Agenda and minutes

Planning & Transport Committee - Wednesday, 31st August, 2022 7.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, The White House, Hockliffe Street, Leighton Buzzard, LU7 1HD

Contact: Committee Officer  01525 631920 & Email:

No. Item



Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1972 requires a record be kept of the Members present and that this record form part of the minutes of the meeting. Members who cannot attend a meeting should tender apologies to the Town Clerk.


Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor J Silverstone (substituted by Councillor T Morris), Councillor A Gray and Councillor D Bowater.


Apologies received from the Deputy Town Clerk.



(i)    Under the Localism Act 2011 (sections 26-37 and Schedule 4) and in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, Members are required to declare any interests which are not currently entered in the Member’s Register of Interests or if he/she has not notified the Monitoring Officer of it.


(ii) Should any Member have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in an item on the agenda, the Member may not participate in consideration of that item unless a Dispensation has first been requested (in writing) and granted by the Council (see Dispensation Procedure).



Councillor Dodwell declared that she had spoken to residents regarding planning application CB/22/03088 – Land South of Chartmoor Road and requested that if recommended for approval, this be considered by the Development Management Committee at Central Bedfordshire Council. Councillor Dodwell also declared that she had spoken to residents regarding planning appplication CB/22/02568 – Units 13-21 Waterborne Walk.


Councillor Freeman declared that planning application CB/22/02993 – 9-13 Soulbury Road was visible from his property.


QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC (3 minutes per person; maximum 15 minutes)


Two residents and a representative from the Roman Gate Action Group spoke against planning application CB/22/03088 – Land South of Chartmoor Road. Whilst recognising that the adjacent land has been allocated for employment uses, residents were concerned that the application offered little detail regarding hours of operation, noise mitigation, height of buildings and the fact that the proposal would locate employment uses hard up against the common boundary shared with established residential properties. Given this relationship, residents believed that the proposed development would give rise to unacceptable overshadowing, light and noise pollution detrimental to their reasonable enjoyment. More should be done to mitigate against these issues through the introduction of enhanced screening and a layout that would see units moved away from the common boundary. Furthermore, the planning application made no reference to sand lizards which were endangered and are considered to be found within this location.


The applicant for planning application CB/22/03088 – Land South of Chartmoor Road spoke in favour of the application. Allocated for employment purposes, the applicant had delivered business and employment on the Chartmoor Development of which he was proud. In addition, the applicant had delivered associated infrastructure including the Chartmoor spine road and signage in accordance with its land allocation. The area was characterised by industrial and business uses including Aggregate Industries for example as well as Spinney Pool which is presently being marketed for open storage purposes. Any screening of the housing development should, according to the applicant, have been provided by the housing developers.


A resident spoke against retrospective planning application CB/22/02467 – 13 Wing Road. The resident raised issues that the planning application description was inaccurate and misleading and has since been amended. In his opinion, the existing structure was larger than permitted and by virtue of its bulk represented an unacceptable form of development visible from the public highway. Concerns were also raised about its appropriateness from a fire safety perspective with access onto third party land in the form of an electricity sub-station. The present structure would fail in meeting the original concerns raised by Public Protection in respects of a previous planning application for a similar style structure (CB/21/03225) in that insufficient natural ventilation was provided. The only way to achieve this would be to create additional openings within the structure which would negate the noise impact assessment requirements.  Given the lack of parking at this location, it was inevitable that the application would lead to an increase in parking pressures within the locality, which had not been adequately addressed.




(a)       The Committee received the minutes of the Planning and Transport Committee meeting held on 10 August 2022.


RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning and Transport Committee meeting held 10 August 2022 be approved as a correct record and were signed accordingly.


(b)       Updates from the previous meeting: Correspondence had been sent to the Canal and River Trust seeking a date as to when the vegetation flanking the Leighton Road canal bridge would be removed.

The pedestrian trip hazard to the same bridge was raised given that no action had thus far been taken to address this. The matter would be raised with the area custodian – highways.

The draft Leighton-Linslade Local Cycling & Walking Implementation Plan would be published later in the year (possibly November) and a 6 to 8 week public engagement exercise would begin thereafter. Buzzcycles would be invited to a future meeting to discuss the merits of the Plan and support a town council led response.

It was anticipated that at an informal meeting scheduled for 20th September 2022, the Portfolio Holder for Highways would be able to offer a position regarding a timed crossing trial at the junction of Bridge Street and West Street.



Additional documents:


The Committee considered planning applications received up until 23 August 2022.


The Committee discussed application reference CB/22/03088 – Land South of Chartmoor Road. Whilst recognising its status as employment land, it was felt that in its present form, the application for the erection of 5 business/industrial/distribution units did little to address the concerns of the adjoining residential development. Situated hard up against the common boundary, the proposal would introduce large business units which by virtue of their height, size and scale would have a considerable impact upon the residential amenity of the established residential community. Little in the way of detail had been provided in terms of proposed uses, building heights, hours of operation, and proposed mitigation measures to overcome neighbour concerns.


RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that objection be made to application reference CB/22/03088 – Land South of Chartmoor Road on the following grounds: Whilst the town council recognises its local plan designation as employment land, the planning application fails to positively respond to the residential units which share a common boundary. The proposal by virtue of the siting of the industrial units hard up against the common boundary it shares with residential properties located within Hadrian Crescent would result in an unacceptable and overbearing form of development detrimental to their reasonable enjoyment. To assuage other concerns, more information is required regarding end uses, anticipated hours of operation as well as methods to overcome potential light and noise pollution which will have a bearing on any proposed mitigation methods which the applicant should include as part of the development proposal.

The ecological survey fails to make reference to sand lizards (protected species) which are believed to be found hereabouts.


The Committee discussed application reference CB/22/02467 – 13 Wing Road. Concern was raised that as a retrospective planning application, the application description was misleading and required to be changed. It was felt that the proposal is materially larger than the previously approved permission which by virtue of its incongruous design and use of materials has a detrimental impact when viewed from public vantage points. In granting permission 21/03225, Public Protection were insistent that in order to provide sufficient natural ventilation, at least 50% of the structure be left open which clearly cannot be achieved based on the structure in-situ.  To do so would then fail to address the noise issues raised by Public Protection. Concerns were also raised regarding fire safety on the grounds that the secondary route of escape led to third party land in the form of an electricity sub-station. Given the proposed specialist use, it is likely that the proposal would lead to increased traffic movements and additional pressures on already scare parking resources within the area.


RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that objection be made to application reference CB/22/02467 – 13 Wing Road on the following grounds: The proposal by virtue of its incongruous design, bulk and use of materials would represent an unacceptable form of development which is clearly visible from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 332/P



(a)         To receive any updates arising from the resolutions passed by Council on 4 April 2022 in respect of:

i.             bus user liaison.

ii.            A505 bypass safety review by Central Bedfordshire Council.

iii.           Liaison with Central Bedfordshire Council on options for future High Street traffic management.


(b)         To consider any other matters relating to highways/transport (if appropriate).



A comment was raised regarding the necessity to include bus user liaison, A505 bypass safety review and the future of the High Street as standing items. It was agreed that when available, updates would be given to Committee.

Concerns were raised given the perceived lack of progress being made in respects of the installation of replacement bollards at the Vimy Road/Leighton Road roundabout.


A request was made that consideration be given to the town council funding the purchase and installation of a speed indicator sign for Derwent Road.

The car boot sale hosted off Stoke Road was felt to be causing highway danger and nuisance through access and egress arrangements. It was noted that the issue would be raised at the time the planning application was up for renewal which was believed to be annually.




There were no information items.