35 storage units at Land North Of Hilltop Farm, Hill Top, Castle Donington

What was proposed

The application proposed 35 storage or distribution units with associated access, parking and servicing areas.

“Erection of 35 B8 units together with associated access, parking and servicing areas Report Item No A1”

“This is a full application for the erection of 35 units of a range of sizes with associated access, parking and servicing. The units would be used for uses falling within Class B8 (storage or distribution) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was agricultural land beside Hill Top, homes, a farm and proposed public open space, with access from Hill Top.

“The site comprises agricultural land located to the western side of Hill Top, and to the north of Hill Top Farm (although it is not currently used in association with that farm, or any other agricultural unit). The site is also adjacent to existing residential properties fronting onto Hill Top and High Street, and to the proposed Village Park, a new area of public open space to be delivered in association with the Park Lane mixed use development.”

“Vehicular access to the site would be provided from Hill Top via a new access road, located in a similar position to a smaller existing field access and with footways tied into the existing facilities on Hill Top.”

Officer report

Planning history and policy position

The site was outside the village’s development limits, and an earlier 1993 residential outline application had no decision.

“Application Ref. Description Decision / Date 93/0480 Residential development including the provision of part of a perimeter for distribution road (36.5ha) (Outline) No Decision (submitted 17/05/93)”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because they considered immediate demand demonstrated and the development acceptable overall, subject to obligations and conditions.

“Whilst it would seem unlikely that everyone who has shown interest to date would go ahead and rent unit(s) in the proposed development (due to changing circumstances etc.), having regard to the above, it is nevertheless considered that the evidence demonstrates the immediacy, location and scale of demand as required by Policy Ec2(2) for an immediate demand for employment land in North West Leicestershire which cannot be met on sites allocated in the Local Plan.”

“Whilst some of the proposed development would be “behind” the existing frontage housing to Hill Top / High Street, the site includes a section of its frontage to this route so, in this sense, could be considered to contribute to the existing dwellings’ ribbon development effects. However, it is acknowledged that the area of frontage to the road would be between the existing dwellings to the north and south.”

Officer report

What consultees and residents said

The parish council, ward member and residents raised concerns about need, access, traffic, noise, flooding, countryside, ecology and amenity, while consultees mostly raised no objections subject to conditions.

“Castle Donington Parish Council strongly objects on the following grounds - Need is not demonstrated especially considering there are other similar units available in the vicinity - Site access via Hill Top inappropriate as the entrance is within a weight restricted area and which was implemented to deter HGVs from going through the conservation area - Site should be accessed via the relief road - Outside Limits to Development and contrary to Policy S3 of the Local Plan -…”

“In addition, Councillor Morley (ward member) objects on the following grounds: - Suggested access route via Hill Top is wholly inappropriate for traffic and especially HGVs as this is a weight restricted area - Outside the limits of development - The proposed units’ employees would be likely to come from outside of Castle Donington meaning an increase in traffic and pollution to the village - No evidence of need for these types of units are needed, particularly given…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A parish councillor urged refusal, the agent supported the proposal, and the ward member opposed it.

What members debated

Members questioned the claimed demand, existing empty warehouses, the location outside development limits, car storage, residential impacts and job creation.

“Members had a discussion during which many questions of clarity were addressed by the planning officers. Members doubted there was an immediate demand for the development, commenting that there were already sufficient warehouses in Castle Donington and that many of the existing units were empty and unused. It was added that it was outside the limits of development, and that the car storage was not appropriate for the small units that were proposed.”

“Members questioned what the Planning Inspectorate would have thought of the views they expressed during the meeting. The Legal Advisor responded that there had been…”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor Canny moved refusal, Councillor Morris seconded it, and the motion was carried.

“It was moved by Councillor R Canny, seconded by Councillor R Morris and…”

“Motion to refuse the application on the grounds that there was no immediate need or demand for the development, that it would have had a negative impact on residential amenity (such as noise and disturbance), and that it conflicted with policies S3, Ec2 and D2 of the Local Plan (Motion) Councillor Russell Boam For Councillor Ray Morris For Councillor Dave Bigby For Councillor Rachel Canny For Councillor David Everitt For Councillor John Legrys For Councillor Peter Moult For…”

Minutes

The final decision

The application was refused because members found no immediate need or demand, residential amenity harm, and conflict with policies S3, Ec2 and D2.

“The application be refused on the grounds that there was no immediate need or demand for the development, that it would have had a negative impact on residential amenity (such as noise and disturbance), and that it conflicted with policies S3, Ec2 and D2 of the Local Plan.”

Minutes