Leicester Forest East Residents Action Group

Lubbesthorpe New Town

 

LFE RAG     LUBBESTHORPE      LFE RESIDENTS ACTION GROUP     LFE RAG

 

 

HISTORY.  On the 20th August 2009, Blaby District Planning Department (BDC),held a public meeting at the LFE Parish Hall. The majority of residents in LFE had been largely unaware of the proposed development at Lubbesthorpe, known as SUE C, a Core Strategy within the BDC Local Development Framework. The Core Strategy, Submission Version, had been published in July 2009. Thanks  to a few local residents, posters had been displayed approximately two weeks before the public meeting, outlining the scale of the development.  
The public meeting was attended by over 250 residents of LFE, who were shocked by the scale of the proposed development, presentedby Planning Officers of BDC. A stormy meeting developed, as the residents were made aware of the magnitude of the proposal.

 In essence, the development provides for 4,500 houses to be built on the land, bounded by Forest House Lane LFE, the M1 passing through LFE and Thorpe Astley, the M69, and Beggars Lane which runs from Hinckley Road through to Enderby. To put the development into perspective, it relates to the size of Market Harborough , or alternatively, it represents  approximately twice the size of the existing LFE.
The development plan, (SUE C), provides for the 4,500 houses being built by 2026, commencing in 2012.  It provides for three primary schools and one secondary school and supporting infrastructures. A new link road and bridge is proposed over the MI into Thorpe Astley, which Braunstone Town Parish Council are vigorously opposed to. Two exits onto Beggars Lane and a further proposal is a relief bypass skirting Enderby, exiting close to the 'Park & Ride'.
Residents of LFE  are fiercely opposed to the proposal.  The main issues being the loss of fine farming land and wildlife habitat; the  significant increase in traffic on the A47 Hinckley Road and Beggars Lane, (both already heavily congested at peak times); likely interference with the Ancient Monument, together with the resulting noise and  air pollution which is already at a peak level in Hinckley Road and Thorpe Astley.
At the public meeting, the residents were informed that any objections to the development must be  forwarded to BDC by September 10th,  just 22 days after the public meeting. Such was the level of concern from local residents that approximately 700 objections were received by BDC within the allotted time.
The scale of these objections, has resulted in BDC having to delay their proposed submission of the  Core Strategy to the Secretary of State in September 2009. This is likely now to be in the early part of 2010. If as a result of these objections, BDC decided to produce a revised document, then  this will be publicised in the  local media and the public and previous objectors,  will be given another opportunity to submit further representations.
In the  meantime the Residents' Action Group  have made representations to the local MP, the Chairman of Leicester County Council,  Planning and Environmental Officers at BDC,  Local Parish Councillors (LFE & BTC), English Heritage and other parties, the fight goes on!

Added 30th December 2009

An analysis of the 'Objection Letters' submitted to Blaby District Council's Planning Department, through the Residents' Action Group, reveals the following strength of feeling, in respect of the main issues.

 

 

Main Reasons for Objections Tabled

 No. of Specified Objections

Percentage of Analysed Objections

Traffic Congestion

401

86%

Air and Noise Pollution

233

50%

Loss of Farming Land, Wildlife and Habitats

224

48%

Lack of Existing Infrastructure in LFE. eg. Schools, Surgeries, etc

179

38%

Loss of Green Environment

60

13%

Anticipated Higher Crime, Anti Social Behaviour, Declining House Values and Travellers Camps.

148

32%

Notes:

 

1. The total number of objections handed to the Residents' Action Group was 519.  Regrettably, a number of the objections would not have been allowed by BDC as  they failed to give the address of the property and/or the name of the objector. Accordingly these objections are not listed in the above figures.  Additionally, some of the objections were identical and from the same residential property so these have been consolidated.  Hence, the total number of objections considered above was 466.

 

2. The objection letters were multi-faceted, some listing as many as five or six different objections, as such, all the reasons given are included above.

 

3. A small number of objections made, but not included above were;  Flood issues; Split Development between sites;  use Brownfield  sites;  and the development is  of no use to LFE.