Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Thursday, 24th March, 2022 1.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, St. Peter's Hill, Grantham. NG31 6PZ

Contact: Email: Democracy@southkesteven.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

117.

Apologies for absence

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Judy Smith, Robert Reid, Penny Milnes, Harish Bisnauthsing, Rosemary Kaberry-Brown and Charmaine Morgan.

     

    Councillors Paul Wood, Nick Robins, Sarah Trotter and Gloria Johnson acted as substitutes, for this meeting only.

     

    Councillor David Bellamy was acting as Vice-Chairman, for this meeting only.

118.

Disclosure of interests

    • Share this item

    Members are asked to disclose any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting

    Minutes:

    No disclosures of interests were disclosed.

     

119.

Minutes of the meeting held on 24 February 2022 pdf icon PDF 146 KB

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    The minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2022 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record.

120.

Application S21/1841 pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                         Erection of 199 dwellings with associated infrastructure, access and open space

    Location:                         Land south of Bourne Road and north of Swinstead Road, Corby Glen

    Recommendation:           To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to conditions outlined in this report. 

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Proposal:                         Erection of 199 dwellings with associated

                                             infrastructure, access and open space

    Location:                         Land south of Bourne Road and north of

                                             Swinstead Road, Corby Glen

    Recommendation:           To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning

                                             to GRANT planning permission, subject to the

    completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to conditions outlined in this report.

     

    Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:

     

    Parish Council:                  Corby Glen Parish Council

    Applicant’s agent:              Harry White

    Against:                             Maria Silabon       

     

    Together with:

     

    ·            Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan, Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven and National Planning Policy Framework.

    ·            Comments received from Anglian Water.

    ·            Comments received from Corby Glen Parish Council.

    ·            No comments received from Environment Agency.

    ·            Comment received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

    ·            Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Education).

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Minerals).

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue.

    ·            Comments received from Lincolnshire Police Crime Prevention Officer.

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

    ·            Comments received from NHS Lincolnshire CCG.

    ·            Comments received from SKDC Partnerships Project Officer.

    ·            Comments received from SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer.

    ·            Comments received from the Ward Member.

    ·            Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

    ·            Comments received from the applicant in respect of draft schedule conditions.

     

    During questions to public speakers, Members commented on:

     

    ·            Concerns were raised around the level of consultation undertaken by the developer to engage with the community.

    ·            Why bungalows had not been included within the application and whether other house types could be explored. 

    ·            The rationale behind open spaces included within the application and outside of the development.

    ·            Whether and how many UV car charging points would be installed whilst securing appropriate electricity provision.

    ·            Whether the developer would be opened to passing street naming responsibilities over to the Parish Council.

    ·            Whether contingencies would be implemented in relation to climate change.

    ·            The lack of S106 support for the primary school.

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·            Concerns were raised over the safety and accessibility between the development and the village and whether this could be mitigated into the development under a Section 106 contribution.

    ·             Whether there was a public crossing on Swinstead Road.

    ·            Comments raised from Anglian Water and why insufficient information was provided.

    ·            Further concerns on the lack of bungalows around the district.

    ·            Clarification was sought on the Planning terminology and wording provided.

    ·             Whether Lincolnshire County Council could be approached by schools after application approval to enquire for more funds to support the local primary school.

    ·            Whether the intended use of a post and rail divisionary fencing would be going ahead. It was confirmed that timber fencing would be between properties.

    ·            Clarification was sought on what a ‘Grampian condition’ was and how this would affect the footpath connection on the side of Bourne Road.

    ·            Whether the existing hedgerows along Bourne Road and Swinestead Road would be retained as the site boundary.

    ·            Which materials would be used as part of the chimney allocation plan?

    ·            Whether an ecological management plan could be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.

121.

Application S21/2500 pdf icon PDF 946 KB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                       Proposed details of the reserved matters relating to external appearance, layout, scale and landscaping (related to S20/1169)

     

      Location:                         Land North Of Wilsford Lane, Ancaster, NG32 3PS

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

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Proposal:                         Proposed details of the reserved matters relating to external appearance, layout, scale and landscaping (related to S20/1169)

    Location:                         Land North Of Wilsford Lane, Ancaster, NG32 3PS

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

     

    Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:

     

    District Ward Councillor:       Councillor Ian Stokes

    Applicant’s agent:                 Sav Patel

     

    Together with:

     

    ·            Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven and National Planning Policy Framework and relevant Planning History.

    ·            Comments received from Ancaster Parish Council.

    ·            Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council Highways.

    ·            Comments following revised plan.

    ·            Comment received from Anglian Water.

    ·            No objections from North Kesteven District Council.

    ·            Comments received from Affordable Housing Officer.

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue Services.

    ·            Comments received from representations as a result of publicity.

    ·            Responses sent to objections.

     

    During questions to public speakers, Members commented on:

     

    ·            Why the developer had not anticipated to provide bungalows in the application.

    ·            Whether the developer would provide EV charging points for every dwelling on site.

    ·            A query was raised on the construction traffic entrance and exit.

    ·            Clarification was sought on the type of fencing that would be built around the pond.

    ·            A further query was raised on who would be maintaining the road network on the site.

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·            Whether any of the proposed properties were accessible for residents with physical disabilities. It was noted that 10% of the houses proposed would need to be accessible.

    ·            Concerns over the play area being adjacent to the pond.

    ·            Concerns over climate change mitigations.

    ·            Whether there was a condition on UV charging points. It was confirmed that there was a condition on UV charging points and that they comply with the sustainability statement.

    ·            Whether UV charging points would be included within the price of the house.

    ·            Concerns around tandem parking.

     

    It was agreed that the below informative would be included:

     

    That the fencing around the play area is made from metal (900mm high X 12mm bar bow top railings).

     

    It was proposed, seconded and AGREED that the application be approved for the summary of reasons set out in the Case Officer’s report together with the following conditions and with amendments as per the additional items paper:

     

    Time Limit for Commencement

     

    1)    The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of two 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: (Please note the list of plans is to be updated prior to committee following receipt of full set of revised plans to reflect the revised layout plan)

     

    9034 – 001 Location Plan

    9034 - 003 E  Revised Black and White Site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 121.

122.

Application S21/0655 pdf icon PDF 1 MB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                          Development of 43 affordable dwellings and         associated infrastructure

     

    Location:                           Land west of Main Road, Long Bennington

     

    Recommendation:            To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to conditions outlined in this report.

    Minutes:

    Proposal: Development of 43 affordable dwellings and associated infrastructure

    Location: Land west of Main Road, Long Bennington

    Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to conditions outlined in this report.

     

    Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:

     

    Against:                                Dave McCarroll

    Applicant’s agent:                 Jake Stentiford

     

    Together with:

     

    ·       Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Document (adopted November 2021), Long Bennington Neighbourhood Development Plan 2016-2026 and National Planning Policy Framework.

    ·       Comments received from Long Bennington Parish Council.

    ·       Comments received from Partnership Project Officer (affordable housing).

    ·       Comments received from Anglian Water.

    ·       No comments received from Environment Agency.

    ·       Comments received from Trent Valley Internal Drainage Board.

    ·       Comments received from Severn Trent Water.

    ·       Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

    ·       Comments received from Tree Officer.

    ·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

    ·       No comments received from National Highways.

    ·       Comments received from LCC Highways & SuDS.

    ·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Fire & Resuce.

    ·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Police Crime Prevention Officer.

    ·       No comments received from Natural England.

    ·       Comments received from NHS England.

     

    During questions to public speakers, Members commented on:

     

    ·       The rationale behind putting the two-story proposed dwellings abutting existing bungalows and whether this could be changed.

    ·       A concern was raised on the lack of on-site open space.

    ·       Whether the developer was a charity or profit making.

    ·       Concern was raised on the comments received from Anglian water on the risk of unacceptable risk of flooding downstream without mitigation.

    ·       Whether the developer decided on affordable homes rather than a mixed variety of dwellings.

    ·       Whether the road running north/south on the development plan was road fit for emergency services.

    ·       Further disappointment was expressed in regard to the layout of the plan with existing bungalows abutting the proposed two-story dwellings.

    ·       A query was raised on the source of heating that would be provided on the proposed properties.

    ·       Whether there had been any communication between the Developer and Officer in relation to re-locating the bungalows on the plan. The Officer confirmed that communications on this matter had taken place.

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·       Whether footway and highway cleaning could be included as part of the construction plan.

    ·       Why a tree-line avenue was not included.

    ·       Clarification was sought on the materials to be used on the brick of the houses.

    ·       How much land outside of the local plan allocation was being encroached on.

    ·       Whether the condition relating to flooding, surface and foul water drainage systems would affect schemes being run by Lincolnshire County Council and Anglian Water.

