Agenda and minutes
PDF 156 KBVenue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, St. Peter's Hill, Grantham. NG31 6PZ
Contact: Email: Democracy@southkesteven.gov.uk
| No. | Item | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Register of attendance and apologies for absence
Minutes: Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Judy Smith, Rosemary Kaberry-Brown, Jacky Smith, Harish Bisnauthsing and Charmaine Morgan.
Councillors Ashley Baxter, Gloria Johnson, Nick Robins and Kaffy Rice-Oxley acted as substitutes, for this meeting only.
Councillor David Bellamy acted as Vice-Chairman, for this meeting only.
Councillor Ashley Baxter would be leaving the meeting at 2:45pm. |
|||||
|
Disclosure of interests
Members are asked to disclose any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting Minutes: Councillor David Bellamy confirmed that he would be speaking as Ward Councillor for Application S21/1906 but would not be involved in the debate.
Councillor Ashley Baxter confirmed that he would be speaking as Ward Councillor for Application S21/2138 but would not be involved in the debate.
Councillor Judy Stevens declared an interest in relation to S21/2138 that was a member of the Deepings Neighbourhood Planning Group.
(The Chairman adjourned the meeting for 15 minutes to ensure Committee Members could read the Additional Information papers.) |
|||||
|
Minutes of the meeting held on 21 April 2022
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 21 April 2022 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record. |
|||||
|
Application S21/2138
Proposal: Erection of a new discount foodstore (Use Class E) with access, car parking, landscaping and other associated works. Location: Land To The East Of Peterborough Road Market Deeping, PE6 8GQ Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to REFUSE planning permission for the reasons set-out in section 12 of this report. Additional documents: Minutes:
Decision: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to REFUSE planning permission for the reasons set-out in section 12 of this report.
Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:
District Ward Councillor: Councillor Ashley Baxter Councillor Virginia Moran Against: Christine Weguelin For: Kate Bleloch and Marcin Koszyczarek
Together with: · Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, the Deepings Neighbourhood Plan, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and supplementary planning documents. · Comments received from LCC Highways/LLFA. · Comments received from the Drainage Board. · Site observations. · 53 representations in objection and approx. 112 representations in support received as a result of publicity.
During questions to public speakers, Members commented on: · Whether another planning application was imminent for an additional discount store and whether the leases for the land in relation to this had been acquired back into control. · The impact of the proposed discount foodstore on town centre businesses. · The retail offer of the proposed discount foodstore.
During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on: · The outcome of the sequential test. · The availability and suitability of the site. · The number of discount retailers the town could support. · The level of car parking provision available in the town centre to support an additional store. · The need to support independent retailers in the area. · Provisions within the Deepings Neighbourhood Plan. · The views of existing retailers in relation to the proposed development.
It was proposed, seconded, and AGREED to refuse the application for the following reasons outlined in the Case Officer’s report:
The proposed development would result in a prominent, unattractive visual impact, particularly when entering the Deepings from the A15 North/Bourne roundabout, identified as Important Gateway 1 in the adopted Deepings Neighbourhood Plan. It would therefore be contrary to Deepings Neighbourhood Plan policy DNP10, Policy DE1 of the Local Plan, and Paragraph 130 of the NPPF.
· In conclusion, none of the additional items alter the recommendation to refuse the application. However it is recommended that the first reason for refusal is separated into 2 separate reasons as follows:
Reason 1
The application site is outside of the town centre. Based on the information and evidence available, including independent retail advice, there is a sequentially preferable site at land to the west of The Deepings Shopping Centre at Market Deeping. The applicant’s reasons for dismissing this alternative site as not being available or suitable have not been adequately substantiated. Therefore, the sequential test has not been passed and the proposal fails to comply with Policy DEP2 of the Local Plan, and paragraphs 87 and 88 of the NPPF.
Reason 2
The applicant has provided insufficient information to demonstrate that the proposed development would not give rise to significant adverse impacts on existing, committed and planned public and private investment ... view the full minutes text for item 154. |
|||||
|
Application S21/1906
Proposal: Reserved matters for appearance, layout, scale and access for the erection of 70 dwellings following Outline permission S18/2379. Location: Land West Off A1 And North Of Bourne Road, Colsterworth Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to approve the submitted reserved matters details, subject to conditions outlined in this report
Additional documents: Minutes:
Decision: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to approve the submitted reserved matters details, subject to conditions outlined in this report
Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:
District Ward Councillor: Councillor David Bellamy Against: Arthur Marshall Ken Vickers Applicant’s Agent: Paul Slater
(Councillor Robert Reid arrived at 14:50)
Together with: · Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and supplementary planning documents. · Comments received from Colsterworth Parish Council. · Comments, including proposed conditions, received from LCC Highways. · Comments received from Environmental Protection. · Comments received from Anglian Water. · Comments received from National Highways. · No objections received from Environment Agency. · Comments received from the Drainage Board. · Comments received from the Project Partnership Officer. · No comments received from Historic England. · No comments received from Gardens Trust. · Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue Services. · Site observations. · Representations received as a result of publicity.
