Agenda item

The Chairman introduced planning application number 136577, an outline planning application for the development of up to 49no. dwellings, with access to land to the west of Horsley Road, Gainsborough to be considered and not reserved for subsequent applications - resubmission of 134824. The Committee were advised that since the last meeting, the site visit requested by Committee Members had taken place on 8 May 2019. He invited the Senior Development Management Officer to provide any updates. He advised that since the report was drafted additional letters of objection had been received from residents of 22 Marshall Rise and 43 Horsley Road Gainsborough and 62 Willingham Road, Knaith Park which were summarised as follows:

·         The site had an unsuitable access.

·         The water table may be a problem that caused damp.

·         A smaller development with landscaping and an extension to Roses playing fields with parking should be proposed.

·         Detrimental to existing infrastructure.

·         Drainage problems.

He advised, however, that the updates did not change the recommendation.

The Chairman invited the first registered speaker, Mr Adam Key, to address the Committee. Mr Key explained he was speaking on behalf of the applicant and wished to address the salient points that had been raised when the application was deferred at the previous meeting. He noted that the application was policy compliant in all regards. The proposed development was on former scrub land with the site having been deselected as open space by the Local Plan Inspector. He explained there had been extensive discussions with the Lead Local Flood Authority and the Environment Agency, both being key statutory consultees, and neither entity had issues with the proposal. Mr Key added that they were now confident that the proposed arrangements would bring improvements to the current situation. He stated that this accorded with LP14. Mr Key explained to the Committee that during the site visit, driveways of residents had been unused with residents preferring to use street parking instead. He felt this gave a skewed representation of the access way to the site. He added that Lincolnshire County Council Highways had supported and accepted the application, no alternative expert evidence had been put forward as to why it was not acceptable. Mr Key stated that the application accorded with LP13. Mr Key added to this that the public realm would be enhanced by the proposed development, with previously inaccessible space being opened up, pathways and cycleways being linked as well as the contributions to health and education in the area. He stated that this was a robust application, they had worked with the planning department throughout and requested Committee Members to support the Officer recommendation to grant approval. He thanked Members for their time.

The Chairman then invited Councillor Sheila Bibb to address the Committee.

Councillor Bibb explained she was speaking as Ward Member in opposition to the application. She noted the comments from Mr Key but referred to three main areas of concern. The first of these was regarding the risk of flooding in an area that already had problems. She acknowledged that the application addressed these issues but she was not convinced that there wouldn’t be ongoing problems or other consequences of the build. Councillor Bibb highlighted her next area of concern which was the access to the site. She explained that the existing roads were already subject to congestion and that cars did have to park on the roads. She felt that if additional vehicles were added into the area through the proposed development, the situation would become increasingly dangerous for road users and pedestrians alike. She also noted that the suggestion for the emergency vehicle access was not realistic as the corresponding road was narrow with limited access. The final point made by Councillor Bibb was regarding the loss of a natural area, she stated that the links for pathways and cycleways could be made without creating another housing development. She thanked the Committee for their time and urged them to think carefully about their decision.

The Chairman reiterated that there had been a site visit giving Members the opportunity to look around the site and see what happened in the vicinity.

Note:              Councillor M. Boles declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Member but confirmed he was speaking as a Member of the Planning Committee not in his capacity as Ward Member.

There was support amongst Committee Members for the concerns voiced by Councillor Bibb, in particular the access to the area, risk of increased traffic in areas where children frequently played and the potential risk of flooding. The Chairman highlighted that within the report there were references to the highways and flooding risks and all relevant parties maintained the proposals were acceptable. The Senior Development Management Officer stated that Lincolnshire County Council Highways Officer had visited the site prior to making comments and the recommendation for living accommodation to be on the first floor was to allow, for example, garage space to be incorporated into the ground floor of the buildings. 

Members of the Committee acknowledged that there were limited options open to the Committee. Those from which they would usually seek advice were in support of the application and it was difficult to come up with justification for refusal. The Officer recommendation was therefore moved.

A Member of Committee suggested an amendment in that conditions were imposed regarding vehicular movement during the construct phase and that all future applications for planning permission, outline planning permission or reserved matters regarding this site should return to be heard by Committee. The Senior Development Management Officer directed Members to condition nine, in relation to vehicular movement and the construction method statement to which it was requested that it be specified that Planning Officers consult with the Ward Members with regards to the movement arrangements. With this in place, the amendment was moved, seconded and put to the vote.

With six Members in favour of the amended recommendation and three Members against, it was AGREED that the Planning Committee delegate powers to Officers to approve the application subject to conditions and the negotiation and completion of a s106 agreement as detailed in the report. In addition to this, the application to discharge condition 9 shall be subject to consultation with the Ward Members, and, any future applications for planning permission, outline planning permission or reserved matters for this site be heard by Committee.