Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Vanessa Smith, Paul Wood, Gloria Johnson and Patsy Ellis.

Councillor Max Sawyer substituted for Councillor Vanessa Smith.

Councillor Harrish Bisnauthsing declared he was the Ward Councillor for S25/2401, however, he came to the Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Pam Byrd declared a personal interest for S25/0250. She would not participate in the meeting and would leave the Chamber.

Councillor Paul Fellows declared he was a Bourne Town Councillor and Ward Member for S25/0514. He came to the Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Tim Harrison was Ward Councillor for 3 applications on the agenda, however, he came to the Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Helen Crawford declared she was a Bourne Town Councillor for S25/0514, however, she came to the Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Charmaine Morgan declared an interest on S25/2345 and S25/1653, S25/1526 as a member of Grantham Town Council. She came to the Committee with an open mind.

The Chairman made the following statement:

‘With regards to application S25/2401 on the agenda, I make a declaration on behalf of all members that whilst it is acknowledged that the Council are the Applicant, this will not affect how members of the planning committee determine the application. All members have been trained and will determine the applications in accordance with their planning training and with an open mind. Any member who does not feel they are open minded to determine the applications should make a declaration to that effect and not vote on the application.’

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 December 2025 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record.

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2026 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record.

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of Offices (Use Class E) to a 13-bedroom House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO) (Use Class Sui Generis) at rear ground floor and upper floors. Replacement windows

Location: 24 St Peter’s Hill, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 6QF

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of Offices (Use Class E) to a 13-bedroom House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO) (Use Class Sui Generis) at rear ground floor and upper floors. Replacement windows

Location: 24 St Peter’s Hill, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 6QF

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillors                       Cllr Ben Green (Statement)

                                                               Cllr Matt Bailey (Statement)

Applicant                                                Rahul Patel  - Eldom Properties Ltd 

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036 and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways).

·       Comments received from Grantham Town Council.

·       No comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer.

·       Comments received from NHS Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board.

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

·       The over intensifications of HMOs in Grantham affecting the neighbourhood character, residential amenity, and community cohesion.

·       That the application did not comply with DE1 and EN4 due to respecting local character and avoiding unacceptable impacts alongside environmental effects in terms of noise, waste storage, servicing, disturbance, and over-concentration.

·       A failure to satisfy policy E6 due to loss of employment space. It was felt the supported housing benefit was not secured.

·       Concern was raised on the consistency with a previously refused application of an HMO.

·       The Applicant confirmed the building would be used as a therapy centre. The ground floor frontage would remain as commercial use.

·       It was noted that no objections had been received from consultees or neighbours.

·       That Policy GR4 supported the reuse of an existing building for a range of purposes, including residential.

·       Officers had concluded the scheme would not provide harmful over concentration.

·       The property would be leased to a registered social housing provider, working with the Council to ensure the scheme provides benefits for the community.

·       In terms of amenity standards, all bedroom exceed the HMO licensing standards.

·       Dedicated bin storage, a secure cycle shelter and on-site parking would be provided with no objections from Environmental Health. 

During questions to the Applicant, Members commented on the following:

·       Clarification was sought around the term ‘supported housing’ and who would be providing the support at what times.

The Applicant confirmed the property would work in conjunction with the Council, Chapta and 3C Housing Association to deliver support housing. There would be a counselling room on site and would cater for residents with mental health, recovery from drug abuse or people released from prison.

·       Concern was raised on the size of the rooms and outdoor space, especially if people with mental health struggles would reside there.

Clarification was provided around the size of the rooms, off-suites and dressing rooms and they met HMO standards for licensing.

·       A query was raised on whether the Applicant had undertaken a broader search on other businesses on what could be commercially available.

·       Clarification was sought on why the Applicant felt this location was appropriate, given the small  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of Offices (Use Class E) to 3no. houses in multiple occupation (HMO) (Use Class Sui Generis)

Location: 29-31 Avenue Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 6TH

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of Offices (Use Class E) to 3no. houses in multiple occupation (HMO) (Use Class Sui Generis)

Location: 29-31 Avenue Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 6TH

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillors                                 Cllr Ben Green (Statement)

Cllr Matt Bailey (Statement)

Cllr Paul Martin

On behalf of the Applicant                               Jon Cook

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036 and National Planning Policy Framework.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways)

·       Comments received from Grantham Town Council

·       Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection

·       Comments received from County Councillor Paul Martin

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

·       That due to other HMOs on Avenue Road, this could mean up to 100 HMO residents within an area in the centre of Grantham.

·       Concern around parking, traffic and road congestion on the road.

