Agenda and minutes

The Chief Executive to notify the Committee of any substitute members

The Committee was notified that a notice under Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990 had been received, appointing Councillor Woolley for Councillor Cook, for this meeting only.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors King and Morgan.

Members are asked to disclose any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting

There were none declared.

                                                                                                                  (Enclosure)

The minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd April 2013 were accepted as a correct record of decisions taken, subject to the inclusion of Councillor Mrs Judy Smith in the list of apologies.

(1.05pm – Councillors Ashberry and Mrs Kaberry-Brown entered the meeting).

To consider applications received for the grant of planning permission – reports prepared by the Case Officer.                                                                                                       (Enclosure)

The anticipated order of consideration is as shown on the agenda, but this may be subject to change, at the discretion of the Chairman of the Committee.

Decision:-

To determine applications, or make observations, as listed below:-

NB1

Application ref:         S13/0728/FULL

Description:               Replacement dwelling and new vehicular access

Location:                    1A, Castlegate, Castle Bytham, Grantham, Lincolnshire

Decision:                   Refused

Noting comments made during the public speaking session from:-

                        Councillor H Bakker – Castle Bytham Parish Council

                        Mr Patrick Candler – objecting

                        Susan Blunt – objecting

                        Mr D Lane – objecting

                        Mr R Garnett – agent

together with no objection from the Principal Conservation Officer or Environment Agency, objections from the Parish Council, comments from Lincolnshire Heritage, English Heritage and the Highway Authority and a number of objections from nearby residents; late information report circulated to Members prior to the meeting including comments from the Tree Officer, English Heritage and no objection from the Highway Authority, officer comment thereon and suggested alterations to conditions from the Highway Authority, and a changed recommendation to refuse, report of site inspection and comments made by Members at the meeting.

The Case Officer advised that since the late report had been produced, English Heritage had confirmed that they had no objection to the proposal, and that consequently the suggested second reason for refusal was not now appropriate.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be refused as being against public feeling, against Policy EN1, neither enhancing nor protecting the Conservation Area, visually intrusive, detracting from the adjoining listed building, loss of privacy, detracting from the street scene, effect on the trees on the site and the proposed scale and size of the proposed dwelling were not acceptable.

The Development Management Service Manager advised that whilst he could accept most of the reasons given, which reflected the remaining reason on page 3 of the late report, the reference to the proposed development being against public opinion was not a reason, and the loss of privacy was not sustainable.  The proposer of the motion accepted the comments and withdrew these from the suggested reasons for refusal, although expressing some reservations about the loss of privacy reason.

On being put to the vote the proposal was agreed and the application refused for the following reasons:-

1)    A number of trees, which are worthy of protection and prominent within the streetscape are proposed to be removed, allowing their removal would be harmful to the character of the streetscene and wider Conservation Area by virtue of their location height, prominence and predicated longevity.  The application is therefore deemed contrary to guidance contained in policy EN1 of the South Kesteven Core Strategy; with no other material planning considerations to indicate that the application should be determined otherwise.

2)    The proposed replacement dwelling would, by virtue of scale and mass, neither   respect nor preserve the character of the Conservation Area as well be harmful to the setting of the adjacent Listed Building with it being visually intrusive within the street scene.  The application is, therefore, deemed contrary to policy EN1 of the South Kesteven Core Strategy and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

NB2

Application Ref:       S13/0729/  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

Report from the Development Management Service Manager.

(To follow)

Decision:-

The Development Control Committee of South Kesteven District Council are not in favour of the proposed development, and South Holland District Council be advised that:

1.    It is considered that the proposed wind turbines, by virtue of their height and number, would have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the landscape in the vicinity of the site and upon the amenities of residents of South Kesteven who live in close proximity to the site.

2.    This would be exacerbated by the cumulative impact of the proposed development together with the Deeping St Nicholas wind farm to the south of the application site.

The Development Management Service Manager submitted his report PLA991, which h had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting, in relation to an application which had been submitted to South Holland District Council for the installation of nine 126b metre (to tip) wind turbines, sub-station and access track at Fen Farm, South Fen, West Pinchbeck.  South Kesteven District Council had been consulted on the application, as a neighbouring authority, and the purpose of the report was to consider this Council’s response to the consultation.  Parishes and individuals within South Kesteven and bordering the site had also been consulted by South Holland.

The report described the proposed development and went on to assess the likely impact of it on South Kesteven District, bearing in mind an existing wind farm approximately 2.5 miles from the application site, and the likely cumulative impact.  The Committee were reminded that a site inspection had taken place and Members reported their views following this inspection.

It was proposed, seconded and agreed that the Development Control Committee of South Kesteven District Council are not in favour of the proposed development, for the detailed reasons set out in paragraph 1.1 on page 6 of the late report.

Report No. PLA991 by the Development Management Service Manager.   (Enclosure)

The Development Management Service Manager submitted his report listing details of applications not determined within the eight week time period.  Also submitted was a list of applications dealt with under delegated powers.  A planning appeals update/summary as at 26^th April 2013 was also submitted, together with a schedule showing planning applications performance between April 2012 and March 2013.

(4.05pm – Councillor Powell left the meeting).

For the information of the Committee, the Development Management Service Manager outlined changes to the General Permitted Development Order, which were to come into force for a three year trial period on 30^th May 2013.  Current legislation removed certain types of development from planning control, principally rear extensions to residential properties, the current limits for which were 3 metres for semi-detached and 4 metres for detached properties.  The new trial rules extended these limits to 6 metres and 8 metres respectively.

It was intended to send out a briefing note to Members, but if there were any issues, the advice was to refer these to the Development Management Team.

(4.12pm – Councillor Mrs Brenda Sumner left the meeting).

The meeting closed at 4.13pm