Agenda and minutes

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 27 April 2022.

A Member of Committee raised that his abstention on Planning Application 143957, Land adj Manor Cottage, Cliff Road, Saxby, Market Rasen, due to not being able to attend the site visit, was not recorded properly. In light of these comments the following amendment was proposed.

“Note:              Councillor D. Cotton requested that his abstention on the above vote be recorded in the minutes.”

On being put to the vote the amendment was unanimously supported and on that basis it was:

RESOLVED that the amended minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Wednesday, 27 April 2022 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.

Councillor I. Fleetwood declared, in relation to agenda item 6b, application number 144639, that he had known the applicant in a business capacity, having made a business transaction 30 years ago.

Councillor I. Fleetwood also declared, in relation to agenda item 6b, application number 144639, that prior to the previous application for the site, when making a visit nearby for a separate matter, he was given a short presentation of the site, and left without making comment.

Councillor I. Fleetwood declared that an email had been received in relation to agenda item 6a, application number 144526. It was stated this declaration was likely valid for all Members of the Committee. Councillors J. Milne, A. White, J. Rainsforth also stated they had received the same email.

Councillor D. Cotton declared a non-pecuniary personal interest, in relation to agenda item 6b, application number 144639. He was vicar in employment, and the application did have consideration of affecting the setting of the church.

Councillor C. Hill declared that though she was the Ward Member for Cherry Willingham, in relation to agenda item 6b, application number 144639, but would retain her seat as a Planning Committee Member.

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 from the Development Management Team Manager with the following updates regarding changes to national planning legislation proposed in the recently published Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill and some changes to the Neighbourhood Plans.

Regarding National Policy, the Officer stated the key changes in the Levelling Up Bill. These included multiple points.

The scope of local plans would now be limited to "locally specific" matters, with "issues that apply in most areas" to be covered by a new suite of national policies. These national policies will carry the same weight as the local plan.

"A new duty on decision makers to make planning decisions in accordance with the development plan and national development management policies unless material considerations strongly indicate otherwise". The document said that this was to "increase certainty in planning decisions".

Local Planning Authorities would be required to have a design code in place covering their entire area;

A new Infrastructure Levy would replace section 106 planning obligations and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) was to be replaced by a new system of Environmental Outcomes Reports

Local planning authorities would "have a new power to prepare 'supplementary plans'. These were policies for specific sites or groups of sites that needed to be prepared quickly (e.g. in response to a new regeneration opportunity), or to set out design codes for a specific site, area or across their whole area."

'Neighbourhood priorities statement', which was to provide communities with a "simpler and more accessible way to set out their key priorities and preferences for their local areas. Local authorities will need to take these into account, where relevant, when preparing their local plans for the areas concerned, enabling more communities to better engage in the local plan-making process".

The bill included a "placeholder for a substantive clause which will introduce a 'Street Votes' system that permits residents to propose development on their street and hold a vote on whether it should be given planning permission"

The bill would "make changes so that designated heritage assets, such as registered parks and gardens, World Heritage Sites, protected wreck sites, and registered battlefields, enjoy the same statutory protection in the planning system as listed buildings and conservation areas", and

Proposals that would ensure that planning enforcement worked effectively by extending the period for taking enforcement action to ten years in all cases; introducing enforcement warning notices; increasing fines associated with certain planning breaches; doubling fees for retrospective applications; extending the time period for temporary stop notices from 28 to 56 days; and giving the Planning Inspectorate the power to dismiss certain appeals where the appellant causes undue delay. The scope for appeals against enforcement notices would be tightened so that there was only one opportunity to obtain planning permission retrospectively.

The Officer then gave notice of the progress of the new Central Lincolnshire Local Plan, with the next meeting to be held on 6 June 2022, followed by comments received on the second  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Chairman introduced the first item of the meeting, planning application 144526, an Outline planning application for residential development of 109no. dwellings, with access to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications, at Land at Eastfield Lane, Welton, Lincoln, Lincolnshire.

The Officer stated that there was an update to the application. Following the publishing of the officer’s report the agent emailed to amend the location plan. The red line now aligns with proposed allocation 008A. This also amends the site area from 6.6ha to 5.93ha. The amended plan was also accompanied by a letter disputing the findings of the officer’s report and the level of weight given to the draft Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

They also stated that West Lindsey would now know the level of objection to the draft local plan. Consultations responses were being added to the system. A breakdown of final consultations would be published on the website, in the same way previous consultations had been This was likely to be uploaded by mid-June once all responses had been reviewed and redacted.

The Officer confirmed that there had been a number of objections received in connection with Policy S80 and more specifically related to site WL/WELT/008A, an initial count of how many related to the site indicated explicitly around 26, however this was to be confirmed and publicly available in June 2022.

In terms of how much weight was attributed to the Submission Draft Local Plan and specifically Policy S80 in relation to application 144526 was for the decision maker to determine.  The Officer, however, stated paragraph 48 of the NPPF did refer to the extent to which there were unresolved objections to relevant policies and the Council knew from an initial assessment that there were several objections.

The agent letter highlighted paragraph 49 and 50 of the NPPF, however these were addressed in the officer report. The letter further highlighted significant benefits to the scheme in s106 contributions. However, these were standard contributions to mitigate against the direct impact of the development. The letter and change in boundary did not change the officer recommendation to the application.

The Chairman then invited the first speaker, James Lambert, the agent for the application, to address the Committee. The speaker made the following statement.

After stating his disappointment with the recommendation, the speaker updated that the site plans were shared with Members of the Committee in the few days prior.

