The Committee gave consideration to planning application number 140979 for a replacement garage workshop/MOT testing centre. The Senior Development Management Officer stated there had been 36 further representations of support from residents of the local area, the wider West Lindsey district and five had been from members of the public from outside of the district. The recommendation remained unchanged.

The Chairman stated there were two registered speakers and invited the Democratic and Civic Officer to read aloud the two statements.

Statement from South Kelsey Parish Council

“The Parish Council wishes to confirm its full support for the application.

The applicant has done everything to ensure the building will be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. The view of the church is not obscured by the garage but by the building known as the stores, now residential.

The building is not fit for a business to run in and many Health & Safety issues are compromised.

The village needs a garage, a good one, and should the application be turned down the applicant will have alternative but to look outside the area. This will be a loss for many residents of all ages, but more so for the elderly who rely on Iman Zidan to maintain their vehicles.”

Statement from Oliver Grundy, Agent for the Applicant

“This letter outlines comments in support of the above application, which are presented to the 22nd July 2020 Planning Committee for consideration.

It is evident that the planning application has been recommended for refusal on the basis of objections made by the Conservation Officer in relation to the impact of the proposed scheme upon the setting of neighbouring designated heritage assets. However, for reasons detailed within the submitted application portfolio and subsequent correspondence, it is not believed that the objections are substantive. In summary it is emphasised that:

• The existing garage is not realistically capable of economical repair and re-use. It is structurally unsound, clad in single skin corrugated steel, devoid of insulation and of dimensions that are incompatible with functional requirements such as inclusion of a modern MoT bay and compliance with health and safety regulations. The building is not therefore capable of sustaining its extant use and its removal is inevitable.

• Contrary to objections raised by the Conservation Officer, the proposed replacement garage workshop has been sensitively designed following analysis of the site’s surroundings. The form of the new garage will broadly reflect that of the original structure, though a lower roof height will now better reveal views of the neighbouring church obtained from Thornton Road. Contemporary features such as roller shutter doors will be concealed behind traditional timber doors (potentially re-using the originals) and the reception will feature a reclaimed brick front elevation. The corrugated steel elevations of the existing building will be echoed through use of profiled steel sheeting. The applicant is happy to match the original garage workshop’s colour scheme. The proposed replacement garage will provide all the benefits of modern steel portal framed construction, energy efficiency and sound insulation whilst maintaining a traditional appearance akin to that of the existing building. The Character and appearance of the street scene, including the setting of the neighbouring listed Bull Inn, will not significantly changed as a result of the development.

• Other planning policy considerations are material to this application. The proposal strongly adheres to the objective of promoting sustainable development. The granting of planning permission will provide significant local social, economic and environmental benefits by retaining a local business/employer within South Kelsey, preventing loss of a local service and putting derelict brownfield land back into beneficial use. It is emphasised that the proposal is strongly supported by the local community. Particularly during these troubled economic times, development such as this should be promoted.

The following comments have been expressed by the applicant/business owner Mr Zidan:

‘I am a young entrepreneur and started my own business 2012 as a car service & repair garage in South Kelsey. I have grown my business from then by supporting the local area and the community of South Kelsey, where I have lived most of my life. I am one of the last surviving businesses left in South Kelsey. Thanks to all my customers supporting my venture my business has grown and I have been able to become an employer.

I am now at the stage where I need a larger premises and to take on new employees. I started this business from nothing, just a converted old farm building with a dirt floor to the lovely little workshop it is now, sadly it's just too small for my growing business. I was lucky to be given the opportunity to purchase Balderson’s (the other car garage in South Kelsey). As the new owner, I wanted it to continue as a garage and provide services to the local area. The former owner has now retired and was happy to sell it to me to move my business into and maintain the heritage of a vehicle repair garage & MOT station on this site as its been established for over 100 years. If I can’t sustain the business with suitable premises in South Kelsey, I will be forced to find a way to recoup my investment such a developing the site with housing. I would have no choice but to move my business to alternative premises outside of the local area.

I have applied for planning permission to construct a new structure for the garage. Unfortunately, after investigation the existing dilapidated and outdated building is not in line with Health & safety regulations, making it an unsafe work environment. The current structure is a rotten wooden frame cobbled together with railway sleepers, random bits of timber and rope holding it together in places all wrapped in rotten tin sheeting. This leaves me with no option other than take it down and start again in order to provide an environment which is both safe for staff & customers and meets all current fire regulations.

After review, I have designed a garage that will meet current regulations for Safety, fire, Noise, security, MoT testing etc. I have gone to great lengths to retain the heritage of the building in its current form, utilising reclaimed bricks, retaining the wooden shutter doors to hide the new secure roller shutter doors, green cladding to mirror the cladding that is in place, a double apex roof with slate blue finish with the pitch being lowered to have no additional impact on current views or surroundings. This solution is much more expensive than a typical rectangular industrial unit.

Since becoming aware of the Conservation Officer’s objections, numerous members of the local community have approached me to express their support for the project. I am desperate to keep my business in South Kelsey and believe that this application is realistically the only way forward.’”

The Chairman invited further comment from the Officer who acknowledged the level of local support for the application but highlighted it was necessary to look at whether the proposal was appropriate or would have an impact on the surrounding area. The Officer additionally made it clear that the existing building between the site and the Church did not mean that the setting of the Listed Building Church was not affected. The Chairman invited comments from Committee Members.

There was considerable support for the application and the positive impact it would have for the local community. The importance of protecting heritage assets was acknowledged but Members felt the derelict state of the existing building negated the worth of protecting it. It was also felt that the impact on the surrounding area would be minimal. A Member of Committee proposed that the permission be granted. This proposal was seconded with further comments of support for the business and highlighting the potential loss to the community should it not be permitted.

The Officer read aloud a set of proposed conditions which were accepted by the proposer and seconder. The reasons for moving approval of the application were given as relevant to LP1, LP2, LP5, LP25, LP26 and LP17.

The Chairman confirmed that the printed recommendation from the Officer’s report had not been moved and therefore the vote was for the tabled proposal of granting permission. It was unanimously agreed that permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

NOTE:           The meeting adjourned at 8:34pm