Agenda item

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 application. It was noted the application dismissed at appeal was significantly larger than the proposed.

 

The proposed application included a garage, which was not part of the originally approved application and the roof height had been increased on the plans, alongside more floor space.

 

·       A query was raised to an objector on what mitigations would be satisfactory in order to protect privacy.

 

It was felt the fallback position would be preferred. It was felt that privacy screening would not block off any car noise or light.

 

The Principal Development Management Planner provided clarity around the boundary and dwellings via site plans. It was confirmed the proposed dwelling was around 110m away from the neighbour’s property.

 

·       How much closer the proposed development to the boundary was compared to the previous application.

 

The Public Speaker could not confirm how much closer the proposed development was, however, by using scaling it was clearly 1-2m closer to his boundary.

 

·       One Member queried whether the proposed dwelling had windows overlooking into the neighbour’s property.

 

It was clarified this proposal had less ground floor windows, which was a benefit.

 

·       Clarification was sought around the barn building on the neighbours site which was closest to the proposed garage.

 

The barn building on the neighbours site was not used agriculturally and was used for storage.

 

A member asked if the new build would impact on the privacy of the neighbour and the speaker said it would not because the barn is in the way.

 

·       A query was raised why another application had been submitted and how alterations differed from the original application. 

 

The agent clarified there was some uncertainty following the appeal dismissed by the Inspector around what would be acceptable for a Class Q. This application secured the need for future proofing the applicant’s accommodation requirements.

 

·       Clarification was sought on whether the applicant had the intention to come back to the Committee with this application, following their previously approved application.

 

It was confirmed the intention was to come back to the Committee with this application, following the previously approved application.

 

·       Members requested clarification over the square meterage of the originally application for the barn itself.

 

The Principal Development Management Planner highlighted the previous application had around 100sqm of floor space. This application was for a 260sqm floor space.

 

The original barn in terms of its footprint was approximately 100sqm. The extant fallback position in total floor space was 192sqm across two floors rather than a single footprint. The proposed application was 260sqm floor space was over two floors. The garage was approximately 36sqm.

 

The height of the barn had increased by 10cm from the original planning application. There was a slight increase on the breadth of the barn to accommodate the additional floor space.

 

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

 

·       That if the proposal is refused and the application returns to the extant application; a further application could come forward for an extension which would fall under permitted development rights.

 

It was proposed that enhanced landscaping could help mitigate against the concerns raised regarding light from vehicles and officers advised the conditions would include a comprehensive landscaping plan.

 

It was confirmed permitted development rights would be removed as part of the fallback position application. Therefore, any extension or alteration to the building would require a process through the authority.

 

Following a suggestion from a Member, it was clarified conditions had been recommended for landscaping details, which had been carried forward from the previous planning permission.

 

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

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

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

                      i.         Drawing No.JDA 2025-0755-LOCATION.001 Location Plan

                     ii.         Drawing No.JDA 2025-0755-SITE.001 Proposed Site Plan

                    iii.         Drawing No.JDA 2025-0755-DETAILS.001 Proposed Floor Plans and Elevations

                   iv.         Drawing No.JDA 2025-0755-LIGHTING.001Proposed Lighting

Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.   

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

Before the Development is Commenced

Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, a scheme relating to the survey of the land for contamination shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include:

                      i.         A desk top study documenting all the previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land;

                     ii.         A site investigation report assessing the ground conditions of the site and               incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk top study; and

                    iii.         A detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid risk from contaminants and/or gases when the site is developed and proposals for future maintenance and monitoring.

                   iv.         Shall include the nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works.

Reason: Previous activities associated with this site may have caused, or had the potential to cause, land contamination and to ensure that the proposed site investigations and remediation will not cause pollution in the interests of the amenities of the future residents and users of the development; and in accordance with Policies EN2 and EN4 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan and national guidance contained in the NPPF.

During Building Works

During construction of the development hereby permitted, the approved Construction Management Plan October 2025 (Drawing No.JDA/2025/755/CEMP/001) shall be adhered to in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: Hard and soft landscaping and tree planting make an important contribution to the development and its assimilation with its surroundings and in accordance with Policies DE1, EN3 and OS1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Before any of the works on the external elevations for the building(s) hereby permitted are begun, a detailed specification of the materials (including colour of any render, paintwork or colourwash) to be used in the construction of the external surfaces shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and in accordance with Policy DE1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until a remediation strategy detailing how this contamination will be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development not cause pollution in the interests of the amenities of the future residents and users of the development; and in accordance with Local Plan Policy EN4.

Before any construction work above ground is commenced, details of any soft landscaping works shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include:

i.         planting plans;

ii.        written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment);

iii.       schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate;

 

Reason: Soft landscaping and tree planting make an important contribution to the development and its assimilation with its surroundings and in accordance with Policies DE1, EN3 and OS1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

 

Before the Development is Occupied

Before any part of the development hereby permitted is occupied/brought into use, the external surfaces shall have been completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and in accordance with Policy DE1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Before any part of the development hereby permitted is occupied, a verification report confirming that remedial works have been completed shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority should any contaminated land be identified by the above condition. The report shall have been submitted by the nominated competent person approved, as required by condition above. The report shall include:

i.         A complete record of remediation activities, and data collected as identified in the remediation scheme, to support compliance with agreed remediation objectives;

ii.        As built drawings of the implemented scheme;

iii.       Photographs of the remediation works in progress; and

iv.       Certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free from contamination.

 

The scheme of remediation shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: Previous activities associated with this site may have caused, or had the potential to cause, land contamination and to ensure that the proposed site investigations and remediation will not cause pollution in the interests of the amenities of the future residents and users of the development; and in accordance with Policies EN2 and EN4 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan and national guidance contained in the NPPF.

Before any part of the development hereby permitted is occupied/brought into use, all hard landscape and soft landscaping works shall have been carried out in accordance with the approved hard landscaping details.

Reason: Hard landscaping and tree planting make an important contribution to the development and its assimilation with its surroundings and in accordance with Policy DE1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Ongoing

Within a period of five years from the first occupation of the final dwelling/unit of the development hereby permitted, any trees or plants provided as part of the approved soft landscaping scheme, that die or become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the first planting season following any such loss with a specimen of the same size and species as was approved in condition above unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs and in accordance with Policies DE1, EN3 and OS1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking, or re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no enlargement, improvement or other alteration of the approved properties, shall be carried out without planning permission first having been granted by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority considers that further development could cause harm to the character of the area, and for this reason would wish to control any future development and in accordance with Policy DE1 (Promoting Good Quality Design) of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking, or re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no buildings etc. incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse, shall be constructed without planning permission first having been granted by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority considers that further development could cause harm to the character of the area, and for this reason would wish to control any future development and in accordance with Policy DE1 (Promoting Good Quality Design) of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

 

(It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to extend the meeting to 17:30pm).