Agenda item

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 local NHS provisions, and £395,000 for education provisions. He finished his statement which asserted the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan evidence and that it was a sustainable location.

The Chairman thanked the speaker for his statement, and invited the registered objector, Chris Thomas, to address the Committee. The speaker made the following statement.

The speaker stated that he represented 120 people from around 70 dwellings in the local area. The statement progressed to say that the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan policy 17 rejected the provision on the site, and that it was not in the Neighbourhood Plan.

The speaker stated that there was enough provisions and planning applications in the current Central Lincolnshire Local Plan to cover the village for ten years, and referenced LP2 and LP3 in this section as the main factors for this application being not needed. The speaker then detailed that the application would not have a sustainability aspect. It would intrude into the countryside, have to be dependent on cars that would increase road traffic, and not improve biodiversity, as the gardens would cut into wildlife.

The speaker then proceeded to state the increased pressure on local services that would come from the proposed application if it was to be granted, that included a stretch on Welton’s local services, including primary school allocations, General Practitioners and the usage of the roads in the area. The speaker stated that the site access would need a 90-degree bend for visibility, and that Eastfield Lane would need to be widened, with accidents occurring regularly. The speaker concluded that the proposed application would conflict with the character of the local Ryland area, and extended and would overload the village’s local amenities.

The Chairman thanked the speaker for his statement, and invited the first Local Ward Member, Councillor Mrs Diana Rodgers, to address the Committee. She made the following statement.

Councillor Mrs Rodgers stated this application had been subjected to much commentary, and commended the Case Officer for a balanced and excellent report. She then referenced that the 2017 Central Lincolnshire Local Plan did not mention the site, and that this site was rejected for the current Local Plan in the evidence report in April 2016. Councillor Mrs Rodgers commented that the proposed application was not a logical extension of the village, and had concerns about significant access issues. She then stated that the proposed development would complicate road issues along with better-suited existing sites. The statement then noted that 300 dwellings were already in building, or had approval, with the figures imposed above the decision of Welton.

The speaker then referred to Welton and Dunholme’s size, and that recent developments had ignored the parish boundary between them. The statement concluded with a reference to over-subscribed local surgeries. She finished to say that any significant development should not be granted until the public infrastructure caught up with the current situation in the ward.

The Chairman thanked Councillor Mrs Rodgers for her statement, and invited the second Local Ward Member, Councillor Steve England, to address the Committee. He made the following statement.

Councillor England endorsed Councillor Mrs Rodgers’ comments, the Officer’s report, and stated that the report considered every aspect of the proposed development. He expressed concerns about the amended maps of the application, and noted that this implied notion from the agent and applicant of not being told of the outcome of the application was unbelievable. He was concerned over changes in the middle of the process with the evidence presented by the applicant. He referenced the strength of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan policies with the Officer’s decision, and that a Planning Inspector could have thrown out the potential area in the future. He concluded his statement by stating that he endorsed the residents, colleagues and the Council’s comments that advocated for refusal of the application.

The Chairman thanked Councillor England for his statement, and invited a response from the planning officers. The Development Management Team Manager stated that in response to the applicant’s concerns of not being told of the officer’s recommendation, all relevant parties found out at the same time when the report was published. The Officer did inform Members that the applicant was advised in writing that the application was to be deemed contrary to the current Central Lincolnshire Local Plan and gave them the opportunity if they wished to withdraw the application.

The Officer advised that the NPPF “presumption in favour” was not engaged and also stressed that in the exceptional cases now referred to by the developer in regard to LP2, this was for the decision-maker but that he would advise that he did not consider these to be “exceptional” with a number of matters such as the financial contributions and affordable housing being a requirement in order to meet planning policy, and are expected for such a development.

The Officer concluded his remarks to state that the emerging plan was not in statute, and that the upcoming Central Lincolnshire Local Plan was not considered to outweigh the existing policies in the statutory development plan. The Chairman then invited comments from Members of the Committee.

Debate occurred, with Members stating that the proposed site was contrary to the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan allocation, and other planning policies. One Member referred to the ongoing process of the future Central Lincolnshire Local Plan, and stated the current one was ‘water-tight’.

There were also raised concerns about the provisions for health and education with the proposed application. There was not enough capacity in the village and nearby area to support this development.

Having been moved and seconded, the Chairman took the vote and, it was unanimously agreed that planning permission, as detailed in the Officer’s recommendation, be REFUSED.