Agenda item

Minutes:

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 Member commented that if the nearby Church were not a listed building, the application would have likely not been brought to the Committee's attention. In response to a query about the location, Members heard that the proposed building was to the South-West of the existing building.

 

Members also commented about the site's topography and the siting of the proposed building in respect of any proposed harm. In response to this aspect, the Legal Adviser stated that it was the legal test to engage whether the proposed building harmed the Church, not the existing buildings and whether the proposed building would cause its own harm.

 

Responding to these points, the Development Management Officer informed Members that with listed buildings, there was a statutory duty to preserve and enhance, which led to advice about the guidance in testing the harm made by development. Members heard of two main policy focuses, which were substantial and less than substantial harm. Members heard that the harm territory required the guidance and whether the public benefits justified the harm.

 

The Legal Advisor reiterated that there was a legal test to engage in whether the proposed building harmed the Church and not the existing buildings. The Legal Advisor stated that Members needed to consider the proposal in whether it would cause its own harm.

 

There was also discussion on the potential harm that the building would cause. Several Members commented that the proposed usage of the site was unlikely to harm the area, as vehicle access was one way, and the site was seemingly in clean and tidy condition, with tarmacked segments.

 

With this in mind, it was proposed that permission be granted contrary to Officer’s recommendation. This proposal was seconded, with no other proposal on the table.

 

The Chairman took the vote, and by majority vote, it was agreed that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions as per published decision notice:

 

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 following drawings: AWS1 dated 22/03/2022, AWS2 dated 22/03/2022 and AWS 4 received 23/03/2022. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and in any other approved documents forming part of the application.

 

Reason: To ensure the development proceeds in accordance with the approved plans and to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

3. The materials used in the development shall match those stated on the application form and drawing No. AWS1 dated 22/03/2022.

 

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

Conditions which apply or relate to matters which are to be observed following completion of the development:

 

None.

 

Supporting documents: