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 of the meeting.

i)       Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 26 June 2019, previously circulated.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 June 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

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

There were no declarations of interests at this stage of the meeting.

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 Planning Manager provided the Planning Committee with an update to the following Neighbourhood Plans (NPs):

·         Willoughton NP was made on 1 July;

·         Glentworth NP had passed its examination, with a referendum to be held on September 5;

·         Both Spridlington and Sudbrooke NPs were under examination;

·         Bishop Norton NP was at the first draft stage and out for consultation until 7 October;

·         Hackthorn and Cold Hanworth have applied to do a joint plan and this was out for consultation.

Members considered a planning application for 1no. dwelling with detached garage at land to north of South Street North Kelsey Market Rasen LN7 6ET.  There were no further updates to the application from officers.

The first public speaker to the application was Richard Alderson from Brown and Co, the agent for the applicant.  He raised the following points during his speech:

·         A principal of planning law is that applications should be in accordance with the Development Plan;

·         The definition of an appropriate planning law depends on the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan (CLLP); LP2 of the CLLP categorises the way developments were rated for medium villages.  The policy also confirms that no sites were allocated except for Hemswell Cliff and Lea;

·         Policy LP4 (growth in villages) gives a sequential test for priority as follows:

o   Brownfield land or infill sites in appropriate locations, within the developed footprint of the settlement;

o   Brownfield sites at the edge of a settlement, in appropriate locations;

o   Greenfield sites at the edge of a settlement, in appropriate locations.

·         The definition of an ‘appropriate location is contained within LP2 of the CLLP, along with provision for clear community support;

·         The site was previously developed as a sand quarry.  The officer’s report suggested that the site in question was detached from the core settlement of North Kelsey.  We believe that the site was protected from open countryside by vegetation.  The archaeology response supported this view;

·         The officer report confirmed that there was no issue with visual impact;

·         The application met the stringent test of LP2 of the CLLP; it was necessary to consider the shape of the whole community.  Weight has been placed on LP2 of the CLLP, but nothing from the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF);

·         The officer considered there would be little impact on the neighbouring property, and the visual impact and design were considered acceptable;

·         There were no archaeological or highways concerns;

·         Drainage was controlled by condition;

·         The ecology report found no specific issues with vulnerable species;

·         In the absence of a conflict with the NPPF, North Kelsey was a well established community.  The application had received strong support from the Parish Council, and written support from residents.

The second public speaker was Jacqueline Duke, a local resident objecting to the application.  She raised the following points on behalf of herself, her husband and another local resident:

·         Nothing has changed following the last application in the area that was refused in January 2019;

·         Her property was the nearest to the lane involved in the application.  When moving into the house 28 years ago the sand quarry was still in use.  Subsequently, it was left to go wild until the applicants purchased the site;

·         The site had historically housed badgers and other wildlife; in the past planning applications had been turned down on this basis;

·         There were great crested newts in the area, with a colony living on Carr Road within half a mile of the site;

·         The sandpit started at the front of South  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

The appeals were noted.