During questions to public speakers, Members commented on: · The layout of the proposed development, particularly regarding its proximity to existing bungalows. · Concerns around the location of the proposed attenuation pond with relation to rainwater flooding. · Concerns relating to the proposed drainage strategy. · The level of engagement the applicant had undertaken with Anglian Water. · The improvements made to the proposed application, particularly the addition of the street trees. · The maintenance of the proposed street trees. · Concerns raised by neighbouring residents. · Concerns relating to the proximity of the nearby roundabout to the access to the proposed development. · Whether a more detailed drainage report could be provided. · Satisfaction was expressed with regards to the residential designs. · Concerns relating to parking.
During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on: · A need for the applicant to address the concerns expressed by Members. · The windows afforded by the proposed development. · A need to reassess the proposed drainage strategy. · The proximity of the proposed LEAP to the A1. · A need for the applicant to engage in consultation with the Parish Council and the relevant Ward Member prior to the application being represented to the Planning Committee.
It was proposed, seconded, and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to DEFER the application in order to allow the applicant to review the issues raised:
- Impact on 9/10 Meadow Close. Need to consider dwelling designs or ideally change house types to bungalows. - Clarify why ground conditions allow infiltration in the attenuation basin, but not for swales as part of the wider drainage strategy. - Provide rationale for why the access could not come off the roundabout (needs consultation and endorsement from LCC). - Agreed landscaping details. - Justification for parking (include RS request to change remove rear parking area).
(The Chairman adjourned the meeting for 5 minutes)
|
|||||
|
Application S21/0808
Proposal: Outline application (with all matters reserved except access and layout) for the erection of 1 dwelling and associated access. Location: Land at Pickworth Grange, Village Street, Pickworth Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director of Planning to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions outlined in this report.
Minutes: (Councillor Judy Stevens left the meeting)
Proposal: Outline application (with all matters reserved except access and layout) for the erection of 1 dwelling and associated access. Location: Land at Pickworth Grange, Village Street, Pickworth Decision: 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 Sarah Trotter Pickworth Parish Meeting: Mark Houldey Against: Aaron Bell Clare Murray Applicant: Mark Tucker
Together with:
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). · Comments received from Pickworth Parish Meeting. · Comments received from LCC Highways/suDS comments.
During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on:
· Whether the Planning Inspectors report of 1992 was considered on the application, as some information, policies and the Council’s Local Plan were still relevant to give weight on the application. · Concerns over local flooding. · Clarification on whether the Planning Inspector had taken away the permitted development rights or the right to develop the land. It was confirmed the Planning Inspector’s appeal decision was removing the permitted development rights. · Concerns over the proposals changing the street scene. · A query on the proposed site location and the driveway access. · Whether a covenant could be included within the application to exclude outbuildings or garages to be built. · Concerns over retention of the proposed hedge, landscape and open space. · Clarification was provided by the Legal Advisor on permitted development rights in relation to the Planning Inspectors report from 1992. · What the Council could do to ‘give weight’ to the Inspectors comments.
It was clarified that the outline application was for layout and access only.
It was proposed, seconded, and AGREED that the application be REFUSED for the following reason:
By virtue of the harm to the prevailing open character of the application site, in conjunction with the adjacent Village green, the application proposals would by contrary to Policy SP3(d), DE1 and SD1 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036 and Section 12 of the NPPF. There are no material considerations of sufficient weight to grant planning permission contrary to the development plan.
|
|||||
|
Application S21/1780
Proposal: Erection of 3(no) holiday let units and use of existing static caravan for holiday let purposes Location: Woodlands, Fen Lane, Long Bennington Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director for Planning to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.
Minutes: Proposal: Erection of 3(no) holiday let units and use of existing static caravan for holiday let purposes Location: Woodlands, Fen Lane, Long Bennington Decision: To authorise the Assistant Director for Planning to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.
