Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed all to the meeting, explained the usual social distancing protocols were in place and also extended the Committee’s best wishes to Councillor Cotton for a speedy recovery.

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

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

i)       Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 1 December 2021.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Wednesday, 1 December 2021 be confirmed and signed as an accurate 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.

The Chairman made a declaration on behalf of all Members of the Committee that an email had been received by Councillors in relation to application number 143728 (agenda item 6a). It was explained this had been shared with relevant Officers to be dealt with and did not preclude the consideration of the application by the Committee.

Councillor C. Hill declared a non-pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Member for application number 143301 (agenda item 6b) however she would remain as a Member of the Committee for this item.

Councillor I. Fleetwood declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was County Councillor for application number 143301 (agenda item 6b) however having had no involvement in the application, he would remain in the Chair for the item.

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 Committee heard there was no update to be given however the status of Neighbourhood Plans across the District could be found on the West Lindsey District Council website.

With regard to the email communication received by all Members of the Committee, the Chairman sought confirmation that the application could be determined at the meeting. The Principal Development Management Officer explained that the correspondence had included a request that the application not be considered, however, there was nothing within the contents of the email that would prohibit the Committee making a determination on the application.

The Vice-Chairman, in consideration of the contents of the email, proposed that the application be deferred until the next meeting for issues detailed within the correspondence to be dealt with. This proposal was subsequently seconded.

Advice was requested from the Legal Advisor and, in order to continue with the meeting, it was AGREED for the following item of business to be discussed.

The Chairman introduced application number 143301, change of use of agricultural land to dog exercising park on land to the West of Reepham Village Hall, Hawthorn Road, Reepham. It was explained that this application had been deferred from the previous meeting in order to seek additional information regarding hours of use and maximum numbers of users. This had been clarified with the applicant and the proposed conditions had been updated to reflect the additional information.

The Chairman advised there was one registered speaker, Mr Gary Brader, who had submitted a statement to be read on his behalf. The Democratic and Civic Officer read aloud the following statement.

 “Dear committee 

I strongly object to this application as I can see no reason for a dog exercise area at this location. There are lots of public footpaths available and areas away from the roads including the very near by old airfield with public access. Where many dog owners already go! I can see only one reason for this application, it is so the land owner can change the land use from agricultural to leisure and then in a years time or whatever an application for building planning will be submitted. They are going in through the back door on this one very devious indeed. If this planning is granted it will result in more traffic on an already very busy road and also spoil the view of the houses opposite not to mention reduce future property value particularly for those opposite. This is a this stupid and not needed planning request! I would very much like to hear the applicant’s reasons for this idea and an honest answer would be nice! I look forward to your reply.

Thank you for your time with my email. Very sorry and disappointed I am unable to attend this meeting.”

The Chairman thanked the Democratic Services Officer and invited any comments from the Senior Development Management Officer. He clarified that the application was for change of use from agricultural to a dog exercising park and any future changes would be assessed at that time.

On opening discussions for the Committee, there were concerns raised from Members regarding the number of parking spaces at the site in relation to the maximum numbers of dogs permitted. It was noted that users of the site may park on Hawthorn Road, which, as a busy road, could cause safety concerns. It was highlighted that there had been no objections to the application from the Highways Agency.

In response to a query as to whether the land would be returned to agricultural use should the proposed dog exercise site not be successful, Members were directed to condition eight which stated the land must be returned to agricultural use within six months of the exercise park closing.

Members reiterated previous concerns regarding the need for such a venture as well as potential noise issues with numbers of dogs. The Legal Adviser highlighted that there were other statutory regimes to deal with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

The Chairman signalled the return to the first application of the evening, application number 143728, to erect 49no. dwellings with associated highways works, earthworks to create drainage attenuation pond, landscaping and boundary treatments, on land North of Hawks Road, Welton, Lincoln. He sought the advice of the Legal Adviser, having afforded her time to consider the contents of the email received by all Committee Members. She confirmed that there was no reason that the Committee could not determine the application at this time. There were no material planning considerations contained within the email, all Members had received training and other concerns within the email would be dealt with by the Monitoring Officer. It was also noted by Officers that Acis were due funding in March, the Section 106 agreement was also required and any decision to defer the application could have a detrimental impact.

Having been moved and seconded that the application be deferred, the Chairman took the vote and with a majority voting against the proposal, the vote was lost, with the Chairman confirming the application would be heard.

The Senior Development Management Officer presented the details of the application and explained that, should a resolution be made to grant permission, final confirmation of conditions would need to be completed in consultation with the Environment Officer.

The Chairman informed the Committee there were three registered speakers on the application and he invited the first speaker, Mr Mark Foster of Lindum Homes, to address the Committee. Mr Foster made the following statement.

“Good evening everybody. My name is Mark Foster and I am the Planning Director with Lindum Homes. We are the market housing division of Lindum Group and I thank you for the opportunity to address you today. We are joint applicants on this application with Acis Group, who, Members will be aware, are an active provider of affordable housing within the district.

As many of you may know, we are a local company with our own local workforce. Our role as a major employer within the local economy is very important to us as our reputation having now operated as a local contractor for over 60 years. The company is employee owned, with 1480 of our staff being shareholders in the company. This has fostered a deeper level of pride, ownership and commitment among employees and has, we believe, been an important factor which is able to sustain our reputation over the years. We do not build many market houses so when we do both the quality of those houses and the sites we choose are vitally important to us.

