Agenda and minutes
PDF 148 KBVenue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, St. Peter's Hill, Grantham. NG31 6PZ
Contact: Email: Democracy@southkesteven.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Register of attendance and apologies for absence
Additional documents: Minutes: An apology for absence had been received from Councillor Harish Bisnauthsing.
Councillor Richard Cleaver substituted for Councillor Harish Bisnauthsing.
Councillor Helen Crawford and Councillor Mary Whittington filled the two Conservative vacancies.
Councillor Phil Dilks filled the Alliance SK vacancy. |
|
|
Disclosure of interests
Members are asked to disclose any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting Additional documents: Minutes: No interests were disclosed.
|
|
|
Minutes of the Additional Meeting held on 17 November 2022
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the Additional Meeting held on 17 November 2022 were proposed, seconded, and AGREED as a correct record. |
|
|
Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 December 2022
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2022 were proposed, seconded, and AGREED as a correct record. |
|
Proposal: Two-storey classroom extensions to existing science block and additional external staircases. Location: Stamford School, St. Paul’s Street, Stamford, PE9 2BE Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions Additional documents: Minutes: Proposal: Two-storey classroom extensions to existing science block and additional external staircases.
Location: Stamford School, St. Paul’s Street, Stamford, PE9 2BE
Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions
Noting comments made in the public speaking session by:
On Behalf of the Applicant: Dean White (Bursar and Clerk to the Governor at Stamford Endowed schools)
Together with:
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2022-2036, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), Design Guidelines Supplementary Planning Document and Stamford Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2036. · No comments received from Anglian Water. · No comments received from Cadent Gas. · No comments received from Stamford Civic Society. · Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer. · Comments received from Stamford Town Council. · Comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection. · Comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire.
During questions to the Public Speaker, Members commented on:
· That the design of the existing building was not in line with the architectural heritage of Stamford. It was queried as to whether the Applicant had considered improving the appearance of the existing building when carrying out the proposed extension work. The Applicant had not considered making any adjustments to the existing building. · The location of the proposed trees was queried. The Applicant confirmed that the proposed trees would be used to soften boundaries between the site and the neighbours for overlooking purposes. · Concern was raised on the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the impact on neighbours. It was questioned as to who decided the site had no harm to visual amenity. It was confirmed to be a Planning Officer recommendation in line with the Conservation Officer’s comments and reviewed by the Principal Planning Officer.
During questions to Officers and debate, Members commented on:
· Several Members expressed their disappointment that the existing building would not be improved. It was suggested that the school revisit the possibility of upgrading the top floor of the existing building. · Members commented on the proposed trees for the site and that 2 trees would be planted for every 1. It was noted that three trees would be removed, however, they were relatively old in age and were not seen as a huge loss. · One Member queried as to whether planting 3 trees per 1 could be conditioned. The Planning Officer confirmed that the condition proposed was for the tree planting scheme to be submitted, however, the Applicants may be happy to work based on planting 3 trees per 1. · That the benefits of the proposal for the school children outweighed the visual impacts of the existing building.
It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director of Planning 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 ... view the full minutes text for item 58. |
|
Proposal: Application for approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for 17 (no) dwellings for over 55’s pursuant to outline planning permission S18/1408 Location: Spittlegate Farm, Gorse Lane, Grantham Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director - Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions Additional documents: Minutes: Proposal: Application for approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for 17 (no) dwellings for over 55’s pursuant to outline planning permission S18/1408
Location: Spittlegate Farm, Gorse Lane, Grantham
Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director - Planning to GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions
Together with:
· Provisions within the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document and Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD. · No comments received from Anglian Water. · No comments received from Association of Gardens Trust. · No comments received from Grantham Civic Society. · No comments received from Heritage Lincolnshire. · No comments received from Historic England. · Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways & SuDS). · No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Minerals). · Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue · No comments received from Lincolnshire Police and Crime Prevention Officer. · Comments received from SKDC Affordable Housing Officer. · Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer. · No comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection. · Comments received from SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer. · No comments received from SKDC Tree Officer. · No comments received from Ward Member.
During questions to Officers, Members commented on:
· Clarification was sought on whether the original application counteracted this application in terms of the S106 agreement which declared footpaths and other schemes. It was confirmed that the S106 agreement carried forward as part of reserved matters, which was a supplementary addition of the outline planning permission. The footpath was covered by condition which would be carried forward for the reserved matters application. · Whether the application provided any scope to protect birds nesting and provide bird boxes. The Planning Officer highlighted that a condition on the outline planning permission secured a scheme to provide bird and bat boxes, which would be in place for the reserved matters application. · Concern was raised on whether Highways or a private company wouldmaintain and cut the front boundary and prevent the boundary from overgrowing which could affect the footpath. The Planning Officer noted that it would depend on the extent of where the Highway boundary was placed as to whether Lincolnshire County Council would be responsible. If the boundary fell within the ownership of the applicant, a private management company would be expected to take on the responsibility.
During debate, Members commented on:
· One Member noted that Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue had submitted a formal objection on the grounds of inadequate water supply for firefighting purposes, they had suggested that additional hydrants were required. Furthermore, the report stated that it was not possible to impose any additional obligation requiring the provision of fire hydrants at this stage. It was highlighted that risks were increased when it came to fires in retirement or over 55 communities due to vulnerability and dependency of residents who reside in them. Concern was raised that a possible fire incident may occur and indicate that the Council had not considered to have met guidance at time ... view the full minutes text for item 59. |
|
|
Any other business, which the Chairman, by reason of special circumstances, decides is urgent
Additional documents: Minutes: There was none.
|
|
|
Close of Meeting
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman closed the meeting at 13:50. |