Together with:
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Long Bennington Neighbourhood Development Plan, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). · No comments received from Cadent Gas. · No comments received from Environment Agency. · Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways and SuDS). · No comments received from Lincolnshire Fieldpaths Association. · No comments received from Lincolnshire Police Crime prevention Officer. · Comments received from Long Bennington Parish Council. · Comments received from National Highways (Highways England). · Comments received from SKDC Arboricultural Advisor. · Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection Officer. · Comments received from Upper Witham Internal Drainage Board. · Comments received from Ministry of Defence.
During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on: · A query was raised on owners of the land to the east of the site. · That the land to the East of the site was an illegal dumping site and has previously set on fire. It was suggested that a fire hydrant be installed if the Committee were to approve the application. · Concern over the microlight strip and whether it had planning permission. There was a permitted development right on the microlight strip for temporary use of land. · Clarification on the public bridleway and whether this would remain or be re-routed. · What the outcome would be if the applicant requested more caravans on the site at a later date. · Concerns were raised over policing aircraft movement and the residency status of the caravans. · Whether the ongoing occupancy restriction conditions could include the details of motor vehicle registration and aircraft registration. · Concerns over the condition and location of a fire hydrant. The condition would be worded to capture details of firefighting measures.
It was proposed, seconded and AGREED that the application be approved on the basis that firefighting measures were included and 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:
a. Proposed Block Plan (Ref: MSP.1828/002A) b. Proposed Floor Plan and Elevations (Ref: MSP.1828/003)
Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.
Reason: To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt.
Before Development is Commenced
Tree Protection Plan
3) No works or development shall take place until a final site specific arboricultural method statement and tree protection plan for the protection of the retained trees has been submitted to and approved by ... view the full minutes text for item 157. |
|||||
|
Application S21/2094 and S21/2095
Proposal: Erection of a new-built sheltered housing scheme of 20 no. flats with communal facilities and parking including demolition of an outbuilding listed by curtilage to 44-46 Watergate, and alteration / refurbishment of existing building on 20 Swinegate Location: 20 and 20B Swinegate, Grantham Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director for 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: Application S21/2094
Proposal: Erection of a new-built sheltered housing scheme of 20 no. flats with communal facilities and parking including demolition of an outbuilding listed by curtilage to 44-46 Watergate, and alteration / refurbishment of existing building on 20 Swinegate Location: 20 and 20B Swinegate, Grantham
Application S21/2095
Proposal: Demolition of an outbuilding listed by curtilage to 44-46 Watergate Location: 20 and 20B Swinegate, Grantham Decision: To authorise the Assistant Director for Planning to GRANT consent subject to conditions. These applications were discussed and debated together, however, were voted on separately.
Councillor Robert Reid declared that he was the Cabinet Member for Housing and Property and therefore, would not participate in the debate or vote on the two applications.
Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:
Colleague of SKDC: Head of Housing Technical Services - Julie Martin Against: James Smith For: Councillor Robert Reid (Cabinet Member for Housing and Property)
Together with (S21/2094):
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). · Comments received from Anglian Water. · No comments received from Cadent Gas. · Comments received from Environment Agency. · Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire. · Comments received from Historic England. · No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Education). · Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways & SuDS). · Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire & Rescue. · No comments received from Lincolnshire Police Crime Prevention Officer. · No comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust. · No comments received from National Grid. · Comments received from NHS Lincolnshire CCG. · Comments received from SKDC Arboricultural Advisor. · Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer. · Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection Officer. · Comments received from SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer. · Comments received from Upper Witham Internal Drainage Board. · No comments received from Victorian Society.
Together with (S21/2095):
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). · No comments received from Grantham Civic Society. · No comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire. · Comments received from Historic England. · Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer.
During questions to public speakers, Members commented on: · Clarification was provided that the social housing proposed would be for individuals aged 55 and over. During questions to officers and debate, Members commented on: · Whether the proposed units would contribute towards the overall Council’s housing stock of 650 a year. It was confirmed that they would fall under the housing contribution. · The Principal Planning Officer clarified that impacts on safety and wellbeing from parking provision had been considered significantly by Lincolnshire County Council. Lincolnshire Police were satisfied that the public thoroughfare would be covered by CCTV surveillance. A construction management plan was included as part of a condition that deals with matters in terms of noise and dust. The town centre ... view the full minutes text for item 158. |
|||||
|
Any other business, which the Chairman, by reason of special circumstances, decides is urgent
Minutes: There were none. |
|||||
|
Close of meeting
Minutes: The Chairman closed the meeting at 6:48pm.
During the meeting, it was proposed, seconded and AGREED to extend the meeting past the 3 hour threshold. |