·       Noise disturbance and anti-social behaviour concerns.

·       Loss of family housing.

·       Intensification of HMOs within Grantham.

·       That the application differs materially from both the previous use and the surrounding residential context.

·       Concern was raised around activity levels, waste management, parking pressures, and the wider cumulative effects of HMO concentration.

·       Over-Concentration of HMOs with no demonstrated local demand.

·       Highway safety in terms of schoolchildren.

·       Total loss of employment with no marketing evidence provided.

·       Insufficient information and amenity in terms of refuse storage details, and boundary treatments.

On behalf of the Applicant:

·       The Agent confirmed 14 off-road parking spaces and bicycle storage would be provided.

·       HMOs and shared living accommodation were overlooked solutions to the country’s housing crisis. It would help to meet the demand through reuse and conversion of existing properties and house multiple people at lower cost.

·       The Agent noted the Applicant was a local and reputable award-winning landlord with a collective experience of more than 40 years owning and managing properties of this nature.

·       It was noted the proposal would not bring any harm to the character of the area as the only alterations would be boundary treatments and the installation of the bike storage.

·       There had been no objections from statutory consultees.

·       The proposal was a central location with good access to local facilities and amenities.

During questions to public speaker, Members commented on the following:

·       A query was raised on how Lincolnshire County Council (Highways) justify that residents of the property would not own a car.

The District Ward Councillor clarified the authority follow a sustainable transport initiative whereby public transport can be used instead of a car.

·       One Member requested clarification around the concern on emergency vehicles accessing the property due to parking issues.

It was confirmed that Highways had stated 2 cars could pass parallel on Avenue Road alongside parked cars. The District Ward Councillor felt this was incorrect. If an emergency service vehicle needed to park/access the road, it would most likely block the road.

·       Clarification was sought around the main concern of 3 buildings becoming  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

Proposal: The creation of a biodiversity habitat bank to be secured for a period of 30 years

Location: Land at Wilsthorpe Road, Braceborough, Lincolnshire

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to enter into a Section 106 Agreement with Enviroland to create, manage and maintain Biodiversity Net Gain Units for the purpose of satisfying Biodiversity Net Gain Obligations for developments for a period of 30 years

Proposal: The creation of a biodiversity habitat bank to be secured for a period of 30 years

Location: Land at Wilsthorpe Road, Braceborough, Lincolnshire

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to enter into a Section 106 Agreement with Enviroland to create, manage and maintain Biodiversity Net Gain Units for the purpose of satisfying Biodiversity Net Gain Obligations for developments for a period of 30 years.

(Councillor Pam Byrd left the Chamber for this application).

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

On behalf of the Applicant                     Jon Byrd - Allied Ecology

The following comments were made by the public speaker:

·       The proposal secured an opportunity to secure and deliver measurably increased biodiversity within the District.

·       It would create new woodlands, species-rich grasslands, a diverse traditionally managed orchard and over 400 metres of species-rich hedgerow. These would be secured legally via a S106 agreement for a minimum of 30 years.

·       The proposal supported national policy and SKDC Local Plan policies.

·       Strategic locations had been proposed from the Woodland Creation.

·       Rare local species would be preserved.

During questions to public speaker, Members commented on the following:

·       A query was raised on whether the proposal included any ponds to provide freshwater habitats.

The agent confirmed that during the first iterations of the proposals, ponds were included in the scheme. However, lower lying areas that most suited pond creation would also bring in water from the adjacent river, bringing in other fish and predatory species. It was felt this would be an overwhelming management burden to remove these species.

During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on the following:

·       One Member queried how the fertility of the land would be monitored.

It was confirmed that depending on the types of habitats being created, the type of land would be monitored on a low, medium or high distinctiveness. Visits to the site would take place periodically by a specialist ecologist appointed by the Council.

The habitat management plan and monitoring plan as part of the appendices included the baseline value with a biodiversity net gain metric. The management plan stated the biodiversity net-gain over the 30-year period and those monitoring visits were effectively checkpoints to ensure net gain is progressing as it should.

Members commended the hard work and detailed information provided by the Applicant.

·       It was queried whether the biodiversity net-gain from the site could be prioritised to South Kesteven.

The biodiversity net-gain would be prioritised to South Kesteven.

Final decision

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to enter into a Section 106 Agreement with Enviroland to create, manage and maintain Biodiversity Net Gain Units for the purpose of satisfying Biodiversity Net Gain Obligations for developments for a period of 30 years.