    ·       Whether the 25 degree angle rule was based on light and outlook and was a national guideline.

    ·       Concerns were raised on the lack of public transportation in Long Bennington.

    ·       A query was raised on the meterage view lost between the corner of a two-story and a single-story building.

     

    The Committee raised their grave disappointment on the attitude received from the Developer.

     

    It was proposed,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 122.

123.

Application S21/0175 pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                          Submission for approval of reserved matters (aorm) relating to landscaping only pursuant to outline permission S15/3189

    Location:                          Land to the North of Longcliffe Road and South of Belton Lane, Grantham

    Recommendation:           That the Assistant Director – Planning is authorised     to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions and the completion of a Unilateral Undertaking.

     

    Minutes:

    Proposal:                         Submission for approval of reserved matters (aorm) relating to landscaping only pursuant to outline permission S15/3189

    Location:                         Land to the North of Longcliffe Road and South of Belton Lane, Grantham

    Decision:                         To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions and the completion of a Unilateral Undertaking.

     

    Noting:

     

    ·            Provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework, the South Kesteven Local Plan, the Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document and supplementary planning documents.

    ·            No comments received by Anglian Water

    ·            An objection received from the Association of Gardens Trust.

    ·            No response received from Belton and Manthorpe Parish Council.

    ·            No comments received from the Environment Agency.

    ·            No response received from Grantham Civic Society.

    ·            No response received from Great Gonerby Parish Council.

    ·            No comments received rom Historic England.

    ·            An initial objection received from the Internal Drainage Board.

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

    ·            No objections but comments received from Lincolnshire Fieldpaths Association.

    ·            No objections received from the Lincolnshire Police Crime Prevention Officer.

    ·            No response received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

    ·            Comments received from the Ministry of Defence.

    ·            Initial objection received from the National Trust.

    ·            No comments received from Natural England.

    ·            No response received from Network Rail.

    ·            No response received from the SKDC Arboricultural Advisor.

    ·            Comments received from the SKDC Conservation Officer.

    ·            No comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

    ·            Comments received from the SKDC Landscape Consultee.

    ·            Comments received from the SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer.

    ·            No objection and comments received from Sport England.

    ·            No response received from the Ward Councillor.

    ·            Site observations.

    ·            Representations as a result of publicity.

     

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·            It was expressed that the applicant should ensure that the appropriate trees be established as part of the development.

     

    It was proposed, seconded and AGREED that the application be approved subject to the completion of a Unilateral Undertaking to secure the off-site planting, the summary of reasons set out in the Case Officer’s report, and with the following 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.    Landscape Strategy Report (Ref: 21-1138 V4)

    b.    POS Character Areas (Ref: 21-1287 V3)

    c.     Detailed Landscape Design – Avenue (West) (Ref: 21-1470 V1)

    d.    Detailed Landscape Design – Avenue (East) (Ref: 21-1470 V1)

    e.    Detailed Landscape Design – Northern Gateway (Ref: 21-1480 V1)

    f.      Detailed Landscape Design – Western Belt (Ref: 21-1481 V2)

    g.    Detailed Landscape Design – Dragonfly Meadows (east) (Ref: 21-1482 V2)

    h.    Detailed Landscape Design – Dragonfly Meadows (south) (Ref: 21-1482 V2)

    i.      Detailed Landscape Design – Dragonfly Meadows (west) (Ref: 21-1482 V2)

    j.      Detailed Landscape Design – Running  ...  view the full minutes text for item 123.

124.

Application S21/0683 pdf icon PDF 2 MB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                            Redevelopment of site for mixed use development comprising Class C3(a) (Residential) and Class E(c)(ii) (Office) – Outline planning application considering appearance, layout and scale. 

     

    Location:                            Ross Thain & Co LTD, Belton Street, Stamford

     

    Recommendation:             To authorise the Assistant Director for Planning to REFUSE planning permission

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Proposal                          Redevelopment of site for mixed use development comprising Class C3(a) (Residential) and Class E(c)(ii) (Office) – Outline planning application considering appearance, layout and scale.

    Location                          Ross Thain & Co LTD, Belton Street, Stamford

    Decision                          That the Assistant Director for Planning is authorised to REFUSE planning permission

     

    Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:

     

    Applicant                           Mr Ross Thain

     

    Together with:

     

    ·            Provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework, the South Kesteven Local Plan, the Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD, the Design Guidelines for Rutland, the Draft Stamford Neighbourhood Plan (Examination Version) and supplementary planning documents.