The site in Welton is no different and the fact that it was already allocated in the existing local plan was a significant factor. The principle of housing already being considered acceptable through the adopted local plan. Our attention has turned to the form the development takes, and how we can integrate any scheme into the locality as set out in the officer’s report. The layout itself is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

The Chairman introduced the next application, number 143815, outline planning application for the erection of up to 4no. dwellings with access to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications - resubmission of 141429, on land to South of Clixby Lane Grasby. The Senior Development Management Officer informed the Committee that additional comments had been received since the publication of the report, mainly making the same points as previously covered in the report, and there was a correction to the report that the plan should have been dated as November not December. Additionally, he drew Members’ attention to conditions four and nine of the report.

The Chairman stated there were several registered speakers, some of whom had submitted statements. He invited the Democratic Services Officer to read aloud the first statement from Grasby Parish Council. The following statement was read.

“Planning Application for this site was turned down on 15^th Oct 2020.  An Appeal was also denied. The main issue for both decisions was the effect on Clixby Lane.

The original denial said ‘the development would not contribute towards a safe transport network for pedestrians or vehicular movement when considering the impact on Clixby Lane and surrounding highway network, it fails to maximise pedestrian permeability and avoid barriers to movement through careful consideration of street layouts and access routes.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 13 and Policy LP26 of CLLP and provisions of NPPF’

So I ask ‘What has changed?’

The Appeal denial supported the Planning Committee’s decision.

‘Main Issue is the effect of the development on highway safety’

The reasons are given as the narrowness of Clixby Lane, need for vehicles to reverse out of the Lane, no separate footpaths and Clixby Lane is a Public Foot Path used by hikers, Duke of Edinburgh groups, schools. The Planning Inspector said ‘I conclude that the proposed development would compromise highway safety for users, causing harm.  This would conflict with Policies LP13 and LP26 of CLLP where these policies seek to ensure that development provides well designed, safe and convenient access for all.  It would also conflict with NPPF ie that safe and suitable access to sites can be achieved for all users.’

So I ask again ‘What has changed?’

Clixby Lane hasn’t got any wider, it is not any less used by walkers, visibility down Clixby Lane hasn’t improved. It is still the Viking Way.

The number of properties has been reduced by 1 but the Planning Inspector contradicted the Appellants claim that 5 properties would have little impact on the number of vehicles on Clixby Lane and thought there would be noticeably more traffic.  The new application would reduce this by 20% - an unknown number of vehicles.

The Inspector addressed the problem of no turning place for vehicles. A lay by is proposed near the far corner of the field on Clixby Lane.  The Lane is 2.8 metres wide, and the verge there is 2.3 metres wide.  This is not enough for anything other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

The Chairman introduced the final application of the evening, application number 143973 for 2no. dwellings with associated detached garages being variation of condition 5 of planning permission 140625 granted 14 April 2020 - Amended drawings, on land off Astley Crescent, Scotter, Gainsborough. The Officer explained that there had been a complaint received by Environmental Protection regarding building material having blown against a fence, it was explained this could be conditioned against if deemed necessary.

The Chairman explained there were two statements submitted to be read aloud by the Democratic Services Officer, the first being from Mrs Jenny Blythe, the applicant. The following statement was read aloud.

“We feel the need to redress some of the comments made so far:

Upon purchase, Plots 12A & 12B Astley Crescent were an impenetrable, overgrown wasteland, covered in 8-10ft briars, bramble bushes and residential waste.  Each year the seeds and spores from the overgrowth ended up in local residents’ gardens requiring removal.  The area was an unacceptable eyesore at the end of a well designed and well kept crescent.

Development of these plots will ensure its transition to two, well designed and positively impactful family residences with appropriate parking and garage facilities.

Both 2 1/2 storey properties will be lesser in height than the adjacent properties, (3 brick courses lower than No 40 Astley Cres, 5 courses lower than No 38 and 8 courses lower than No 36).  Thus within the boundaries set for the builds.

Regarding flooding concerns, a specialist drainage engineering company have provided calculations, specifications and specific design to accommodate for present day surface water drainage and a 50% over estimate to ensure future climatic conditions are provided for.

This development work has always been respectful of local residents, the builder never beginning work before 8am and finishing before 6pm.  One exception was Northern Power Grid began work around 7am.  we were given no prior warning of this date or start time and their admin team had omitted to notify local residents.

Upon completion, this small development will positively enhance the Astley Crescent street scene, completing a small community of well designed, family orientated properties and ending a negative visual impact of overgrown wasteland.

Scotter village and parish is a very attractive residential prospect to a large range of families and as such needs to always be forward thinking for that to continue.  Aiming to embrace progress and  work to positively support new builds and new design would be beneficial to both the parish and its community.”

The Chairman invited the Democratic Services Officer to read aloud the second statement, on behalf of Mr and Mrs Brown, Mr and Mrs Rion and Mr and Mrs Whitby. The following statement was read aloud.

“Although this application relates to 140625, we’ve been advised by Councillor Snee this should be considered as a new application, not an amendment.

Our concerns at the officer’s recommendation to approve 143973 are as follows.

Obstruction, massing and loss of amenity

We believe the application breaches policies  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

The Determination of Appeals was DULY NOTED.