Agenda item


The Chairman introduced the next item on the agenda, application number 142874, for an Outline planning application to erect up to 144no. dwellings – access to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications, on land to the north of Rudgard Avenue, Cherry Willingham.


The case officer provided an update to the Condition 9 in the report. Condition 9 needed amendment so that after development was commenced, it would need to include within 10m of the railway line. This has been agreed with Network Rail. This is to allow a start on site.


The new condition was to read: “9. Development shall not commence within 10m of the railway line until a construction methodology has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Authority. The construction methodology shall demonstrate consultation with the Asset Protection Project 2 Manager at Network Rail. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved construction methodology unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”


After a short presentation on the application, the Chairman advised that there were no registered public participants for the application, and invited comments from Members of the Committee.


Debate ensued, and Members brought up multiple points, which included access, the possible layout, and the principle of development, and the nature of outline applications. There was also deliberation over the error of the initial numbers for the site, and the density of the application, with one Member asserting that it was not of high density in many new development sites. It was also emphasised at multiple points that the application was only looking at the outline, with emphasis that there would be no dwellings built from the possible granting of the application.


In response to the numbers of dwellings proposed, the Development Management Team Manager explained that the housing numbers came from the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan, with the application being on an allocated site. There was an issue with the incorrect figure of 1.75 hectares, with an expectation that 75% of the site being used for dwellings, that the proposed figure was based on the area size being 5.17 hectares. The Officer explained that the plan was indicative, and that the approved local policies indicated that 40 dwellings was insufficient.


The Officer explained that the figure of 144 dwellings was up to that number, and that consideration would be given to the accommodating road space, layout and the open space. The Officer further elucidated that the Committee at this point should mainly consider the scale and reserved matters for the application, and whether the high number affects these issues, in addition to housing needs in the area. In a response to a later enquiry, Members heard that the actual number of dwellings might be reduced to factors around the site.


In response to a query on affordable housing, Members learnt from the Development Management Team Leader that the figures were advised by one of the West Lindsey District Council Housing Officers.  The figure of 25% overall, with a split for 60% affordable rented housing, and 15% on shared ownership, and 25% on first homes, was decided as the best way to split the monies.


In a later enquiry, the Development Management Team Manager explained that the indicative scale and layout had been considered with Lincolnshire County Council Highways, and has assessed that the proposed site could safely accommodate the number of dwellings. For vehicle access, Members learned that the access was an upgrade to the existing access point onto Rudgard Avenue, and was designed with the usage of ‘Manual for Streets’.


Regarding a similar enquiry about noise, mitigation was proposed and this had been reviewed by West Lindsey District Council’s Environmental Protection Officer.


Members also learnt from the Development Management Team Manager that the full application would not automatically return to the Committee, but would progress the same way that any other planning application would progress. In a similar explanation later in the debate, the Officer explained that access was not a reserved matter, and therefore was in consideration at this point in the process.


During the debate, several Members felt that having the ability to see the access of the proposed site would be beneficial to check the access for the large number of dwellings proposed, and to examine the scale of the proposed site. Even with this group, the proposed application was proposed and seconded to be granted. The Chairman took the vote to have a site visit first, as it was the last proposal that got the required proposing and seconding.


Having been proposed, and seconded and, on taking the vote, it was


RESOLVED that the application be deferred for decision at the next available meeting, in order for a site visit to be undertaken.


Supporting documents: