Agenda and minutes

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

There was no public participation.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 14 August 2024, 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 two declarations on behalf of all Members of the Planning Committee. The first declaration was in relation to application number 00585, Baltic Mill (agenda item 6f), as the applicant was West Lindsey District Council. He confirmed that Members would hear the application with an open mind and in accordance with their training.

The second declaration was in relation to application 147738, land off Gallamore Lane, Market Rasen (agenda item 6a), in that all Members of the Committee had received an email from Tesco superstore. This would not impact their decision making process.

Councillor D. Dobbie made a personal declaration of interest regarding application number 00585, Baltic Mill, (agenda item 6f) in that he was a member of Gainsborough Town Council, a consultee for the application, however he confirmed he would hear the application with an open mind and address the matter as a Member of the Planning Committee.

The Chairman made a personal declaration regarding application number 148001, Glebe Farm, (agenda item 6e), in that he knew the applicant through other associations however had not discussed any personal matters and he would consider the application with an open mind.

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 regarding recent updates to local and national planning policy. He explained that the Government’s proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other changes to the planning system, were still under consultation which would run until 11.45pm on 24 September 2024. An all Member workshop had been arranged for 18 September, in order that officers could capture the views of Members when responding to the consultation.

With regard to CL Design Code consultation, it was explained that the preparation of an authority wide design code was a new national requirement, brought into force through the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023. All local planning authorities were required to produce a design code for their area to cover design issues commonly found across the whole authority area. The Central Lincolnshire authorities were preparing a design code which would cover the entire administrative areas of the City of Lincoln, North Kesteven and West Lindsey. There would be three rounds of consultation as the Design Code was prepared. Consultation One was the first stage of public consultation and started on 10 September 2024. It would run for six weeks, closing on Tuesday 22 October. The consultation comprised two surveys: Survey 1: Tell us about your places! was a short survey asking what people thought was special about where they lived or worked in Central Lincolnshire, and what they thought worked well in terms of the design of buildings, streets and spaces. Survey 2: Design Code Consultation1 asked more detailed questions about the content of the Design Code. It focused on key aspects of the Code such as vision, design principles and selection of area types. The consultation could be viewed at: Design Code | Central Lincolnshire Planning Hub (arcgis.com)

The Committee gave consideration to the first application of the evening, number 147738, seeking permission to demolish all buildings on site and erect a Class E food store and a Class E(b) coffee shop drive-thru together with access, car parking, servicing, landscaping and associated works, on land off Gallamore Lane, Middle Rasen. The Officer confirmed that pre-commencement conditions had been accepted and provided the Committee with a short presentation of the application.

The Chairman stated there were three registered speakers, and invited the first, Mr Keith Nutter, Applicant, to address the Committee.

Mr Nutter stated that through a public consultation exercise, 91% of over 400 responses had been in support of the proposal. Objections had been that the application was speculative, however, there was now a defined scheme being presented for approval. He noted that it was common for objectors to be more vocal than those expressing support, and stated it was rare for the level of support given for the proposal to be seen. He explained that the proposal could only be beneficial to the local area, creating more jobs and more sustainable options for local residents, rather than them having to travel further afield to similar food stores. In seeking the support of the Committee, Mr Nutter concluded that the people of Market Rasen had long sought to have such facilities in their area, and the proposal would fulfil that need.

The Chairman thanked Mr Nutter for his comments and explained that the second speaker, Mr Matthew Horsefield, had been unable to attend however had submitted a statement to be read on his behalf. The following statement was read aloud.

“My Name is Matthew Horsefield. I am the owner of The Advocate Arms and The Heneage Arms Businesses. I have been running the two myself for the past 10 months but been back in Market Rasen for the past 2 years. I was originally at The Advocate Arms back 12 years ago when Market Rasen was a very different place. And so to the point. The plans to build an Aldi and a Coffee shop which i believe is to be a Starbucks concerns me greatly. I do agree that another supermarket may bring needed competition to Tesco however will also impact the Highstreet which is already greatly suffering. The footfall is nothing in comparison to what it was in the past. The Highstreet looks tired and uncared for. So why would we then look at development on the outside of the main street? Even if this is from a private developer. 

The Building of the Aldi and Starbucks will only mean that people will shop and drink there and park for free and never touch the high street which already has plenty of coffee shops and food retailers that offer all that is being suggested. So why do we need more of things we already have! But allow free parking at Aldi but pay and display in Market Rasen?!?! I appreciate that Tesco don't charge for parking  ...  view the full minutes text for item 143.

