Decision details

Planning application for proposed housing development for two pairs ofsemi detached dwellings on Main Street, Torksey.

Roger Eyre, spoke on behalf of the applicant and questioned the recommendation to refuse the application, citing the weight to be given to the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan which allowed for up to four houses on infill sites.  The Environment Agency had not objected to building on the site in 2014, however the report states that a sequential test would require development further away from flood risk.  Any archaeological issues could be conditioned to be addressed, and the proposals would enhance the site, removal of Permitted Development Rights would ensure protection.

Christiana Naidu, spoke in objection to the application, stating that this was an important historic site which should not be developed at the expense of residents’ enjoyment.  There was the potential of increased traffic and anti-social behaviour.  The height of the buildings would block light, overlook gardens, and block the view of the green strip.  The field and green space should be left for residential amenity.  Torksey was also prone to flooding.

The Principal Development Management Officer described how the issues were a matter of balance.  It was up to the decision makers (the Local Planning Authority not the Environment Agency in this case) to assess whether the sequential test had been met, whether other less vulnerable sites were available.  Reference was made to recent appeals, following which the Planning Inspector had stated that development should not be permitted if other sites, not within a flood zone, were available.  It was proposed that floor levels should be above flood level, however the effectiveness of defences could not be guaranteed and this would not in itself satisfy the the sequential test.

Members made reference to the archaeological aspect and noted that once important remains had gone they could not be replaced.

It was moved and seconded that permission be REFUSED as per the recommendation and reasons as set out in the report, this was AGREED.