Agenda item

The first application before the Committee was item 6(a), application number 142460, seeking approval of reserved matters for 43 dwellings, considering only the outstanding matters of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, following the granting of outline permission on 19 December, 2017 on land west of North Moor Road, Scotter.  The application had been referred to the Committee following the receipt of third party objections, including from the Local Ward Member and Scotter Parish Council.

 

The application had previously been considered by the Committee on 31 May 2023 when it had been resolved that there should be a site visit prior to determination of the application.  The site visit took place on 15 June and had taken in the views of the site from North Moor Road and from within the site.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report and gave an update.  Since the report had been published, two further representations had been received.  The first was from Scotter Parish Council along the following lines:-

 

The Parish Council had concerns over the proposed footpath that linked the development to the centre of Scotter.  Due to the third party ownership of the footpath, it could not run the full length of North Moor Road on the same side as the development.  Therefore, the Parish Council contended that the elderly and those with young families in particular would have to cross the busy North Moor Road twice, which would deter them from visiting facilities in Scotter.  Whilst appreciating that third party ownership was not within the control of the Planning Authority or the developer, the Parish Council was of the view that further investigations should be undertaken to find a satisfactory solution such as the provision of a Zebra Crossing or Pelican Crossing.

 

The second representation had been submitted by a resident of “Applegarth”, Messingham Road.  This was similar to the statement to be read out by the Democratic Services Officer.

 

Reference was made during the Planning Officer’s presentation to a revised drainage plan submitted by the applicant.  Reference was also made to the proposed ridge heights.

 

Having received the Planning Officer’s presentation, the Vice-Chairman welcomed the agent for the applicant, Mr Chris Dawkins, who addressed the Committee along the following lines:-

 

“Thank you and good evening everyone.

 

At the previous Committee meeting concerns were raised regarding the height of the 3 bedroom bungalow at Plot 43 and its potential impact on the neighbouring property known as “The Rustlings”.

 

Since then, a site visit has been carried out and we have submitted an additional site section drawing showing the relationship of the proposed bungalow and the existing property which you have just seen as part of the presentation.

 

I would like to reiterate some of the key points illustrated by that drawing, which is that the ridge of the proposed bungalow is 0.88 metres lower than the ridge of the existing property, “The Rustlings”.  The eaves of the proposed property are 0.51 metres lower than the eaves of “The Rustlings” and the proposed properties are 89 square metres smaller in footprint than “The Rustlings”, which is a significant difference.  And the other adjacent properties, are of similar height and proportions to “The Rustlings”, so it is therefore quite clear that the proposed bungalow is smaller in all regards than the existing neighbouring properties and entirely in keeping with the scale, form and massing of properties in the area.

 

On this basis, we do not think that it is reasonable to call the proposal excessive in scale given the fact that it is substantially smaller than all of the existing adjacent properties.  We also believe that the proposal clearly demonstrates that there will not be any significant impact on the amenity of the existing properties and that good separation distances have been achieved.

 

I would also just like to reiterate that we have already lowered the roof of a property by about half a metre to accommodate the neighbour's request, and we have achieved that by lowering the roof pitch to 30 degrees, which is lower than an average roof pitch for this type of property.  To lower it any further would compromise the aesthetics of the property and result in a squat and unattractive appearance.

 

The roof pitch again of “The Rustlings” is around 41 degrees which is significantly steeper than the proposed bungalow.

 

I would also just like to draw attention to some previous comments from the neighbour suggesting that his view of the field may be lost due to the proposed development.  However as I am sure you are all aware that is not a planning policy matter or a valid reason for refusal as there is no protection of views over privately owned fields in this instance.

 

In summary, we have designed the proposed plots in accordance with urban design good practice, and we have considered the amenity of the existing residents at all stages of the design development.  During the planning process we have made further compromises to the design to accommodate the feedback from the neighbours.  We have demonstrated that our proposals are in keeping with the scale form and the massing of the neighbouring properties and have no impact on their amenity.  On that basis I hope that the Committee will consider approval of the application.  Thank you”.

 

The Vice-Chairman thanked Mr Dawkins for his contribution and then invited Mr Russ Murray to address the Committee.  Mr Murray commented along the following lines:-

 

“Good evening I am Russ Murray, of “The Rustlings”, Messingham Road, Scotter.