Proposal: Construction of 9no. dwellings, access, landscaping and parking

Location: 3, Drummond Road, Bourne

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions in the report

Proposal: Construction of 9no. dwellings, access, landscaping and parking

Location: 3, Drummond Road, Bourne

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions in the report

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Against                           Thomas Harvey

Carl Harvey

Diane Stabler and Samantha Carvath -(TIMESHARE)

Agent                           Mark Collins

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036 and National Planning Policy Framework

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection Services (SKDC)

·       Comments received from LCC highways and SuDs

·       Comments received from Anglian Water

·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

·       Comments received from Bourne Town Council

·       Comments received from Black Sluice Drainage Board

·       Comments received from National Grid

·       Comments received from Bourne Civic Society

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

·       A Public Speaker who resided next door to the site outlined the flooding directly out of the surface water drains.

·       It was felt the developer was ignoring the water course despite the LLFA expressing strong concerns, specifically requesting a solution for the drain along the western boundary. There was no modelling for the watercourse at present.

·       It was felt the application did not comply with Council policies or the NPPF.

·       Concern was raised on access to the site, boundaries, noise levels and BNG baseline.

·       That the water was coming from the Peak District via an aquifer and therefore the flooding was not linked to local weather conditions.

·       There were 2 historical issues with the site relating to incoming water and the 220mm borehole feeding into the site. The water going out was in Anglian Water’s drainage system through a 200mm pipe being fed from a 150mm pipe meaning the water level exceeded the level of the pipe.

·       Concerns had been raised from the lead local flood authority and was being investigated by the internal drainage board ombudsman.

·       2 public speakers raised their concern on the boundary fence. They were advised this matter was a private boundary dispute and not something for the Planning Committee to consider.

·       The agent had a background of working in drainage and would ensure there was no flooding to any proposed properties and to not increase flood risk to any nearby properties as a result of the development.

·       It was proposed to adopt a sub-base system using a permeable road to provide sufficient storage to hold water, which would be released via a manhole at the bottom of the site restricted to a flow of two litres a second.

·       A private management company would maintain the ditch in perpetuity.

·       There was a proposal to lay an alleviation pipe between the drainage system and the ditch itself to capture any water that overspills from the ditch. 

During questions to public speaker, Members commented on the following:

·       Clarification was sought on a photograph provided and whether it was the result of direct running water from the Dyke not being contained or a blockage, or whether it was direct runoff water from the field behind the property.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

Proposal: Proposed demolition of existing barn and erection of a detached dwelling, hard and soft landscaping and formation of a re-wilding zone

Location: Wildwood, Nightingale Lane, Aisby, NG32 3NE

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Proposed demolition of existing barn and erection of a detached dwelling, hard and soft landscaping and formation of a re-wilding zone

Location: Wildwood, Nightingale Lane, Aisby, NG32 3NE

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillor                                           Cllr Sarah Trotter

Against                                                                     Simon Jones

David Coleman

On behalf of the Applicant                                       John Dickie

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Supplementary Planning Document

·       Comments received from LCC Highways & SuDS

·       Comments received from Heydour Parish Council

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection

·       No comments received from Historic England, The Gardens Trust

(Councillor Sarah Trotter excluded herself from this application, due to speaking as Ward Councillor).

The Development Management Planner clarified a note within the report stating the application state had an ‘in progress’ appeal. It was noted the appeal had been dismissed.

The following comments were made by the public speaker:

·       The Ward Councillor highlighted there were five different applications on this site.

·       The area was a small, rural village with distinct character, with limited infrastructure and a clear settlement pattern.

·       Concern was raised on the cumulative and incremental impact of repeated applications on the site.

·       The Ward Councillor’s main concern related to whether the application overcame issues identified in previous refusals.

·       That the application could push density beyond what was charismatic of the village.

·       A neighbour to the property raised concern on continual ‘creep’ of the applications and requested refusal due to the scale and impact on privacy.

·       It was felt the application did not meet certain policy requirements and provisions within the NPPF.

·       That 11d of the NPPF did not comply with the proposal and that a dwelling was already consented under application S24/1822, therefore, did not increase housing delivery.

·       It was felt the countryside designation had not changed and significant weight should be given to the recent appeal decision.

·       It was also felt that Policy SP4 required local support, which the application did not have.

·       The Parish Council had fully objected.

·       The agent stated the proposed was a more improved plan to previous applications.

·       The fallback position would enable a dwelling to be built on the site, however, the proposed was a better plan.

·       The proposed ridge height was 6.4, an increase of only 10cm.

·       The Officer had confirmed the site was discreetly located and not highly visible from within the village, with the nearest house being 110m away.

