Agenda and minutes

The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming all those present and any who may be watching the live webcast. He explained the procedure for the meeting and informed all present of the relevant housekeeping details.

Up to 15 minutes are allowed for public participation.  Participants are restricted to 3 minutes each.

There was no public participation at this point of the meeting.

Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 2 May 2018.

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 2 May 2018 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 May 2018 at the conclusion of Annual Council.

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 May 2018 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Members may make any declarations of interest at this point but may also make them at any time during the course of the meeting.

Councillor David Cotton commented that the applicant for planning application 137697 (agenda item 6(b)) was an elected Member of council and therefore, for transparency, this should be declared for all Members of the Planning Committee.

Note – the status of Neighbourhood Plans in the District may be found via this link

https://www.west-lindsey.gov.uk/my-services/planning-and-building/neighbourhood-planning/

The Development Management Team Leader advised Committee that both the Great Limber and Osgodby Neighbourhood Plans had a majority vote in favour of their Plan at recent referendums held on Thursday 24^th May. These neighbourhood plans would come into force as part of the statutory development plan once approved at Full Council.

The status of Neighbourhood Plans in the District may be found via this link:chttps://www.west-lindsey.gov.uk/my-services/planning-and-building/neighbourhood-planning/

Great Limber NP: https://www.west-lindsey.gov.uk/my-services/planning-and-building/neighbourhood-planning/all-neighbourhood-plans-in-west-lindsey/great-limber-neighbourhood-plan/

Osgodby NP: https://www.west-lindsey.gov.uk/my-services/planning-and-building/neighbourhood-planning/all-neighbourhood-plans-in-west-lindsey/osgodby-neighbourhood-plan/

RESOLVED that the applications detailed in agenda item 6 be dealt with as follows:-

The Chairman introduced the first of the applications to be considered by Committee and stated there were two speakers registered. He explained the process for hearing the application and invited the Development Management Team Leader to present the item to Committee.

The Development Management Team Leader advised Committee that in relation to application 137381 (referenced in the report), this had been determined on 25 May 2018. He explained that the condition that had required a footway across the entire frontage of the allocated site had been removed and that condition 15 now only required that they provided a footpath north to the village. Consequently, they were no longer required to provide a footpath within Lodge Lane that would have connected to the application site at 40 Lodge Lane (application 137531).

He added that the applicant had written to advise that, ‘whilst they were intending to market these properties to retirees / older persons from Nettleham Village, they realised that some of the properties would be suitable for wheelchair users. Therefore they would prefer not to have a planning obligation to market the properties solely to those over 55 however, if WLDC and/or the Planning Committee saw that an Over 55’s development would be the difference between being exceptional and not, then they would be agreeable to secure by a planning obligation’.

It was also explained to Committee that 40% of the parish were over 60 years of age where the average across West Lindsey was 29.1% and that the Nettleham Local Plan had allowed for provision of older adult accommodation. He detailed other allocated sites in the neighbourhood area which would provide some, albeit not all, of the identified needed homes. This included a dedicated site (site CL4663/D) for older persons. He concluded with the addition to the Officer recommendation that “dedicated provision of higher accessible homes for older persons, for which there is an identified need, would be a benefit of development. However, releasing an unallocated site outside the development footprint (now without a footpath link) would undermine those accessibility credentials and would not result in “exceptional circumstances”.”

The Chairman invited the first speaker to address Committee. He introduced himself as Mr Steve Gelder, speaking in favour of the application, as the applicant. He explained to Committee that he had been perplexed by the objections from the Parish Council as they had been consulted, their discussions had been minuted and he had understood they were remaining neutral. He had also thought they had the support of the Planning Officer and had been surprised to see the recommendation on the report. Mr Gelder stated that this was a planning application with integrity, that there was a distance of only 100m to the doctors’ surgery and 200m to the local store. He stated this was an easily accessible site and they had received letters of support from neighbouring properties and the local rugby club. He further added that the under construction residential site was now almost completed and therefore the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The Chairman reiterated, for transparency, that all Committee Members knew the applicant. The Senior Development Management Officer advised Committee that there had been one further objection received. The objector felt the plans for the bungalow were unclear, the proposed dwelling would be overlooking the home and garden of the objector and stated that, with building work underway at another property, there would be a significant loss of open space. The Senior Development Management Officer also advised Committee that Lincolnshire County Councils Historic Environment Officer had noted that medieval and post medieval archaeology was revealed when land to the rear of the White Swan Inn, less than 50m to the east of the application site, was developed. It was therefore likely that similar remains may survive on the application site and it recommended a condition requiring the submission of a scheme of archaeological works. He added that if Committee were to grant planning permission, appropriate conditions would need to be added to the permission to secure this.

The Chairman informed Committee that there was one speaker registered to speak and he reiterated the time limit of five minutes and invited the speaker to take the microphone.

The speaker introduced himself as Mr James Mumby, agent for the applicant. He explained the application was for outline planning only for a three bedroomed bungalow in the grounds of the existing property. He stated that the applicant had been running a bed and breakfast although had now retired from this and wished to downsize into a more accessible home. With respect to the proposal to build in the grounds of the existing property, Mr Mumby highlighted that other sites in the area had done this and it was deemed acceptable in principle. He stated that this would be a single storey dwelling meaning there would be no overlooking windows. It would be accessed by the existing driveway and would not generate any more noise or access issues than the bed and breakfast business had done, he stated there was already sufficient parking on the site. Mr Mumby concluded by asking Committee to support the application.

