Agenda item

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

 

                                                                        (Enclosure)

Decision:-

 

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

 

PWM1

 

Application ref:         S11/2371/HSH

 

Description:               Retention of two conservatories, veranda, extension to Coach House and various structures within the cartilage (including fountain, fencing, CCTV cameras and landscaping works), erection of leisure building, greenhouse and cold frames within existing walled gardens, construction of tennis court

 

Location:                    Caythorpe Hall, Church Lane, Caythorpe, Grantham, NG32 3EL

 

Decision:                   Deferred

 

Following the receipt of a letter from the applicant’s Solicitor raising questions about the procedure which has been followed in respect of this proposal, pending a new report to a future meeting of the Committee.

 

PWM2

 

Application ref:         S11/2372/LB

 

Description:               Extensions and alterations to listed building including retention of two conservatories, veranda, and extension to Coach House, erection of leisure building and greenhouse within existing walled garden, replacement of Coach House doors and other associated works

 

Location:                    Caythorpe Hall, Church Lane, Caythorpe, Grantham, NG32 3EL                             

 

Decision:                   Deferred

 

Following the receipt of a letter from the applicant’s Solicitor raising questions about the procedure which has been followed in respect of this proposal, pending a new report to a future meeting of the Committee.

 

JJ1

 

Application ref:         S11/2050/MJRF

 

Description:               Construction of 18 dwellings

 

Location:                    Land north of, Spalding Road, Deeping St. James

Decision:                   Approved subject to a Section 106 agreement

 

Noting no objection from the Environment Agency, Anglian Water, Heritage Lincolnshire or the Highway Authority, comments from the Community Leisure Officer, Planning Policy, LCC Children’s Services, and the Parish Council and objections from nearby residents, together with a note of the required S106 Heads of Terms and comments from the Partnerships and Projects Officer (Affordable Housing), letter in support from the applicants, and comments made by Members at the meeting.

 

The Principal Planning Officer drew the attention of Members to the comments in regard to the amended application as set out in the report.  He reminded the Committee that when the application had been considered at the last meeting concern had been expressed with regard to the parking, layout and access arrangements to the proposed development.  In particular, concern had been expressed about the lack of two parking spaces per dwelling and the fact that the driveway to the site would not be to an adoptable standard.

 

The applicant had now submitted amended plans indicating that each dwelling would have two off-street parking spaces; the access roads had been widened to 5 metres and would be built to an adoptable standard; and the scheme had been redesigned to improve the turning facilities within the site.

 

The Principal Planning Officer addressed the Committee in relation to amended and additional conditions, and said that the Highway Authority had requested four conditions, there would be a necessary amendment to proposed condition 8 to include the amended plans and a new condition 10 would be required to include a requirement to submit elevations of a proposed new carport to plot 218.

 

Members discussed the application in detail, and asked questions, particularly with regard to the extent of the adoption of the roads on the site.  It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved subject to the additions/amendment to conditions included in the circulated report.

 

Members asked that a written copy of the conditions suggested by the Highway Authority be circulated, as it was difficult to understand them when read, and because there might be as need to suggest amendments. 

 

During further discussion, a Member said that it was worrying that the County Council was choosing not to adopt roads that are to adoptable standards.  He asked that the Chairman take this up with the Cabinet with a view to further discussions between them and the County Council, and the Chairman agreed.

 

It was suggested by a Member that further consideration of this application be deferred until the attitude of the County Council in regard to adoption was clarified.  Another Member said that she had raised this with the County Council who had advised that it was up to developers to request adoption.  She suggested that clarity was needed.  The Development Management Service Manager gave advice in relation to the technicalities of the highway issues, and the Solicitor gave advice in relation to matters raised by Members as to how purchasers would be aware whether or not a road was adopted, which would be via the local search procedure.

 

A Member proposed an amendment that the roads and footways on the site shall be completed before the occupation of any house, as opposed to the suggested Highway Authority condition which required the road up to and including the turning head to be constructed to an adoptable standard before the occupation of the penultimate dwelling.  The Principal Planning Officer responded, and it was then suggested by a Member that the discussion be deferred to enable copies of the Highway Authority conditions to be handed out.

 

A Member proposed a further amendment to add a condition in relation to the specification for the construction of private/adoptable roads, as follows:

 

“The specification for the construction of the road surface of the ‘private’ roads sub-bases, hardcore and tarmac be the same specification as that used on an ‘adopted’ road.”

 

The suggested Highway Authority conditions were then handed out to Members, and it was suggested by the Vice-Chairman that there was no need to alter them as they were standard County Council conditions. 

 

The proposer of the first amendment noted above withdrew her proposal and the second amendment was then seconded.  Following advice from the Solicitor on the reasonableness of the conditions, the second amendment noted above was put to the vote and agreed.

 

The Chairman then confirmed what Members would be voting on, and he noted for the sake of clarity that the first 9 conditions would be as listed in the report (subject to an amendment to condition 8 to include the amended plans), condition 10 in relation to elevations for the carport to plot 218, conditions 11 to 14 from the Highway Authority and condition 15 in relation to the specification of the roads, as noted and agreed above.

 

The amended proposal was then put to the vote and it was agreed that the application be approved, with authority delegated to the Development Management Service Manager, after consultation with the Chairman or Vice-Chairman , subject to the summary of reasons set out in the case officer’s circulated report, and subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement to secure developer contributions, and to appropriate conditions as listed in the report, and as circulated and amended by the Committee.  In this case, as the agreement has not been concluded prior to the Committee, a period not exceeding 6 weeks post the date of the Committee shall be set for the completion (including signing) of the agreement.  In the event that the agreement has not been concluded within the six week period, and where in the opinion of the Development Management Service Manager acting in consultation with the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Committee there are no extenuating circumstances which would justify a further extension of time, the related planning application shall be refused on the basis that the necessary infrastructure or community contributions essential to make what would otherwise be an unacceptable development acceptable, have not been forthcoming.

 

PL1

 

Application ref:         S12/0209/HSH

 

Description:               Single storey rear extension and retention of garage as built

 

Location:                    29 Drummond Road, Bourne, Lincolnshire, PE10 9JF

 

Decision:                   Deferred

 

Pending a site inspection.

 

 

LDPP1

 

Application ref:         S12/0807/HSH

 

Description:               Removal of fence and erection of replacement wall

 

Location:                    17, Peachwood Close, Grantham, Lincolnshire, NG31 8PQ

 

Decision:                   Approved

 

Noting no observations as a result of consultation, and comments made by Members at the meeting.

 

It was proposed, seconded and agreed that the application be approved, subject to the following conditions:-

 

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

 

2.    The development shall be built in accordance with the materials detailed on the submitted application forms unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

3.  The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following list of approved plans submitted as part of the application:

Illustration of proposed wall date stamped 2 April 2012
Face view of Typical Section date stamped 2 April 2012
Block Plan of area to the front of property date stamped 2 April 2012
Block Plan date stamped 2 April 2012