion:

Councillors R Adams, R Boam, D Everitt, R Johnson, J Legrys, V Richichi and M B Wyatt(7).

Abstentions:

None(0).

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be permitted in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Regeneration.

Councillor D J Stevenson returned to the meeting and the chair.