    ·            Comments received from Anglian Water.

    ·            No comments received from Cadent Gas.

    ·            Comments received from Environment Agency.

    ·            No comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

    ·            No comments received from Historic England.

    ·            No comments received from the Internal Drainage Board.

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Education).

    ·            Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways & SuDS).

    ·            No objections received from Lincolnshire County Council (Minerals).

    ·            No comments received from Lincolnshire Fire & Rescue.

    ·            No objection received from the Lincolnshire Police Crime Prevention Officer.

    ·            Section 106 contributions requested from NHS Lincolnshire CCG.

    ·            Comments received from the SKDC Conservation Officer.

    ·            No objection subject to conditions and informatives received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

    ·            Comments received from the SKDC Partnership Projects Officer.

    ·            An objection received from the SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer.

    ·            An objection received from Stamford Town Council.

    ·            No comments received from The Association of Gardens Trust.

    ·            A representation received from the owners of the neighbouring property.

    ·            Representations received as a result of publicity.

     

    During questions to public speakers, Members commented on:

     

    ·            The car parking strategy proposed by the applicant and the number of car parking spaces afforded by this. The applicant confirmed that the proposed car parking strategy complied with requirements.

    ·            Whether the applicant considered the application to have an acceptable visual impact, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation as outlined in the report.

     

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·            Concerns were raised relating to poor access to the site due to the narrow streets.

    ·            The subjectivity of the views of consultees.

    ·            Whether there were any extant planning permissions for the site currently.

    ·            Amenity considerations, especially with regard to the extent the development overlooks the neighbouring car park.

    ·            The concerns expressed by Stamford Town Council.

    ·            The level of balance regarding the decision to recommend the application for refusal.

     

    It was proposed, seconded and AGREED that the application be refused for the summary of reasons set out in the Case Officer’s report:

     

    1                  As a result of the overall height and scale of the proposed terrace of townhouses fronting Gas Street, as well as the inappropriate, excessive “neo-Georgian” architectural style of the frontage elevation, the application proposals would give rise to less than substantial harm to the setting of the Stamford Conservation Area. The public benefits of the scheme are not considered to be sufficient to outweigh this less than substantial harm and, as such, the application proposals are considered to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 124.

125.

Application S21/2526 pdf icon PDF 459 KB

    • Share this item

    Proposal:                          Extension to existing storage building for E(g) and B8 use

     

    Location:                          Greeen + Ltd, Tunnel Bank, Bourne, Lincolnshire, PE10 0DJ

     

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

    Minutes:

    Proposal:                         Extension to existing storage building for E(g) and B8 use Green + Ltd

    Location:                         Tunnel Bank, Bourne, Lincolnshire, PE10 0DJ

    Decision:                         That the Assistant Director of Planning is authorised to GRANT planning permission

     

    Noting:

     

    ·            Provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework, the South Kesteven Local Plan and supplementary planning documents.

    ·            Support received from Bourne Town Council.

    ·            Comments received from LCC Highways/SuDS.

    ·            Additional condition recommended by the Environmental Protection Officer.

    ·            Comments received from Cadent Gas.

    ·            Representations received as a result of publicity.

    During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:

     

    ·            It was expressed that the expansion of the business was a positive for the district.

    ·            Whether approval of the application would lead to further employment in the area.

    It was proposed, seconded and AGREED that the application be approved for the summary of reasons set out in the Case Officer’s report together with the following 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:

     

    1419-3_PL_LP01 Location Plan

    1419-3_PL_EL02 Proposed Elevations

    1419-3_PL_PL02 Proposed Site Plan

    1419-3_PL_SP02 Proposed Site Plan

    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 brought into use, the external elevations shall have been completed using only the materials stated in the planning application forms.

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

     

    During Construction

     

    4.    Should the developer during excavation and construction works of the said development site find any area of the site where it is suspected that the land is contaminated then all works must stop and the local planning authority notified immediately. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with current good practice and legislation and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and the approved remediation shall thereafter be implemented. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

    Reason: To comply with Policy EN4 of the Local Plan (2020).

     

126.

Any other business, which the Chairman, by reason of special circumstances, decides is urgent

    • Share this item

127.

Close of meeting

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    The Chairman closed the meeting at 17:38.