The Planning and Development Control Committee of Leicester Council met on Wednesday 2 September 2026 to discuss several planning applications and the implementation of a new national scheme of delegation. The committee granted planning permission for the change of use of a former university building to student accommodation, subject to a Section 106 agreement. Authority was delegated for the approval of variations to opening hours at a bowls club, subject to a noise assessment. Permission was refused for the construction of covered padel courts at a lawn tennis club.

3-5 Salisbury Road

The committee granted planning permission for the change of use of the former university teaching and administration building at 3-5 Salisbury Road into fifteen studio student flats. This decision was made subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement¹ to secure contributions for open space and health facilities. A number of conditions were attached to the permission, including requirements for the development to be begun within three years, for the accommodation to be occupied only by students, and for the provision of secure cycle parking and energy efficiency measures. A management, parking, and travel plan will also be required before the first occupation of the development, along with a 'Residents Travel Pack' for each flat to promote sustainable travel. The applicant, Mr D Shah, spoke in opposition to the application, and Councillor Kitterick also spoke against it. However, the committee voted unanimously to approve the application.

8A Crofters Drive, Goodwood Bowls and Social Club

The committee agreed that approval of variations to the conditions of planning permission for 8A Crofters Drive, which would allow permanent opening hours for the clubhouse from 8 am to 11 pm from Mondays to Saturdays, and 8 am to 10:30 pm on Sundays, and permit the use of the clubhouse for non-bowls related activities during these hours, be delegated to officers. This delegation is subject to the receipt of a Noise Assessment Report to the satisfaction of the council's Environmental Health service. If the applicant, Mr John Steer, does not agree to submit this report, officers will be authorised to refuse the application. The reasons for potential refusal include the failure to address the potential negative impact of amplified sound from private functions on neighbouring properties, which would be contrary to Policy DQP06 (Residential Amenity) of the Leicester Local Plan 2026² and policies DP3 and P3 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2026³. Peter Wilkinson spoke in opposition to the application, while Councillor Osman spoke in support.

4 Westernhay Road, Lawn Tennis Club

Permission was refused for the construction of two covered padel courts (Class F2⁴) at 4 Westernhay Road. The refusal was based on the grounds that the proposed development, due to its size and siting, would be an incongruous addition to the character of the area, negatively impacting the amenity of existing residents and the Stoneygate Conservation Area. This decision was contrary to Local Plan policies DQP01, DQP06, and HE01, and National Planning Policy Framework policies DP3, HE4, HE5, HE6, and HE9. Heath Cade and the applicant, Mr Umar Boodhoo, spoke in support of the application, while Sarah Reynolds and Councillor March spoke in opposition. Councillor Karavadra attended the meeting at 6:00 pm but did not participate in the discussion or vote.

Implementation of New National Scheme of Delegation

The committee endorsed amendments to its Terms of Reference and Member Good Practice Guidance concerning the implementation of a new national scheme of delegation, with observations. Members expressed a clear understanding that the current procedures in Leicester appropriately balance the use of the committee process with officer delegation. However, concerns were raised about potential future legislation that could broaden the scope of matters requiring member involvement, potentially eroding opportunities for legitimate member participation in decision-making. The committee also noted that the Gateway Test, which requires unanimity between a Nominated Member and Nominated Officer, could lead to more cases being delegated to officers. Despite these concerns, the committee recognised the limited legal discretion available due to the statutory nature of the proposals, welcomed attempts to align them with the current local scheme of delegation, and agreed to support the proposals.