The Chairman thanked Mr Mumby and enquired of the Senior Development Management Officer whether the application would have come before Committee if the applicant had not been an elected Member of council. The Senior Development Officer confirmed that it would have come to Committee as there were objections received. The Chairman then invited comments from Committee members.

A member of Committee enquired as to the future of the bed and breakfast business and the impact there would be on the area if it were to continue as a bed and breakfast. The Senior Development Management Officer stated that there was no condition as to the cessation of the bed and breakfast however it had been confirmed the business had ceased running.

A member of Committee noted there had been comments from a member of public to the effect that the application was likely to have been agreed already  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

The Chairman explained this was a resubmission application following refusal of a previous proposal for erection of 69 no. dwellings, access to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications. The current application sought to address the previous reason for refusal, which was based on insufficient proposals for dealing with drainage of surface water and foul water from the development. The Chairman invited the Principal Development Management Officer to provide any additional information or amendments.

The Principal Development Management Officer explained there had been some revised details to the report and additional information. There had been a letter of support received, which stated the site was complex and the applicants had gone in to great detail to resolve the water issues. There had also been one letter of objection which re-iterated concerns about water drainage, increased traffic levels and increased pressure on the infrastructure. The Principal Development Management Officer added that the Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust had made comments on the application and stated that the plans and reports indicated that their recommendations had been taken into account but that they strongly supported the need for an ecological management plan to be conditioned. They offered to act as a consultee throughout any future works. The Principal Development Management Officer also noted an amendment on page 63 of the report: 1.16 ha of open space should read 0.93ha.

The Chairman advised Committee there was one speaker registered and he invited Mr Mark Hodson to take the microphone.

Mr Hodson addressed Committee, explaining he was the agent for the application and therefore speaking in support of the plans. He thanked all involved with the application for their assistance and willingness to engage in a positive manner. He re-iterated why the application had been refused previously and explained they had been working closely with Anglian Water to put something in place. He added that Anglian Water were happy with, and supportive of, the proposed plans. Mr Hodson stated that a viability test had demonstrated whilst the full affordable housing contribution could not be afforded there would be a 15% affordable housing contribution, a full primary school education contribution, as well a CIL contribution to reduce the pressures to the infrastructure that had been a concern of the objectors and that the ecological importance of the site had also been taken into consideration for all aspects of the proposal. Mr Hodson acknowledged that Lincolnshire Police had raised concerns regarding the use of car ports on the development however he assured Committee that similar structures had been used for several years on other developments without any adverse effect on crime rates. Mr Hodson brought the attention of Committee Members to photographs of such car ports which he had provided to Officers in order to demonstrate the appearance and construction. He highlighted that the development would help to provide a mix of houses to the area, that the density of houses was below the recommended density and there was also access to a children’s play area, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Note:              The Chairman explained Councillor Cotton had offered his apologies for leaving Committee earlier and indicated he was feeling unwell.

The Chairman introduced planning application 137532 for the proposed replacement of the communal building approved under 134583 with the erection of two single storey bungalows and associated works. The Principal Development Management Officer notified Committee that there was an amendment to the report in that the recommendation stated it was subject to Section 106 arrangements however this should have read Section 1 which is also a legal agreement under the Localism Act 2011. The section 1 agreement would ensure affordable housing on the site. S106 agreements will remain the principle type of agreement for planning applications to secure affordable housing but in certain circumstances an s1 allows an applicant to gain funding for such accommodation as in this case.

The Chairman notified Committee there were two registered speakers and reiterated the order of appearance. He then invited the first speaker to the microphone.

Committee was addressed by Councillor Liz Hillman of Saxilby Parish Council who was speaking in opposition to the application. Councillor Hillman explained the impact the removal of the community hub would have on the proposed development and that it would drastically alter the original plans for the site. Councillor Hillman highlighted the risk of social isolation amongst older residents and informed Committee of the higher than average population of older people within the Saxilby area. She explained the percentage of older residents would only increase with time and it was necessary to provide suitable residential areas for this section of the community. She noted that the original plan would have provided not only suitable housing but also the necessary community support to ensure an integrated and prosperous retirement village which would have helped tackle the social issues faced by older generations. She considered that not all the alternative management methods for the facility had been considered which may have allowed the original hub to be retained. Councillor Hillman strongly recommended that the application be refused.

The second speaker, Andrea Brough, introduced herself to the Committee and explained she was representing Acis Group Ltd in support of the application. She explained that Acis had been brought into the scheme following the withdrawal of the original housing provider allowing the scheme to continue to provide the over 55’s accommodation. With the involvement of Acis Group Ltd, the specification for the site had been amended due to their business model and that the homes would be provided not only for older people but with a greater affordable housing emphasis as well as open market properties. Ms Brough explained that the costs involved with running the community building, such as staff, utilities, entertainment licences and maintenance, would need to be absorbed by the residents by way of a service charge. On breaking down the average costs involved, and in consideration that the service charge would not be included in any financial assistance provided to those in identified affordable housing options,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

·         13688 – Land off Manor Lane, Aisthorpe

·         136292 – Land adjacent to Corner House Farm, Main Road, Linwood, Market Rasen

The Chairman highlighted there were two appeal decisions on this occasion. There were no comments or questions from the Committee.

RESOLVED that the determination of appeals be noted.