Members
of the audience present included Mr. Gerry Faulkner who also
spoke on several matters. Mr Maloney (the applicant) was not
present.
During the hearing Mr. Hughes was extremely
fair and even handed in his approach to questioning and issues
raised from the floor. The hearing lasted for approximately
two hours during which time all of the above named people spoke
regarding various aspects of the case covering issues within
the agenda (highlighted below), as follows:
Clarification of the Plans etc.
The revised plan for the application showed caravans for proposed
living accommodation moved away from the fence adjacent to the
motorway, to the fence adjacent to No. 79 Hinckley Road. This
was intended to make them less susceptible to ingress of noise
and air pollution. However it would bring them closer to the
neighbouring property and hence more undesirable from that point
of view.
Planning Policy
Blaby District Council advised the hearing that the Blaby District
Plan was currently under review and was due to be completed
by 2012. Some aspects of the plan would affect provisions for
gypsy caravan sites.
Effects of the proposal on the pattern
of development in the area
Professor Fox reported that this proposal would create a substantial
over development of the site. Furthermore, the implication would
be that owners of other properties with very long gardens (particularly
some on the north side of Hinckley Road, between the M1 and
Braunstone Crossroads), might file similar applications, or
contest the justification of any which were previously refused.
Several property owners had already had planning applications
for building extensions etc. refused on similar grounds of over
development.
Effects of the proposal on neighbouring
properties
Visibility of the proposed caravans was discussed, including
that from the main carriageway and neighbouring properties.
This was apparent from the sheer size of the caravans to be
accommodated (these were present for three weeks immediately
prior to the original Blaby District Council hearing in August
of 2006), and the raised level of the ground on which they would
stand.
Mr Hughes asked Blaby BDC whether the Highways
objected to the application and they confirmed they had not
however, at this point Mr Fox stated that the LFE Parish Council
did not agree with this statement.
Access to and from the site with large vehicles
towing long trailers, would require a wide sweep into (and from)
the gateway crossing both carriageways of the A47, causing an
unacceptable congestion of traffic on a road which is invariably
very busy (see information regarding legal limits of sizes of
towing trailers, below).
Mr Hughes raised a question over the number
of times access might be required to and from the premises.
Philip Brown said that this was likely to be only five or six
times a year to visit various Gypsy events and gatherings. Mr
Faulkner corrected this stating that Mr Brown's own supporting
commentary included the issue of Mr Maloney travelling to find
work, suggesting that the figure was likely to be substantially
higher than this.
Effects of existing and future noise
and pollution on proposed occupants (Read
review Air Quality/Noise Pollution in Blaby District - 5th January
2005)
Philip Brown suggested to the inspectorate to disregard the
issue of M1 widening, suggesting that it may not happen. Professor
Fox corrected him, confirming that the program for widening
of the motorway is already underway along a vast stretch of
the motorway. The only issue in question is which option (5
or 6 - both involving M1 widening at LFE) would be chosen,
and when the work would commence. NB: Please see the other articles
on this site, for more information on the M1
Widening Program.
Noise and air pollution will be excessive both
during (for a period of 18 to 24 months) and after the M1 widening
and A47 bridge replacement works, leading to a substantial degradation
of air quality following the work due to the increased traffic
and the closer proximity of the M1 carriageway after the work
is completed.
Mr Faulkner had contacted the Environmental
Health Dept at Blaby DC and asked whether the traffic levels
would increase after the works had been completed. The Environmental
Health Dept spokesperson confirmed that when the M69 link was
completed the anticipated traffic model proved an increase on
traffic volumes was likely.
Mr Hughes asked Mr Faulkner whether this would
offset the point raised by Mr Brown that "the efficiency
of vehicles would be more environmentally friendly". Mr
Faulkner responded stating that any efficiencies gained by development
of more efficient engines would be negated by the increased
volumes in traffic that will be using the M1.
Mr Faulkner also pointed out that Leicester
Forest East is already in an Air Quality Management Area, specialist
Air Quality Management monitoring equipment has been recently
been installed (the grey box outside the Kathleen Rutland Home
for the Blind) and is being monitored by the Environmental Health
Department due to their concerns of the high levels of pollution
within the Parish.