·       Design and massing were a benefit to the scheme.

·       The scheme would deliver an 104% net increase in biodiversity habitat units.

During questions to public speaker, Members commented on the following:

·       A query was raised to the Ward Councillor on whether she felt visual harms could be conditioned in her opinion.

The District Ward Councillor had an overall concern of the ‘creeping’ next to the neighbour’s boundary, which may cause disruption to them.

·       Clarification was sought around the difference between this application, and the previously approved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

Proposal: Change of use from existing agricultural field to create new leisure facility. Construction of golf driving range with associated clubhouse, parking, and amenities

Location: Existing Agricultural Field off Meadow Drove, Bourne

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Change of use from existing agricultural field to create new leisure facility. Construction of golf driving range with associated clubhouse, parking, and amenities

Location: Existing Agricultural Field off Meadow Drove, Bourne

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillor                            Cllr Zoe Lane

Applicant                                                   Mr Daniel Cundy

Together with:

·       Provision within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036 and National Planning Policy Framework.

·       Comments received from LCC Highways & SuDS Support

·       Comments received from Anglian Water

·       Comments received from Bourne Town Council - Objection

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection

·       Comments received from Black Sluice Inland Drainage Board

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue

·       Comments received from Environment Agency

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire (Archaeology)

Councillor Charmaine Mogan declared she was approached by the Ward Councillor to accept the call-in for the application. She declared she had no interest in the application and was completely open-minded.

The following comments were made by the public speaker:

·       The Ward Councillor raised concerns around residents’ comments around traffic issues around the village of Dyke and the bridge.

·       Concern was raised around nesting owls close to the site. It would be preferred if any construction period could take place outside of owl breeding season.

·       Potential of light pollution was raised.

·       The application was within open countryside.

·       It was noted that benefits around employment and a low impact activity for the community.

·       The Applicant was community focused for Bourne.

·       The project presented years of planning, working in conjunction with partners and consultants to ensure the application was environmentally responsible, economically and socially viable.

·       The facility would be a top-quality driving range technology with indoor simulators and family friendly miniature golf, all designed to make the sport accessible to everyone.

·       The application had been positively supported by Golf England.

·       The proposal would use less than 1/5 of an existing field with the majority remaining as open grassland, enhanced with native planting and hedgerow restoration.

·       A sensitive directional lighting strategy had been provided to use low spill LED technology. All lighting would be fully shielded and contained within the site boundaries.

·       There had been no objections from Highways on the application in terms of traffic.

·       The application would provide jobs and open career paths.

During questions to public speaker, Members commented on the following:

·       How many jobs the proposal would provide.

It was confirmed the golfing range would provide 8 jobs to start with and it was hoped to expand in the future.

·       Whether 250 people were expected to visit the club in one day. It was noted there were only 70 parking spaces available.

The applicant felt 70 parking spaces would be sufficient for visitors and staff throughout each day. The applicant clarified that the number of visitors referred to was an estimate for each day overall, not at any given time.

·       Clarification was sought around the operational hours.

The anticipated operational hours were anticipated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

Proposal: Gabion structural support of existing retaining wall with repairs/rebuilding of existing buttress walls

Location: Car Park, Scotgate, Stamford, Lincolnshire, PE9 2YB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Gabion structural support of existing retaining wall with repairs/rebuilding of existing buttress walls

Location: Car Park, Scotgate, Stamford, Lincolnshire, PE9 2YB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, Stamford Neighbourhood Plan and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council Highways.

·       No comments received from Parish Council

·       No comments received from Historic England

·       Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer

During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on the following:

·       How many of the currently suspended car parking slots would be installed.

The entirety of the bays next to the wall were currently blocked off due to the structure. It was proposed all bays would be back to full use.

Final decision

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions:

Time Limit for Commencement

1)    The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order that the development is commenced in a timely manner, as set out in Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

          Approved Plans

2)    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following list of approved plans:

i.      Location Plan – Date received: 11/12/2025.

ii.     Schedule of Works- Date received: 12/12/2025.

Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.

Reason: To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt.

During Building Works

3)    Before any of the works on the external elevations for the development hereby permitted are begun, samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and in accordance with Policy DE1and EN6 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Proposal: Outline application for a residential development (7 dwellings) with all matters reserved except for access

Location: Constables Field, Belton Lane, Manthorpe, Grantham

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

Proposal: Outline application for a residential development (7 dwellings) with all matters reserved except for access

Location: Constables Field, Belton Lane, Manthorpe, Grantham

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to DEFER this item to the next meeting.

There were none.

The Chairman closed the meeting at 17:22.