Agenda item

Poultry Farm Normanton Road Packington Leicestershire

Having declared a pecuniary interest in item A2 Councillor V Richichi left the meeting and took no part in the consideration and voting thereon.

The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report to Members.

Mr C Miles, Parish Councillor, addressed the Committee. He advised Members that Packington Parish Council believed that the development site was agricultural land, which could not be built on and was outside the Limits to Development adding that permitting the development would open the door to further applications. He informed the Committee that the road was notorious for speeding and the access was not safe with very poor visibility. He stated that no provision had been made for the public right of way and that the development would destroy the Countryside. He urged the Committee to refuse the application.

Mrs Fleetham, applicant, addressed the Committee. She advised the Members that the family had lived in Packington for ten years, with their current home backing on to the site and that it was proposed to build a bigger family home and then two smaller homes for their two daughters. She highlighted that the site was industrial in appearance and that by removing the current buildings the development would improve the view into the village. She informed Members that as an owner of dogs she was a regular user of the footpath and that they had no intention of building more than three dwellings adding that they would be willing to sign a legal agreement to that effect. She urged the Committee to consider the application on its own merits and support the recommendation to permit.

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

Councillor N Smith stated that it was a difficult application which had caused concern with the Parish Council and requested that a meeting take place between the Director of Services and the Parish Council to resolve issues surrounding a plan. He advised that the village did not want ad hoc developments and that the Committee should consider a deferment so that a plan could be formulated.

Councillor J Legrys felt that it was an excellent application and it was a route that he travelled quite often and always thought that it was an eyesore. He said that the buildings could be demolished and the land returned to Greenfield. He added the land had value and the family wanted to build their dream home to stay together. He stated that it was not a big development which would mean less traffic, that there should be more encouragement for these applications and there was no need for the family to sign an agreement on the number of houses built.

Councillor J Bridges stated that should any further applications be submitted in the future they would be considered separately. 

Councillor G Jones felt that the application was a breath of fresh air stating that farms were decreasing and the new homes were needed to support villages adding that the application looked like a quality development of which he was all in favour of.

Councillor M Specht stated that he could remember the site from his youth and it had always been an eyesore. He highlighted that if the application was refused then a new application to utilise the existing buildings could be submitted for industrial units which would mean large lorries using the surrounding roads.

RESOLVED THAT:

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

Councillor V Richichi returned to the meeting.