The speaker then stated that the Committee should afford greater weight to the new local plan, and had additional information submitted. He then asserted that the proposed application cleared policy 48 and 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which included the additional submitted information. The speaker specified that exceptional circumstances facilitated possible developments, and referenced development ongoing on a neighbouring site to the application.

The speaker concluded that the development would bring 109 dwellings, 27 of which were to be affordable, with road and footpath improvements. The speaker then detailed that the application would bring £70,000 for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Chairman introduced the next item of the meeting, planning application 144639, for construction of an agricultural storage building, at Church Farm, Church Lane, Stainton By Langworth, Lincoln, LN3 5BL.

Note:               Councillor I. Fleetwood declared that he was County Councillor for Bardney and Cherry Willingham but would remain in the Chair for the item.

The Officer informed the Members of the Committee that there were no updates to the report and gave a short presentation. The Chairman then invited the registered speaker, Andy Hey, the agent for the application, to address the Committee. The agent made the following statement.

The speaker stated that the application would have less than substantial harm to the Church and surrounding area. It was referenced that Church Farm was a working farm and that the proposed new building would not cause any further harm. The speaker stated that a previously proposed building that was larger was granted under permitted development that had more prominent views and questioned the logic behind the Officer's refusal recommendation.

The speaker held that the only views of the proposed building would be seen via Langworth Road and Scothern Lane, with no available views close from the Church. The speaker stressed that there were no viewing spots that would obscure the Church. The statement progressed to state that the proposed building would not last for a long time, unlike the Church. The speaker also asserted that the proposed building would be lower and sit at a lower height than the previously accepted building. The speaker then said that the view from the A158, which was one kilometre away, was hidden by the roadside hedge and questioned if the view did exist.

The speaker then progressed to talk about the statement of harm and stated that the statement of 'less than substantial harm' was unclear. The speaker then argued that the benefits of the farm for economic activity and a better storage facility outweighed the harm. The speaker concluded by repeating that less than substantial harm was involved, that a previously large building had been given prior approval, which was more intrusive, and invited Members to view the site.

The Chairman thanked the speaker for his statement and invited comments from the Officer. The Development Management Team Manager specified that the existing buildings would be built to a similar scale, with 7.7 metres to the ridge, and had a similar square metre edge to other buildings on the site. The Officer also reiterated that the Conservation was in the lower category of 'less than substantial harm', with this categorisation weighed up with the public benefits of a planning application. The Chairman then invited comments from Members of the Committee.

There was discussion on the comments of the nearby affected parties, and statutory agencies did not object to the proposed application. One Member brought that the Church did not oppose the proposed building, with another Member asserting that the Church would have used Church Farm as a sustainable way of provision. A separate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Chairman introduced the next application of the meeting, planning application 144395, for extensions and alterations to existing dwelling at Barnaby, 18 Rasen Road, Tealby, Market Rasen, LN8 3XL. The Officer informed Members that there was no update to the report and gave a short presentation on the application.

The Chairman then invited the first speaker, Kevin Coupland, the agent for the application, to address the Committee. The agent made the following statement.

Having been approached by the applicants, they described that they wanted to improve the existing dwelling and remove the current extension, changing the dwelling to be more sympathetic to the area and better use of the applicant's family. The speaker then described that the property's frontage was 30 metres and stressed that the application had gone through pre-application consideration to make it acceptable, which included collaboration with the Council with the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

The speaker then stated the positive effect of adjacent properties that had changed with other development similar to the proposed application. The speaker detailed that the plans for the proposed application had been changed to consider objectors' viewpoints. The speaker concluded that the replacement of a two-storey flat roof, and the change of rear extension, would improve the view of the nearby AONB, and the scheme had been reviewed and supported by the Council.

The Chairman thanked the speaker for his statement and invited the second speaker, Joanne Macbeth, an objector, to address the Committee. The objector made the following statement.

The speaker stated that she was a neighbour and also represented number 20. The speaker asserted the application had a significant uplift, going from 133 to 277 square metres in area. The proposed development would double the size of the property and extended close to the boundary of her property, with a comment that any space would be gone. The speaker stated that a 1.3 metre ridge increase would be a reduction of the light in the autumn and winter in her property.

The speaker then commented about the privacy screens and the roof terrace and stated that the proposed design was too small, referring to a refused balcony design on a nearby property. The speaker noted that the land gradients compounded the proposed design. The amenities detailed in LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan were in contravention if the proposed application was granted.

The speaker explained that the proposed development would lead to a loss of space for 16 and 18 Rasen Road, and had strong objections from the local Members. The speaker concluded her statement by referring to the local character of Tealby, expressing that the village had a unique beauty, with the Wolds necessitating special protection, and that the proposed development would impact and harm the village.

The Chairman thanked the speaker for her statement and then invited a response from the Planning Officer. The Officer stated that the application submitted was not the same as the pre-application submission and that the distance to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Chairman introduced the final application of the meeting, planning application 144620, for a lawful development certificate to convert bathroom to wet room including removal of airing cupboard and other internal alterations to a Listed Building, at 1 Maltings Court, Market Rasen, Lincolnshire, LN8 3AZ.

After a short presentation, and with no updates to the report, the Chairman stated that there were no registered speakers. The Chairman then invited comments from Members of the Committee.

There was wide approval that a change to a wet room was of no issue, and a comment was made that it would improve the living situation of the resident.

Having been proposed and seconded, the Chairman took the vote and it was unanimously agreed that the Certificate of Lawful Development be GRANTED.

As at 17 May 2022, there were no appeal determinations to be noted.

There were no appeal determinations for noting.