 

Because of my earlier statement it was agreed to have a site visit.  The fact that the site visit was arranged without informing Scotter Parish Council or any of the residents, I believe it was a one-sided meeting. You did not want to hear about the facts, related to and relevant to the site and you decided not to invite anyone and obtain any factual information or witnesses. What was the actual point?  I just do not understand what you are frightened of. You are public servants and you fail to invite the public. You made us feel irrelevant. We do not live in China or Russia.

 

Steamrollers come to mind.  If things were simple and easily resolvable, why did you not ease our minds at that meeting and take all this anxiety and stress away.  I just find it unbelievable.

 

Two miles away from Scotter in the next village, Messingham a far larger development has been held up because of concerns with a rainwater issue.  Permission will not be approved until it has been resolved.  What a difference between the two authorities - one with rainwater one with sewerage – it is not right, unfair and unbelievable.  It was stated at the last planning meeting that it was only hedge and environment issues that needed to be resolved.  However, surely sewerage is a part of the environment.

 

I question why the planners approved the development without a sewerage scheme, vetted and approved by the relevant water authority when there was common knowledge of the sewerage problems. “Coach and horses” comes to mind!

 

Building Control would not pass the building of one dwelling without full approval of important calculations i.e. roof structure, insulation, drainage, etc and you will pass a development without an approved sewerage system for the site and any future developments.

 

With the increase in traffic speed in North Moor Road and with access to the motorway this is going to be even greater, and we have to take that into account.  I would suggest a small circle similar to the one at Messingham at the junction with Holme Lane.

 

Could the access to the north end of the site be changed to slow down the traffic.  Traffic is only going to get greater over this road with access to the M180.  Could we please consider this and ensure there are no more serious accidents.  I just thought that this would be a sensible move for the benefit of everyone.

 

In conclusion, we should think about the future.  I thought the planners would have a duty to care more about the existing residents, and yet here we have approval of a site in a future flood risk area.  The water tables are rising all over the world and there are sites in the village well above it.  Foresight and logic comes to mind.  The site access on the road has safety issues and the development has inadequate sewerage arrangements.  I would respectfully ask the Committee to defer approval until the receipt of a full and complete report with regard to the surface water run-off and the foul sewers and road safety.

 

My neighbour is still awaiting a reply to a letter sent on the 26th of June with a picture of the outfall in the garden.  The main drain runs through their land.  A large timber building on their land was taken down the river, which again shows future problems with the water table.  Thank you”.

 

The Vice-Chairman thanked Mr Murray for his contribution and invited the next speaker to address the Committee, Councillor Karen Carless, one of the District Ward Members for Scotter, who commented along the following lines:-

 

“Good evening Councillors and attendees. Firstly, can I thank Council for this opportunity to represent and speak on behalf of the residents in Scotter Ward. There may be references within my speech heard before by the Committee, but I feel the need to reflect on them again because of their importance.

 

The residents of Scotter Ward have brought to my attention as a serving District Councillor of their ward, a number of issues. There are ongoing issues and concerns regarding the road safety aspects of North Moor Road, Messingham, Road and the proposed entrances to the new housing development site. My prepared statement is as follows:

 

I visited the Ward in question on the 12th of July 2023 at 2.35 p.m. alongside two Scotter residents.  They brought to my attention the severity of their concerns.   May I also add these are not just concerns of the residents already living at this location, but also for the residents who may come to live on the new development. There are a few key points of consideration and interest that I would like to put forward.

 

There are no clear footpaths available on the side of North Moor Road and where the proposed site entrance is to be established. It cannot be presumed that any resident who may come to reside on the proposed new housing development site will have access to a mode of transport and therefore, would likely use walking as their main mode of travel.  Consideration is needed regarding the age and mobility issues of any resident who may come to reside on the proposed new housing development and their access to safe passage within Scotter Ward.

 

Vehicles are legally allowed at present to park on either side of North Moor Road. I feel that this is a major safety issue.  I witnessed yesterday a parked Transit van on North Moor Road creating a blind spot.  Further consideration must be given to North Moor Road as it hosts 24/7 a diverse range of vehicles of all sizes and weight.