The Committee heard from the Development Management Team Leader regarding planning application number 00420, seeking permission for the construction of a specialist 65-bedroom dementia care home (Use Class C2) together with associated car and cycle parking, structural landscaping and amenity space provision, being a variation of conditions 3 and 6 of planning permission 145433 granted 10 February 2023, to allow shorter footpath link to serve the approved care home, on land to the North of 40 Lodge Lane, Nettleham. It was explained that further correspondence had been received from the agents for the applicant, stating that the provision of a footpath was not included in the original plans and there was no requirement for connectivity from the care home to the rugby club. The Officer also noted that the speed limit for a section of road detailed in the report was 40mph not 60mph as stated in the report. Additionally, he highlighted to Members that the only aspect of the application under consideration was the variation of the two stated conditions, numbers three and six.

Following a short presentation from the Officer, the Chairman invited the only registered speaker, Councillor Angela White, Nettleham Parish Council, to address the Committee.

Councillor White stated the objections of the Parish Council to the removal of the condition. She highlighted the importance of a footpath, with the road in questions being unsafe for pedestrians. She stated the lack of streetlighting, the liability of the road to flooding, meaning pedestrians walked in the road to avoid large puddles, and the current use of the road by residents and visitors to the area as being proof that a footpath was very much needed. She stated that by her measurements, the length of required pathway in question was less than 100m, with the given distance of 226m being the total length including existing footpaths. Having provided photographs to be shown to Committee Members, Councillor White noted the proximity of the entrance to a bridleway, which was frequently used by walkers, as well as demonstrating the length of the unpathed section of road. She requested that the Committee support local residents and retain the requirement for the footpath to be made.

The Chairman thanked Councillor White and invited a response from Officers. It was highlighted that there would be a pavement from the care home into the village, providing a safe route for care home staff, residents and visitors, and Members were reminded of the tests for appropriateness of conditions.

On inviting comments from Committee Members, there was general understanding of the concerns from the Parish Council and residents. Members requested to be shown the photographs of the area again, seeking to confirm the location of the footpath and how it would interact with the development. A Member of the Committee highlighted the specific objections from the Highways Agency, noting that the Committee had a duty to take professional opinions into account. On that basis, it was proposed that the variation to conditions be refused.

The Development Management  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

The Committee considered the third application of the evening, that being application number 00360, for the erection of 1no. dwelling with associated access on land at 2 School Lane, Grayingham. With no updates from the Officer, there was a short presentation in which it was noted that the application was before the Committee as Grayingham Parish Meeting referred to the development, in cumulation with the dwelling (147469) previously approved to the east, and would now constitute a 'multiple' infill development and would not meet with Policy S1. It was the Officer’s opinion that it was a single infill development, being sited in between the host dwelling and the dwelling which was now substantially constructed, and would meet with the definition of an infill within the glossary of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

The Chairman noted there were three registered speakers, the first being Mr Geoff Boothby, representative of the Grayingham Parish Meeting. Unfortunately Mr Boothby had not been able to attend and so had been permitted to submit a written statement. The following statement was read aloud on his behalf.

“On behalf of Grayingham Parish Meeting, I would like to present the following comments for this committee to consider while determining the Application.

At a parish meeting held to discuss this application, about 50% of the homes in Grayingham were represented at that meeting or tended apologies sending their comments to the parish for submission, all comments received were against granting permission for this second dwelling based on the following:

Impact on the character of Grayingham; Planning policy defines Grayingham as a settlement not listed elsewhere in this policy and goes on to state ‘…of such hamlets, development will be limited to single dwelling infill’. Within the last seven months a ‘single infill Dwelling’ on Land, also associated with No.2 School Lane was granted permission, it is currently under construction. We believe that this dwelling should be taken into account when determining this new application. In our opinion, the developer has exploited the single infill policy by submitting this second application to achieve what is becoming a ‘multiple infill’ development. This is creating a cramming effect, not in keeping with the surroundings. It will significantly change the rural open feel of School Lane, creating a character more like an urban development in what is a rural settlement in the open countryside. It is disappointing the developer didn’t have a more sympathetic approach, involving the community of their intensions, up front, as this area of land was always considered to attract maybe one or two suitably spaced dwelling in the future.

Grayingham relies on the NPPF & Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 Policies to provide the controls on development in these settlements; These policies should ensure the characters of small rural settlements are retained. That character being the very reason many residents came & wished to continue living here.

Grayingham is not considered a sustainable location for further new developments. There is very little work within the Parish & a lack of facilities to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 145.

The Committee considered planning application number 148165, seeking permission to erect 2no. dwellings on land adjacent to Grange Farm, Sandy Lane, Tealby. There were no updates from the Officer however it was noted that a recommended condition had been missed regarding dropped kerbs. Following a presentation of the application, the Chairman invited the registered speaker, Mr Liam Riggall, Agent for the Applicant, to address the Committee.

Mr Riggall thanked the Committee for their time and stated that he found the Officer’s report to be well-considered. He provided a brief summary of the application, highlighting that the proposal for the new dwellings enabled a much improved layout and would be far more energy efficient than simply attempting to convert the existing building. He stated that the removal of the existing building, with the replacement of new, would be far more in keeping with the aesthetics of the area, providing clear betterment and enhancement of the site. He highlighted that the development which would be possible under the existing Class Q permission would not provide the same level of betterment, nor abide by the newly updated policies, in the way the application under consideration would be able to. He again thanked the Committee and requested that they support the Officer recommendation to grant approval.

