Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Gloria Johnson.

(Councillor Tim Harrison arrived at 13:12)

Councillor Helen Crawford and Councillor Paul Fellows declared an interest on application S24/0569, as the application had previously been considered by Bourne Town Council. Councillor Helen Crawford and Councillor Paul Fellows came to this Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Harrish Bisnauthsing declared an interest on application S22/1591, however, came to the meeting with an open mind.

Councillor Patsy Ellis declared an interest on application on S24/1467, in her capacity as a Director of Leisure SK Ltd. Councillor Patsy Ellis would not take part in the debate or vote for this item.

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2024 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record.

Proposal: Full Planning Application for the erection of 111 dwellings including affordable housing provision, open space including access to the river, soft and hard landscaping including tree lined streets, car and cycle parking including EV charging provision, and vehicular link with the adjacent Vistry site.

Location: Land to the north of Uffington Road, Stamford  

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to completion of a planning obligation and subject to conditions outlined in the report.

Proposal: Full Planning Application for the erection of 111 dwellings including affordable housing provision, open space including access to the river, soft and hard landscaping including tree lined streets, car and cycle parking including EV charging provision, and vehicular link with the adjacent Vistry site.

Location: Land to the north of Uffington Road, Stamford  

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to completion of a planning obligation and subject to conditions outlined in the report.

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Agent                       Rosanna Metcalfe (Associate Director, Strutt & Parker)

Together with:

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

·       Comments received from Stamford Town Council.

·       Comments received from Stamford Civic Society.

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection Services (SKDC).

·       Comments received from LCC(as Local Highway Authority and Lead Local Flood Authority).

·       Comments received from Anglian Water.

·       Comments received from Fire Authority.

·       Comments received from Historic England.

·       Comments received from LCC Minerals and Waste.

·       Comments received from LCC Education.

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Police.

·       Comments received from Environment Agency.

·       Comments received from NHS England.

·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

·       Comments received from Conservation Officer.

·       No comments received from The Gardens Trust.

·       No comments received from Cadent Gas.

·       Final comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (as Local Highway Authority).

During questions to Public Speakers, Members commented on:

·       Whether the footpath/cycle path across the two sites would include lighting?

·       Whether there was a proposed access to Ryhall Road. 

The Development Management & Enforcement Manager advised that a link to Ryhall Road would involve third party land and therefore could not be delivered by this scheme.

·       Members queried how the site could be accessed and the length of time for a construction period.

It was noted the access junction to the site was the same access to the Aldi development.

The agent for the application highlighted that a construction management plan would be submitted following approval. There were 2 access points to the site and the construction timespan would be 5-6 years.

·       Whether any consideration had been given to properties closest to the Aldi development in terms of noise mitigations.

An acoustic fence had been proposed in order to mitigate noise from the nearby the Aldi development.

During questions to Officers, Members commented on:

·       Whether comments from Lincolnshire County Council on a crossing could be conditioned.

The Development Management & Enforcement Manager clarified that Lincolnshire County Council had specified their request for a puffin crossing. The additional condition recommended by the late items paper would require submission of details and consideration of technical matters and traffic flow impacts in consultation with Lincolnshire County Council.

·       Whether any Section 106 agreement funds had been secured for Education.

·       One Member requested further clarification on section 9.9 of the report which stated that the application proposals would accord with the adopted Development Plan, including the Stamford Neighbourhood Plan, when taken as a whole. There were no material considerations that indicate that planning permission  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

Proposal: Demolition of the existing grain store and erection of five dwellings

Location: Grain Store, Station Road, Twenty, PE10 0AZ

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

Proposal: Demolition of the existing grain store and erection of five dwellings

Location: Grain Store, Station Road, Twenty, PE10 0AZ

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             Councillor Zoe Lane

Applicant                                    Simon Thompson

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 Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

·       No comments received from Bourne Town Council.

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       No comments received from Environment Agency.

·       Comments received from Natural England.

·       Comments received from Bourne Civic Society.

(Councillor Vanessa Smith joined the meeting at 13:36).

During questions to Public Speakers, Members commented on:

The Assistant Director of Planning raised significant concerns in planning law, following a statement read provided by the District Ward Councillor. There was clear case law in this instance that indicated fallback position being a material consideration and must be given regard to. In doing so, three tests would need to be applied:

-       Whether there was lawful ability to undertake the fallback position and whether the permission could be legally undertaken.

-       Likelihood or real prospect of it occurring, if so;

-       The third test would be to make a comparison between the proposed development and the fallback position.

·       Clarification was sought on footprint changing.

The current application was slightly larger site with a larger footprint as the proposal was for a number of dwellings opposded to the conversion of a single building, as previously submitted. This meant a potential conflict in terms of the plan for a different site.

Members were requested to consider whether in planning terms, this proposal was a betterment from the fallback position in relation to harm.

·       Whether the proposal site contradicted Policy SP4.

