Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - The Guildhall. View directions

Contact: Ele Snow  Democratic and Civic Officer


No. Item


Public Participation Period

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

Additional documents:


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



To Approve the Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 389 KB

i)       Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 16 June 2021.

Additional documents:


RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Wednesday, 16 June 2021 be confirmed and signed as an accurate record


Declarations of Interest

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


Additional documents:


The Chairman made a declaration on behalf of all Members of the Committee in relation to a lobbying email received in reference to application number 142302 (agenda item 6a).


Councillor C. McCartney stated to the Committee that, as Ward Councillor, she had not received an individual briefing relating to application number 142302 (agenda item 6a), contrary to the information in the report.


Councillor A. White declared that she was Ward Member for Nettleham, in relation to application number 142542 (agenda item 6d), however she would retain her seat as Planning Committee Member.


Councillor J. Ellis declared that she had had prior involvement in application number 142598 (agenda item 6c) and as such would step down from the Committee for the duration of that item.


Councillor C. Hill declared that she was Ward Member in relation to planning application number 142146 (agenda item 6b) however she had no prior involvement and would remain as a Member of the Planning Committee.


Councillor G. McNeill declared a personal interest in application number 142542 (agenda item 6d) in that the applicant was known to him in a previous role on the Parish Council, however he had no predetermined view of the application and would remain on the Planning Committee for that item.



Update on Government/Local Changes in Planning Policy


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


Additional documents:


The Committee heard from the Interim Planning Manager (Development Management) with the following update.


The consultation draft to the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan was published on 30 June and the consultation would end on 24 August. This would be the new development plan that would replace the 2017 edition. Opportunities presented by the new draft were being recognised, such as in regards to climate change, and the Central Lincolnshire Joint Strategic Planning Committee were keen to hear views from local communities and key stakeholders.


The formal response from West Lindsey District Council would be considered at the meeting of the Prosperous Communities Committee on 29 July. Members were invited to contact the Planning Policy Manager, Rachael Hughes, or access the consultation via the main website. It was anticipated that there would be further consultation in early 2022, after consideration of the responses provided during the current consultation.


With regards to the weighting of the draft local plan, it was highlighted that any weight afforded to the draft plan should be tempered in consideration of the, as yet unknown, level of unresolved objections to the draft plan.


The Committee heard that, in terms of Neighbourhood Plans, the Corringham Neighbourhood Plan was awaiting the appointment of the Examiner and it was expected that examination of the Plan would be held in August or September. Additionally, consultation was open for the Hemswell Cliff Neighbourhood Plan and that would close on 15 August 2021.


142302 - Gallamore Lane, Middle Rasen pdf icon PDF 135 KB

Additional documents:


The Chairman introduced the first application of the evening, planning application number 142302, outline planning application for the demolition of a dwelling and associated outbuildings and to erect a retail food store building and a detached coffee shop drive thru building - access to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications, on land off Gallamore Lane Middle Rasen Market Rasen. With no updates from the Officer, the Chairman invited the registered speaker, Mr Keith Nutter, to address the Committee. Mr Nutter made the following statement.


“I am speaking today as the applicant and developer who will be working in partnership with national operators to deliver a high quality but sensitive development in Market and Middle Rasen. 


In terms of the proposal as a whole, I think it is fair to say that our community consultation has shown that the prospect of a discount foodstore and coffee drive-thru being developed in Market Rasen has been well received and widely supported - excluding Tesco that is!  For those who would like more choice and competition, then this can only be viewed as a good thing. 


It’s common knowledge that some people within the catchment of Market Rasen travel significant distances to undertake food shopping trips, given the limited choice on offer locally.  Granted, some of these trips may have been combined with trips to work but since the pandemic there has been a considerable shift in shopping patterns.  Grocery operators have continued to trade strongly despite the restrictions placed on the retail sector.  However, people are certainly traveling less and with increases in the number of people working from home, a greater amount of trips are being undertaken locally.  Therefore, if a better offer can be provided within the local catchment of Market and Middle Rasen then this can only be beneficial to the wider community. 


Yes there will be some trade drawn from existing supermarkets including the Tesco and the Co-op but not to a significant level.  More importantly, those people who live locally but currently shop elsewhere will be encouraged to shop in Market Rasen which will create more sustainable shopping patterns whilst encouraging them to rediscover other facilities within the area.  It is evident that larger centres (such as Lincoln) have been disproportionately impacted by Covid–related restrictions and, as a consequence, there is a real opportunity for Market Rasen’s local shops to be rediscovered. 


It’s understandable that Tesco raise concerns about a new development that might take some trade from their store in the future, but your officer is absolutely right when he concludes that there is no sound planning policy basis to support or justify Tesco’s objection.  It is not the role of the planning system to intervene in commercial competition - but rather to direct development towards sustainable locations which do not result in any adverse impacts. 