 

Whilst I can appreciate North Moor Road has stipulations in place for a 30 miles an hour, speed restriction zone, North Moor Road junctions with another major road through Scotter, that of Messingham Road.  It can be argued, that there are peak and quiet flows of traffic on the said roads, but I have witnessed first-hand a vehicle at 2.45 p.m. yesterday, exceeding the speed limit.

 

I therefore conclude that this is still a priority issue of concern for the residents who seek only transparency and clarity around this road safety issue and this is why I have brought this matter to tonight’s meeting.  Can the residents be assured that either a viable footpath, alternative, safe crossings or any other viable option is delivered so that North Moor Road allows safe passage to all its residents to access all of Scotter’s roads and amenities? Thank you”.

 

The Vice-Chairman thanked Councillor Carless for her contribution and invited the Planning Officers to comment on any of the views expressed.  The Planning Officer reminded the Committee that permission had already been granted for the development.  This was an allocated site within the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan.  The only matters for consideration this evening were appearance, layout, landscaping and scale.  The Highway issues (access) had been considered and approved by the local Highway Authority and the drainage issues (both foul and surface water) had been through the statutory processes and the scheme submitted for the development had been accepted. 

 

The Vice-Chairman then duly opened the item up for debate by the Committee.

 

Concerns were still expressed regarding the suitability of the drainage arrangements and the highways safety aspects.  It was felt that the site visit had been helpful to Members of the Committee in having an overview of the site and the possible impacts of the highway and drainage arrangements.  A number of Members were unconvinced that these matters had been addressed satisfactorily.

 

The Committee’s Legal Advisor reminded Members that there were two types of planning permission - outline permission establishing the principle of the development, which had previously been agreed, and thereafter subject to detailed approval relating to appearance, landscape and scale of the development – the subject of this evening’s discussion.  Condition 3 actually required a footpath scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Council, so whilst appreciating the speakers’ and some Members’ concerns, those details would come forward in due course and be dealt with in liaison with the Local Highway Authority.  With regard to drainage matters, these had been addressed as a condition on the outline permission.  The scheme had been shaped in accordance with the requirements of the water authorities and Members were advised that a satisfactory scheme had been approved.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, the Vice-Chairman put the application to the vote, and it was agreed by a majority vote that permission should be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

 

Conditions stating the time by which the development must be commenced:

 

See Outline Permission 134677

 

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:

 

1.    With the exception of the detailed matters referred to by the conditions of this consent, the development hereby approved must be carried out in accordance with the following proposed drawings:

 

·       12062 10001 Rev P18 dated May 2023 – Site and Landscaping Plan

·       12062 10005 Rev P7 dated May 2023 – External Materials Plan

·       12062 10007 Rev P7 dated May 2023 – Roof Tiling and Road Surfacing Plan

·       12062 39200 Rev P5 dated 3rd May 2023 – Drainage Plan

 

Elevation and Floor Plans (unless stated all dated September 2018)

• 10400 Rev P2 dated July 2021 – Warwick Floor Plans (3B5P)
• 10600 Rev P3 dated July 2021 – Warwick Option A Elevation Plans (3B5P)
• 10601 Rev P4 dated July 2021 – Warwick Option C Elevation Plans (3B5P)
• 10401 Rev P2 dated September 2020 - Mawbray Floor Plans (3B6P)
• 10407 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Mawbray Floor Plans (Handed) (3B6P)
• 10615 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Mawbray Option A Elevation Plans (3B6P)
• 10616 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Mawbray Option B Elevation Plans (3B5P)
• 10402 Rev P3 dated October 2020 – Grasmere Floor Plans (3B6P)
• 10604 Rev P3 dated July 2021 – Grasmere Option A Elevation Plans (3B6P)
• 10612 Rev P3 dated July 2021 – Grasmere Option C Elevation Plans (3B6P)
• 10410 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Coniston Floor Plans (Handed) (4B7P)
• 10403 Rev P4 dated October 2020 – Coniston Floor Plans (4B7P)
• 10621 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Coniston Option A Elevation Plans (4B7P)
• 10622 Rev P1 dated April 2021 – Coniston Option B Elevation Plans (4B7P)
• 10404 Rev P2 dated September 2020 – Harrington Floor Plans (4B8P)
• 10606 Rev P2 dated September 2020 – Harrington Option A Elevation Plans (4B8P)
• 10607 Rev P3 dated October 2020 – Harrington Option C Elevation Plans (4B8P)
• 10405 Rev P4 dated October 2020 – Harrington Plus Floor Plans (5B10P)
• 10609 Rev P4 dated October 2020 – Harrington Plus Option C Elevation Plans (5B10P)
• 10415 Rev P1 dated March 2023 – Buttermere Floor Plans (2B4P)
• 10630 Rev P1 dated March 2023 – Buttermere Option A Elevation Plans (2B4P)
• 10631 Rev P1 dated March 2023 – Buttermere Option C Elevation Plans (2B4P)