The Case Officer evaluated the application on Policy SP5 and assessed the application in terms of it’s compliance with the development plan. This included making an assessment against the spatial policies. Once an assessment had been completed, the fallback position would then be taken into account.

The report set out that making the spatial assessment and a clear conflict with the spatial policy had been identified. The fallback position would be taken into account that establishes the principle of five dwellings on the site. Planning considerations were important to consider in relation to character, appearance and impact on residential amenity. The fallback position was a material consideration that outweighed the conflict of policies.

·       Clarification around the increase in size of the application, in relation to the previous application.

This application was 34sqm larger than the previous application.

·       Whether the brick and stonework of the proposed dwellings would be within keeping of the local area.

The buildings would be brick with slate or pantile roofing, which would be within keeping of the local area.

·       Concern was raised on ridge height and the chimneys proposed due to net zero carbon ambitions.

The ridge  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Proposal: Installation of 574 Solar PV panels

Location: Grantham Meres Leisure Centre, Trent Road, Grantham, NG31 7XQ

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT prior approval

Proposal: Installation of 574 Solar PV panels

Location: Grantham Meres Leisure Centre, Trent Road, Grantham, NG31 7XQ

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT prior approval

Together with:

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

·       Comments received from LCC Highways & SuDS.

·       No comments received from Grantham Town Council.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection.

(Councillor Patsy Ellis declared an interest in the application in her capacity as a Director of Leisure SK Ltd. She did not participate in the debate or vote).

During questions to Officers, Members commented on:

Clarification was sought on why the application had been brought to the Committee.

The application had been brought to Committee due to the Council being the Applicant.

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director of Planning and Growth to GRANT prior approval.

Proposal: Proposed single storey rear elevation extension, internal alterations to garage / store, and installation of 3no skylights to main 2-storey property.

Location: White Farm Cottage, 16 Pond Street, Harlaxton

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

Proposal: Proposed single storey rear elevation extension, internal alterations to garage / store, and installation of 3no skylights to main 2-storey property.

Location: White Farm Cottage, 16 Pond Street, Harlaxton

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

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines Supplementary Planning Document and National Planning Policy Framework.

·       No comments received from Harlaxton Parish Council.

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways & SuDS).

·       Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer.

(Councillor Patsy Ellis returned to the meeting).

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director of Planning and Growth 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:

a.    Proposed Plans and Elevations (Ref: 0257-02/Rev C)

Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.

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

Before the Development is Occupied

3)    Before any part of the development hereby permitted is occupied/brought into use, the external elevations shall have been completed in accordance with the materials stated in the submitted application forms, unless otherwise agreed 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.

          Ongoing Conditions       

4)    The annexe hereby permitted shall only be occupied for residential purposes which are ancillary to the residential use of the host dwelling; White Farm Cottage, 16 Pond Street, Harlaxton. The annexe shall not be let, leased, sold, split in title, or otherwise occupied such as to constitute the formation of an independent / separate dwelling or holiday let planning unit. Separate utilities, utility meters, oil tanks or septic tanks, shall not be installed. Separate vehicular access, parking or garden areas shall not be created / demarcated. A separate postal address shall not be created for the annexe.

Reason: The establishment of a further independent dwelling on the site would give rise to conditions detrimental to the amenity of the existing and proposed accommodation.

Proposal: Application for works to 0JSX (T6) - Fagus Sylvatica - Crown Lift to maximum of 6m, 4m only over driveway and 0JSW (T7) - Fagus Sylvatica Purpurea - Crown lift to a maximum of 3m, bark wound <30%

Location: Highgrove Gardens, Stamford, PE9 2GR

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT Consent, subject to conditions.

Proposal: Application for works to 0JSX (T6) - Fagus Sylvatica - Crown Lift to maximum of 6m, 4m only over driveway and 0JSW (T7) - Fagus Sylvatica Purpurea - Crown lift to a maximum of 3m, bark wound <30%

Location: Highgrove Gardens, Stamford, PE9 2GR

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT Consent, subject to conditions.

Together with:

·       No comments received from Stamford Town Council.

During questions to Officers, Members commented on:

·       Confirmation on where the expertise advice had come from.

The Council’s asset team had commissioned an arboriculturist who worked on behalf of North Kesteven District Council to carry out an independent survey of the trees.

·       Whether Officer’s were satisfied with the overall shape of the tree given the difference in heights of the trees.

The height provided within the report was a maximum height of 6 metres. The recommended condition included required the actual works to maintain a balanced appearance to the tree.

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

(1)    Crown lifting shall be to a maximum height above ground level as described in the accompanying paperwork.  This work shall involve the removal of low branches to the height specified and result in a tree of balanced appearance.  Those branches to be removed shall be cut at their origin and all branch collars shall be left intact.  Climbing irons or 'spikes' shall not be used and the works shall have regard to the BS3998 (2010) Tree Work-Recommendations.

Reason:  In the interests of visual amenity and tree health and for the avoidance of doubt.

There were none.

 The Chairman closed the meeting at 15:28.