Agenda item

Application ref: S18/1752
Description: Erection of a 4-bedroom dwelling and garage
Location: 23 Main Road, Dyke, PE10 0AF




To refuse the application


Noting comments made during the public speaking session by:


Applicant’s Agent

Meg Reeve


Together with:


·         No comments from SKDC’s Environmental Protection Services

·         No objections from Bourne Town Council

·         No objection from Lincolnshire County Council Highways and SUDS Support

·         One representation received as a result of public consultation

·         Provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework and the South Kesteven Core Strategy and supplementary planning documents

·         Site visit observations

·         The additional information report summarising additional material supplied by the applicant and officer comment thereon

·         Comments made by members at the meeting


15:06 – Councillor Wood left the meeting and did not return.


Several Members expressed their support of the application and debate ensued on whether the proposal fell within the settlement of Dyke or deviated from the existing line of development. Members also discussed previous uses of the site, existing and recently removed structures, and evidence that had been submitted to prove that it was brownfield land.


It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved contrary to officer recommendations. The reasons given in support of granting the application were based on the additional information submitted that demonstrated that it was a brownfield site and the potential that the proposed development would help support local services. On being put to the vote, this was lost.


A proposition was then made and seconded to refuse the application in line with officer recommendations for the reasons given in the additional items paper, which was issued on 7 December 2018. There was an equality of votes and the Chairman used his casting vote to vote against the proposition.


Following further discussion a new proposition was made to refuse the application in line with the officer’s recommendation. A request was made for a recorded vote, in accordance with Article 9.1.9(d) of the Council’s Constitution. As more than five Members indicated their support, a recorded vote was taken:


For: Councillors Dilks, Exton, King, Reid, A Stokes and Trollope-Bellew


Against: Councillors Baxter, Kaberry-Brown, Judy Smith, Stevens, I Stokes, Brian Sumer


Abstain: There were no abstentions


As there was an equality of votes the Chairman used his casting vote, voting for the proposition. The Committee therefore resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons:


1.    The proposed development by virtue of its scale, appearance and siting, would result in the unacceptable introduction of built form to the north of the existing linear pattern of development along Main Road which is contrary to the established spatial characteristics of the area. In consequence the development, would result in harm to the character and historic pattern of development in the area which is contrary to Core Strategy Policy EN1 and the NPPF Section 12.


2.    The proposal does not fall under any of the categories of development described in Core Strategy Policy SP1 that would be considered acceptable in a location such as Dyke. The proposal would therefore result in unjustified additional residential development in a village which is not considered suitable for new dwellings. As such the proposals are considered contrary to the requirements of Core Strategy Policies SP1 and H1 and the principles of sustainable development as advocated by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).


15:50 to 16:12 – the meeting was adjourned


During the adjournment, Councillor Mrs. Kaberry-Brown left the meeting and did not return

Supporting documents: