Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor David Bellamy.

Councillor Paul Fellows declared an interest on application S25/1676 as he was the Ward Councillor for the adjacent Ward to the application alongside a Member of Bourne Town Council. He had not taken part in any discussions on the application and came to the Committee with an open mind.

Councillor Helen Crawford declared an interest on application S25/1676 as she was speaking as Ward Councillor for the application. She would not participate in the debate or vote for this application.

Councillor Peter Stephens declared an interest on application S25/1676 as he knew the Applicant. He would not participate in the debate or vote for this application.

Councillor Sarah Trotter declared an interest on application S26/0354 as she was the Ward Councillor for the application. She came to the Committee with an open mind.

The Chairman made the following statement in relation to S26/0354:

‘I make the declaration on behalf of all members that whilst acknowledging that the Council owns the property, this would not affect how members of the Planning Committee determine the application. All members have been trained and will determine the application in accordance with their training and with an open mind’. Any members who do not feel that they are open minded to determine the application, should make a declaration to that effect and not vote on the application’.

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2026 were proposed, seconded and AGREED as a correct record.

The meeting was adjourned for 10 minutes for Members to consider the Agenda Supplement.

Proposal: Outline application with all matters reserved except for access for the erection of up to 270 dwellings including affordable housing, public open space, associated infrastructure, and vehicular access from West Road

Location: Land south-west of Bourne, PE10 0LB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT outline planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement and the conditions set out in this report.

Proposal: Outline application with all matters reserved except for access for the erection of up to 270 dwellings including affordable housing, public open space, associated infrastructure, and vehicular access from West Road

Location: Land south-west of Bourne, PE10 0LB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT outline planning permission, subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement and the conditions set out in this report

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillors                               Cllr Helen Crawford

                                                                       Cllr Sue Woolley (County Cllr for        adjoining County Division)

                                                                         Cllr Ken Redfern (Bourne South and Thurlby Division, LCC) *Statement*

Against                                                               Peter Sharpe

Agent                                                                  Brian Flynn, Carter Jonas

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven.

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection Services (SKDC).

·       Comments received from LCC Highways and SuDs.

·       Comments received from Anglian Water.

·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue.

·       No comments received from National Gas.

·       Comments received from Cadent Gas.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

·       Comments received from NATS Safeguarding.

·       No comments received from Active Travel England.

·       Comments received from Environment Agency.

·       Comments received from LCC Education.

·       Comments received from NHS Lincolnshire.

·       Comments received from Bourne Town Council.

·       Comments received from Natural England.

·       Comments received from Historic England.

·       Comments received from Affordable Housing.

·       Comments received from Conservation Officer.

·       Comments received from Black Sluice Drainage Board.

·       Comments received from Bourne Civic Society.

·       Comments received from Ministry of Defence Safeguarding.

·       Comments received from Principal Design Officer.

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

-       Concerns were raised over Highways and the safety impacts of commuting from the site into Bourne via car, alongside dangers of pedestrians crossing busy A roads, with inadequate safe crossing points. It was felt the proposal was in the wrong location.

-       Lincolnshire Road Partnership had provided a detailed breakdown of vehicular accidents that had occurred. 

-       That the application was within open countryside and that the community did not support the proposal in line with policies.

-       The Applicant had undertaken design review, pre-application discussions, Highways meetings and community consultation alongside a Parish Council meeting.

-       The proposal was put forward due to the housing land supply shortfall and a draft allocation of the site was subsequently added to allocations in the Local Plan Review, now abandoned in favour of the new system of Plan Making. The houses would include Affordable Housing.

-       New pedestrian crossings and bus stops on West Road and bus stops on the A151 but without adequate pedestrian crossings would be provided to connect the site to Bourne and Stamford.

-       The western edge of the site would be retained for open space and green infrastructure to reflect the design advice received.

During questions to public speakers, Members commented on the following:

-       Whether the provision of foot bridges on the bypass would make a difference.

It was confirmed the provision of foot bridges on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Proposal: Erection and operation of an energy storage system including associated infrastructure, engineering works, landscaping and formation of vehicular access from highway. With outline application (all matters reserved) for the erection and operation of a transmission substation with associated infrastructure.

Location: Land East Of The B6403 High Dike, Stoke Rochford, Grantham NG33 4EB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement

Proposal: Erection and operation of an energy storage system including associated infrastructure, engineering works, landscaping and formation of vehicular access from highway. With outline application (all matters reserved) for the erection and operation of a transmission substation with associated infrastructure

Location: Land East Of The B6403 High Dike, Stoke Rochford, Grantham NG33 4EB

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillor                                                                         Cllr David Bellamy

                                                                                                               Cllr Ben Green (Statement)

Against                                                                                                   Ursula Cholmeley

Applicant                                                                                                Marcus Evans (NatPower)

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), National Policy Statement for Energy (EN1) and National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy (EN-3).

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Police.

·       No comments received from National Gas.

·       Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Natural England.

·       Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council – Minerals and Waste.

·       Comments received from Environment Agency.

·       Comments received from Historic England.

·       Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council – Highways and SuDs.

·       Comments received fromNetwork Rail.

·       Comments received from Health and Safety Executive.

·       Comments received from SKDC Tree Officer.

·       Comments received from Anglian Water.

·       Comments received from National Highways.

·        Comments received from The Gardens Trust.

·       Comments received from Stoke Rochford and Easton Parish Council.

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

-       That the application did not comply with Policy E7 and was within open countryside.

-       There was no local economic benefit and would damage ancient woodland.

-       The outline application of the substation did not provide any further details on what would follow.

-       It would industrialise 44.6 hectares of open countryside with up to 1,142 battery containers, hardstanding, security fencing and a 15-metre substation.

-       It was felt the land would not return to farming afterwards. There would be hardstanding, access roads, altered ground levels, soil compaction and changes to field drainage. The detailed decommissioning scheme would not be submitted until the site had stopped operating.

-       Concern was raised on possible fire and the need for fire response, water availability, pollution control, construction management and protection of the East Coast Main Line and the ancient woodland.

-       The agent spoke on behalf of a developer that specialised in the infrastructure to improve UK energy security. Battery energy storage was a crucial part of modern energy systems.

-       The site was chosen as it sat directly alongside the existing 400kV overhead transmission line, crossing the site.

-       The scheme had been designed in accordance with National Fire Chief’s Council Guidance.

During questions to public speakers, Members commented on the following:

-       Why this specific site had been chosen for this application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Proposal: Construction of 4no. Dwellings

Location: Land between 16-18, Bourne Road, Colsterworth

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

Proposal: Construction of 4no. Dwellings

Location: Land between 16-18, Bourne Road, Colsterworth

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

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

District Ward Councillor                             Cllr David Bellamy

Against                                                       Peter Smith

Applicant                                                    Mr Jon Gibbison (Hereward Homes)

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), Neighbourhood Plan and Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection Services (SKDC).

·       Comments received from LCC highways and SuDs.

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

·       Comments received from Colsterworth and District Parish Council.

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

-       The history of the application was raised, where there was a previous refusal for five dwellings, however, three dwellings had received planning permission.

-       That the Parish Council and neighbouring properties felt four dwellings was out of character and would result in the introduction of a cramped form of development. Concern was raised on the continuous roofline of the dwellings proposed.

-       It was felt this proposal would cause overlooking issues with neighbouring properties.

-       Concern was raised on the driveways of the dwellings and vehicles having to join a busy road. It seemed the width of the driveway was only suitable for one vehicle to pass, which would cause possible traffic congestion.

-       The previously approved scheme included a large six-bedroom property, this application was to request that dwelling be split into two, three-bedroom properties. This was due to a reduction in demand of large executive homes.

-       There were no changes to the public footpath from this application to the fallback position.

During questions to public speakers, Members commented on the following:

-       Further clarification was sought around properties that would be overlooked by the development. The Speaker raised concerns on plot 12 and 16.

-       A suggestion was made on whether the previously approved six bedroom property could be split into two semi-detached dwellings without changing the layout of the development. As movement of the boundaries was causing overlooking concerns with neighbouring properties.

-       Clarification was sought whether the foundations of the site had already been established on site.

The Applicant confirmed they had aimed to complete the access road firstly and only a partial dig of a foundation had taken place which could be changed if necessary.

-       A suggestion was made to reduce the six bedroom property to a four bedroom.

The Applicant highlighted the proposal was made around financial viability of the sales of the properties.

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

-       Members were concerned of the overlooking element of the proposal.

Based on the existing boundary treatment and the plan submitted, the Officer felt there was no significant overlooking concern.

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

Time Limit for Commencement

1        The development hereby  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

Proposal: Change of use of warehouse/storage space into 2 separate units consisting of a takeaway and a barbershop

Location: 106 Church Street, Market Deeping, Lincolnshire, PE6 8AL

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

Proposal: Change of use of warehouse/storage space into 2 separate units consisting of a takeaway and a barbershop

Location: 106 Church Street, Market Deeping, Lincolnshire, PE6 8AL

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

This application was DEFERRED and would be heard at the next meeting of Planning Committee being held on 3 September 2026.

Proposal: Creation of 2no. parking spaces to front of property

Location: 5 Corby Road, Bitchfield, Lincolnshire, NG33 4DU

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

Proposal: Creation of 2no. parking spaces to front of property

Location: 5 Corby Road, Bitchfield, Lincolnshire, NG33 4DU

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

This application was DEFERRED and would be heard at the next meeting of Planning Committee being held on 3 September 2026.

There were none.

The Chairman closed the meeting at 17:19.