On this matter, we have undertaken extensive searches throughout Market Rasen and the application site is the best located site sequentially, that is suitable, available and deliverable.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.


142146 - Fosters Yard, Langworth pdf icon PDF 135 KB

Additional documents:


The second application of the evening was introduced, planning application number 142146 for the removal of all existing buildings to be replaced by 13 no. new rural enterprise units for business use (Class E(g)/B2/B8), at Fosters Yard, Station Road, Langworth, Lincoln. The Committee heard that additional comments had been received from Internal Drainage Board on Drainage Strategy, read aloud as follows:


“The watercourse is Sudbrooke Beck and at this location it is a board maintained watercourse so anything within 9m of the top of the bank requires consent from the board. As stated in the original comments the board normally maintains the watercourse from the opposite side but periodic access from this side may be required. The building closest to the watercourse should be set back to provide access. Ultimately responsibility for the stability of the bank is with the site owner and it is in their interest to provide access should they required to under remedial work. Consent will also be need for the outfall.


The drainage strategy is generally acceptable, but I would point out that water levels in Sudbrook Beck are subject to high water levels backing up from Barlings Eau so the outfall will be surcharges reducing discharge at times. The comment about ground raising is a common issue, if a plot is raised it potentially acts as a dam and prevents overland flow going where it naturally goes. So the effect can be ponding in the adjacent sites and at worst flooding. Also raising the ground can locally affect the water table which again could cause ponding or soggy ground. It is something that you should always be aware of. In this case I have not visited the site but I think it is already raised so it may not be an issue, but you will need to assess it.” 


The Officer noted that there was currently access to the Beck and it was not considered reasonable or relevant to the merits of the application to impose a setback requested. There was a separate consent procedure in place that the applicants would need to engage with in connection with discharge to the Beck and due to distance to the bank. It was also highlighted to Members that there was a proposed amendment to condition 2 in the report, as read aloud. In addition to these comments, further comments had been received from Langworth Group Parish Council on amendments stating that “LGPC remained in favour, as per the previous application”.


The Chairman noted there had been two statements submitted to be read aloud to the Committee. The Democratic Services Officer read aloud the following statement, on behalf of Mr Oliver Fytche-Taylor, agent for the applicant.


“Dear Chairman,


Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. We would like to send our apologies for not being present in person to deliver this statement to you.


This application site has been a location for continuous employment and industrial uses as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.


142598 - 3 Southmoor Road, Newton on Trent pdf icon PDF 453 KB

Additional documents:


NOTE:           Councillor J. Ellis stepped down from the Committee for the duration of this item and left the Council Chamber at 7.37pm


The Chairman introduced planning application number 142598, for proposed change of use from agricultural to B8 – storage, at 3 Southmoor Road, Newton On Trent, Lincoln. The Officer explained there were no updates to the application and presented the details of the application to the Committee. The Chairman stated there was one registered speaker, Mr George Machin, agent for the applicant. He invited Mr Machin to address the Committee and he made the following statement.


“Chair, thank you for the opportunity to speak on the application this evening.


The application has been recommended for approval by Planning Officers, subject to a number of conditions. These include that within 6 months, a scheme of landscaping is submitted detailing any proposed new planting. Also, in the interests of visual amenity, conditions are attached that would restrict the Storage of materials within the site to a maximum height of 2.5 metres, and also that there shall be no storage of any plant, machinery or materials or any vehicular parking within root protection areas of existing trees.


Not a single local resident has objected to this application.


The Parish Council simply request that all relevant paperwork in terms of any other permits or certificates are also put in place.


It is also worth highlighting that individual letters from businesses based locally who regularly use and employ the applicant, P&M Pavers, on jobs in the area have written into the Council to fully SUPPORT this application. All of these businesses are based in Central Lincolnshire and close to the application site. 


Extracts taken from these letters are as follows:


‘Just to confirm that we as a company work with P&M Pavers on a regular basis and because they utilize a local workforce, we encourage our customers to make the most of this when carrying out landscape alterations to their properties. They have all the necessary plant and a comprehensive experienced work force that deliver a high quality standard of workmanship.’


‘We are a local building company carrying out various construction works in the local area. We use P & M Pavers (Lincoln) Ltd for all plant and groundwork labour and materials supplies.’


We are a small civil engineering company which rely on local businesses for labour, plant and materials, we use P&M Pavers for most of the time as on a phone call we can hire in suitable labour and any plant we require, because their local they are very easy to access and their rates are very favourable’


In terms of relevant planning policy, significant weight must be given to the fact that the proposal accords with paragraph 80 of the National Planning Policy Framework in placing significant weight on the need to support economic growth and productivity, paragraph 82 in recognising the specific locational requirements of different sectors, and paragraph 83 which requires decisions to enable the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.


