The Development Control and Regulatory Board of Leicestershire Council refused an application for a proposed anaerobic digestion plant at Marigold Farm, Great Bowden. The Board also noted a report on government planning reforms and received updates on delegated planning decisions, enforcement actions, and tree preservation orders.

Proposed Anaerobic Digestion Plant Refused at Marigold Farm

The Development Control and Regulatory Board refused planning permission for a proposed anaerobic digestion plant, associated infrastructure, lagoons, and feedstock clamps at Marigold Farm, Welham Road, Great Bowden. The decision was made despite an officer recommendation for approval.

The Board cited several reasons for refusal, including:

• Unacceptable harm to rural character: The scale, massing, industrial appearance, and operational characteristics of the development were deemed to cause unacceptable harm to the rural character, tranquillity, and visual qualities of the site and its surroundings. The Board was not satisfied that proposed landscaping would adequately mitigate this harm.
• Highway safety concerns: The frequency, scale, and nature of operational vehicle movements were considered to cause unacceptable harm to the recreational amenity and attractiveness of Welham Lane and surrounding routes for pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, and visitors. The Board was not satisfied that proposed road widening, signage, and management arrangements would adequately address these effects, particularly concerning traffic movements on and off the A6 and overall highway safety.
• Odour concerns: The Board was not satisfied that unacceptable odour effects would be avoided or adequately and enforceably controlled throughout the life of the development, particularly concerning short-duration odour emissions during the handling of poultry manure.
• Conflict with Policy W5 of the Leicestershire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: A material part of the development would occupy land that is not previously developed, contaminated, or derelict. Furthermore, the required clear link between the location and the waste to be managed, with associated transport, operational, and environmental benefits, was not sufficiently demonstrated.
• Conflict with Policy EMP2(c) of the Great Bowden Neighbourhood Plan: The proposal would result in the loss of an existing dwelling.

The Board concluded that, when taken together, these locational and policy conflicts, alongside landscape, recreational amenity, and odour harms, were not outweighed by the benefits of the proposal, such as renewable energy generation, waste management, and brownfield regeneration.

Planning Reforms Noted

The Board considered a report on government planning reforms, including a national scheme of delegation for planning functions and consequential changes to the Council's planning governance arrangements. The report was for noting, aiming to inform members about revised terms of reference, officer delegations, a Members' Planning Code of Good Practice, and a new gateway process for determining planning application referrals. The Board noted the contents of the report.

Delegated Decisions and Enforcement Updates Received

The Board received and noted reports detailing delegated planning decisions issued between 1 January 2026 and 30 June 2026. An update on delegated enforcement actions for the period 1 January 2026 to 1 June 2026 was also noted, with no new enforcement notices served during that time.

Tree Preservation Order Decisions Noted

The Board received and noted a report outlining delegated decisions made for works to trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders between 1 January 2026 and 30 June 2026.

Future Meetings Scheduled

The dates for future meetings of the Board were noted, with the next meeting scheduled for Thursday, 8 October 2026.