In addition, the impact of air quality has
to date only been considered from the M1 or the A47 aspects
separately. This property stands at the closest juncture of
both roads and hence the air quality at this point would without
doubt be the worst in the area.
Other issues including need for sites and personal
circumstances
An initiative was raised to challenge the Gypsy status of the
applicant, which was not supported.
Professor Fox stated that the community and
council alike, welcome Mr Maloney to the area (as we do all
newcomers) as the dynamic and successful businessman he is.
The council applaud his support of elderly and ailing relatives,
and would support any reasonable application to extend his property
to accommodate them. The only objection is the change of use
of the property to include a gypsy caravan site, which is out
of keeping with the nature of other properties in the area.
If the health issues of Mr Maloney’s
immediate family are so pressing, why has he not used the property
for the last three years. The first time it has been used was
the weekend prior to this Inspectorate hearing, for what appeared
to be a family wedding, when the applicant and his family managed
to stay in the building without the use of caravans.
Conditions of acceptance and monitoring.
If the decision is taken to find in favour of Mr Maloney, any
permission granted would be limited to Mr Maloney himself and
specific members of his immediate family only. If granted, Mrs
Bridget Maloney and Louise Maloney would be permitted to live
in residential caravans (one in each) at the property. No other
persons, including other members of Mr Maloney’s family,
would be included in this.
It is also likely that there would be a limit
to the period for which permission would be granted (eg. maximum
three years?). The inspector could also limit the size of caravans
permitted to use the premises, and this may not be the same
as the current legal limit for the size of caravans for towing:
Towing vehicle under 3500kg GVW
Length (excluding the coupling and drawbar) 7.0 metres (= 22'
- 11 6/10")
Maximum width 2.3 metres (= 7' - 7 7/10" )
Towing vehicle over 3500kg GVW
Length (excluding the coupling and drawbar) 12 metres if at
least 4 wheels (= 39' - 4 4/10" )
Maximum width 2.55 metres (= 8' - 4 4/10")
Length of towing vehicle & trailer combined 18 metres (=
59' - 0 7/10" )
Maximum overhang of load from rear of trailer 3.05 metres (=
10' - 0 1/10" )
Current
legal limits for caravan towing. (Opens in new window -
Practical Caravan -Legal Towing)
Site Visit
The site visit then followed when all present travelled to LFE
to meet at the Maloney property at 12:30pm.
The party first visited No. 79 paying particular
attention to the view from the landing and bedrooms, along with
the present noise levels from the motorway. Mr Hughes commented
on the current noise level and the proposed location of caravans.
He also noted the possibility of caravans being visible over
the fence, due to their height combined with the raised level
of the gravel area at the rear of No 77.
The party then viewed the grounds of No 77 from the gravel
area at the back of the property where the proposed caravans
were to stand.
Summary
It was felt by a number of those present that the representatives
from Blaby District Council had repeatedly failed to put the
case effectively on behalf of the parish and the District. In
particular, the issue of precedent involving properties on the
north side of the A47 between the M1 motorway bridge and Braunstone
crossroads, and the issue of the M1 Motorway widening program
(and consequent effects of air and noise pollution), which is
definitely scheduled to go ahead.
Almost all points raised and/or contested were by Professor
Fox and Mr. Faulkner.
Considering the fact, that over three hundred
people had packed the Leicester Forest East Parish Hall to hear
the Council's views on the original planning application, some
three hundred and thirty wrote letters of objection to Blaby
District Council (not including many more who had separately
signed petitions), and almost seven hundred people wrote to
the Inspectorate opposing Mr. Maloney's appeal. There
seemed to be remarkably little commitment from those Blaby Councillors
present to uphold the degree of opposition to this case.
After the meeting, Professor Fox in discussions
with those that had attended the hearing stated "that if
the event had been recorded and replayed to members of the parish,
some might feel justified in withholding their council tax.
Had it been left to Blaby District Council to oppose this application
alone, Mr Maloney’s appeal would have been an almost certain
success." Several LFE Parishioners present at the meeting
were in agreement
The findings
of the Inspectorate are expected to be released within three
to four weeks. Watch this site for more information regarding
this and other issues of local interest.
| 