The Chairman thanked Mr Riggall for his time, and with no further comments from the Officer, invited Members of the Committee to speak.

On the basis of what was considered to be an obvious betterment of the site, when compared with the plans under Class Q provision, Members were content with the proposals. Having been moved, seconded and voted upon it was agreed that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions stating the time by which the development must be commenced:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To conform with Section 91 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

Conditions which apply or require matters to be agreed before the development commenced:

2. Prior to the commencement of the development, a 30-year Biodiversity Net Gain Management and Maintenance Plan & Landscape Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include the following details:

·         Details of the size, species, planting arrangement and position of all trees, hedgerows and other vegetation to be planted in accordance with the details in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment for ‘Land off Sandy Lane, Tealby’ (KJ Ecology Ltd June 2024) and Drawing No. LDC4041-201B dated 09/08/2024)

·         Details of boundary treatments (including boundaries within the site) and hardstanding.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To ensure that the biodiversity net gain measures are maintained for a 30-year period and a landscaping scheme is implemented to enhance the development in accordance with the NPPF and Policies S53, S60 and S61 of the Central Lincolnshire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 146.

The Committee considered the next application, number 148001, seeking permission for the conversion of existing barn building to 1no. dwelling including erection of extension and new garage, boundary features and access gates, at Glebe Farm Barn, Fen Road, Owmby by Spital, Market Rasen. There were no updates from the Officer. During the course of the presentation Members heard that the barn was considered to be a non-designated heritage asset as it was listed on the Lincolnshire HER, and dated back to the mid-19^th century. The proposal went beyond the ‘minimal alterations’ requirement of Part A, criteria b of Policy S5 of the Central Lincolnshire local Plan, however significant weight was given to the fact that the conversion would bring back into use a non- designated heritage asset as well as securing its long-term use.

Note:              Councillor D. Dobbie returned to the meeting at 7:55pm

With no speakers registered, the Chairman invited comments. There was overall support for proposal, with Members noting the design and approach had been consulted on, with the proposed design being preferred over previous options.

Having been moved, seconded and voted upon, it was agreed that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions stating the time by which the development must be commenced:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To conform with Section 91 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

Conditions which apply or require matters to be agreed before the development commenced:

None.

Conditions which apply or are to be observed during the course of the development:

2.With the exception of the detailed matters referred to by the conditions of this consent, the development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details as shown on the approved plans and any other document forming part of the application:

·         OMS/01 Site Location Plan

·         OMB_02 Rev B Proposed Floor Plans

·         OMB_03 Rev A Proposed Block Plan

·         OMB_04 Rev B Proposed Elevations

Reason: To ensure the development proceeds in accordance with the approved plans

3. No development, other than to foundations level on the proposed extension shall take place until details and samples (where stated) of the following materials have been made available on site for inspection and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The proposed development shall only proceed in accordance with the approved materials.

·         Details of the reclaimed Brickwork, fencing and gates to be used in the boundary treatments; Page 140

·         Specifications of Roof Tiles;

·         All new external cladding– Samples to be made available on site for inspection;

·         Specifications of all new windows (including roof lights), doors (including garage door), glazing and joinery details at a scale of 1:20, including colour and finish;

·         Rainwater goods.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the materials used are appropriate in this sensitive setting in accordance with Policies S53 and S57 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 147.

The Committee gave consideration to the final application of the evening, application number 00585, seeking approval for the demolition of the remaining Baltic Mill wall on Baltic Mill Land, Bridge Street, Gainsborough. It was explained that since the report was published, a consultation response had been received from the Environment Agency. Whilst they had no objections to the application, they had advised that the applicant would require a Flood Risk Activity Permit due to the proximity of the site in relation to the River Trent. In the event permission be granted, an informative advising the applicant on how to obtain a permit would be added to the decision notice. Additionally, a ‘no objection’ response had been received from Gainsborough Town Council. The Officer summarised that the application proposed to demolish the remaining south flank wall of Baltic Mill. Structural issues with the wall had come to light since the granting of the landscaping scheme, meaning that the proposed landscaping could affect the stability of the wall. Members received a short presentation on the application.

With no registered speakers, the Chairman thanked the Officer and invited comments from Members. Councillor D. Dobbie reiterated his declaration from earlier in the meeting and stated that, on the basis of the application as presented to the Committee, the proposal was entirely reasonable.

Having been moved and seconded, the Chairman took the vote and it was unanimously

RESOLVED that approval to GRANT planning permission (subject to conditions) be delegated back to officers to issue a decision once the re-consultation period on changes to the site location / red line ownership plan had expired.

With no comments, questions or requirement for a vote, the determination of appeals report was NOTED.