 

The works must 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, local policy S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2012-2036 and policy H3, D5 and T9 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

2.    No development above ground level must take place until the following additional landscaping details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Details must include:

 

·       Species, planting height and aftercare of all new trees.

 

The development must be completed in strict accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure that appropriate landscaping is introduced and would not harm the character and appearance of the site or the surrounding area to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and D5 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

3.    No development above ground level must take place until a detailed specification and plan for:

 

• a 1.8 metre wide footway with tactile crossing to connect the development hereby approved to the existing footway network to the north east and/or south east and
• a 1.8 metre wide footway to the front of the site to connect development hereby approved to Northmoor Park Playing Field to the north.

 

has been submitted to and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The works shall also include appropriate arrangements for the management of surface water run-off from the highway.  No occupation of the development must take place until the connecting footway and tactile crossing has been fully completed in strict accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: To ensure the provision of safe and adequate pedestrian access to the permitted development, without increasing flood risk to the highway and adjacent land and property to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S47 and S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and T10 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

4.    No occupation of a dwelling hereby approved must take place until, all of that part of the estate road and associated footways that forms the junction with the main road and which will be constructed within the limits of the existing highway, must be laid out and constructed to finished surface levels in accordance with details to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: In the interests of safety, to avoid the creation of pedestrian trip hazards within the public highway from surfacing materials, manholes and gullies that may otherwise remain for an extended period at dissimilar, interim construction levels to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S47 and S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and D5 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

5.    No development above ground level must take place until an Estate Road and Phasing Plan for the development hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The Plan must set out how the construction of the development will be phased and standards to which the estate roads on each phase will be completed during the construction period of the development.  The development must be completed in strict accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure that a safe and suitable standard of vehicular and pedestrian access is provided for residents throughout the construction period of the development to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S47 and S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and D5 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

6.    No occupation of each individual dwellings must take place until its individual driveway or parking space(s) has been completed in accordance with site layout plan 12062 Rev P17 dated May 2023 and retained for that use thereafter.

 

Reason: In the interests of safety of the users of the public highway and the safety of the users of the site to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S47 and S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and policy D5 and T9 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

7.    The development must be completed in accordance with the external materials plan 12062 Rev P7 dated May 2023 and Roof Tiling and Road Surfacing Plan 12062 Rev P7 dated May 2023.

 

Reason:  To safeguard the character and appearance of the site, the area and the area of great landscape value and to ensure the proposal uses materials and components that have a low environmental impact to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and policy D5 and T9 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

8.    As identified on site plan 12062 Rev P17 dated May 2023 plots 23, 24 and 30 to 43 must be completed to accord with standard M4(2) of the Building Regulations (access to and use of buildings) and retained as such thereafter.

 

Reason:  To accord with the policy requirement to comply with the 30% M4(2) standard to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework and local policy S23 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023.

 

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

 

9.    All planting or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.  The landscaping should be retained thereafter.

 

Reason: To ensure that additional trees are provided within the site to mitigate for the trees which are to be removed to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework, local policies S53 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2023 and policy D5 of the Scotter Neighbourhood Plan.

 

10. Notwithstanding the provisions of Classes AA of Schedule 2 Part 1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) the bungalows hereby approved on plots 30-43 must not be extended in the form of an additional storey (not including the conversion of the roof accommodation) unless planning permission has first been granted by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To enable any such proposals to be assessed in terms of their impact on theresulting amount of space around the dwelling to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework and local policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2012-2036.

 

Note:               Councillor P. Morris left the Chamber at 7.15 pm in advance of the next item of the meeting.