142542 - Scothern Rd, Nettleham pdf icon PDF 205 KB

Additional documents:


The next application of the evening was introduced, planning application number 142542, to erect 3no. dwellings on land off 72 Scothern Road, Nettleham, Lincoln. There were no updates from the Officer and Members were presented with details of the application. The Chairman stated there had been one statement submitted by Miss Emma Truelove, applicant, and he invited the Democratic Services Officer to read the statement aloud. The following statement was made.


 “Dear Chairman,


Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. We would like to send our apologies for not being present in person to deliver this statement to you.


The application site is within an area of land allocated housing in both the Nettleham Neighbourhood Plan (known as allocation B) and Central Lincolnshire Local Plan, where it is given the reference CL4661. 


The site is allocated in the Local Plan for an indicative capacity of 68 dwellings (and not 50 as stated in the objection from the Parish Council).  As such, the additional numbers proposed by this application represent a very minimal increase in overall capacity.


It is obviously worth noting that whist the figures quoted in the local plan serve as a useful guide, they are not prescriptive and nor should they be used as a barrier to growth.  Precise site capacity cannot reasonably be identified until the more advanced stages of planning when a site layout is considered.


As committee members will be aware, other developments that exceeded the ‘indicative capacity’ shown in the plan on allocated sites within the village have attracted similar concerns from the parish council, but those higher capacities were subsequently allowed on the basis of good planning and design.


The delivery of additional homes without compromising either site design or land-take should be welcomed, particularly in a popular village such as Nettleham where development.  Indeed, both the NPPF and the Local Plan advocate good design and the use of appropriate site densities to make best use of available land.


Paragraph 122 of the NPPF states that “Planning policies and decisions should support development that makes efficient use of land”.


In achieving well designed places paragraph 127 of the framework states that “Planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments…are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities)”.


This planning application would not result in demonstrable harm as a result of the minor uplift in overall housing numbers proposed by this planning application.  Nor would this development cause harm to the local environment or setting, nor create a development that is wholly out of character with the village.


Instead, as confirmed by the planning officer’s positive recommendation, the development would continue to comply with the development plan when read as a whole, and it does not trigger any material policy conflicts that would justify the refusal of planning permission.


Accordingly, we trust that the Planning Committee will follow the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.


142847 - Cobwebs, Middlefield Lane, Glentham pdf icon PDF 168 KB

Additional documents:


Members gave consideration to the final application of the evening, application number 142847 for conversion of existing dwelling into 2no. dwellings at Cobwebs, Middlefield Lane, Glentham, Market Rasen.


The Chairman stated there was one registered speaker for the application, Mr Mike Dee, and he invited him to address the Committee. Mr Dee made the following statement.


“Good evening members of the planning committee.


As the agent for the application on Middlefield Lane in Glentham, I am here today to speak in support of the proposal which has been presented to this evenings meeting with a recommendation of approval.


The original building consisted of 2 semi-detached symmetrical cottages. The previous occupier lived in one of the cottages and in 1992 decided to buy the other cottage also. The previous occupier then created a doorway opening at the ground floor level and effectively used both cottages as one dwelling from that point onwards. The opening at the ground floor level was the only modification made to allow the cottages to be used as one dwelling.


When viewing the property externally from Middlefield Lane, the building still appears to be 2 individual cottages as there are 2 front doors to each original cottage and a roof that is physically divided with ridge tiles.


Internally, the 2 original separate staircases remain in place which each lead to separate first floor areas that are still completely divided by the original party wall. The separate electrical supplies to each cottage also remain in place and from a conveyancing perspective each cottage has its own separate legal title.

Currently the existing building stands empty in an extremely poor state of repair and is unsuitable for occupation. This planning application seeks formal consent to re-instate the two cottages back into their original form which will be complemented by a complete refurbishment on each cottage to include new heating systems, wall and roof insulation, new external doors and windows and new kitchens and bathrooms.


The application has been recommended for approval by the planning officer and there have been no objections from local residents, the historic environment officer or the highways department. The parish council did raise concerns regarding parking however we have provided 2 off-street parking spaces, 1 per dwelling.


The application site is in an appropriate location under Policy LP2 and the proposal will provide additional benefits by restoring a heritage asset of local significance back into its original form of 2 cottages.


By approving this application, 2 completely refurbished cottages will be brought onto the market for occupation which forms a positive contribution when considering the under-supply of housing.


I therefore trust that the members of the planning committee can approve this application in line with the planning officer’s recommendation.”


With no further comment from the Officer, and with Members expressing support for the plan to revert to two dwellings, the Officer recommendation was proposed from the Chair, seconded, and on taking the vote, it was unanimously agreed that planning permission be GRANTED  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.


Determination of Appeals pdf icon PDF 208 KB

Additional documents:


The determination of appeals was NOTED.