Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Charmaine Morgan, Paul Wood and Harrish Bisnauthsing. 

Councillor Max Sawyer substituted for Councillor Harrish Bisnauthsing.

Councillor Penny Milnes acted as Chairman for this meeting.

Councillor Pam Byrd declared she was a Member of the Wildlife Trust and came to the Committee with an open mind.

The Chairman made the following statement:

‘With regards to items 5,6,7 and 8 of the Agenda, I make a declaration on behalf of all members that whilst it is acknowledged that the Council either manage the property, are the Applicant or landowner, this will not affect how members of the planning committee determine the application. All members have been trained and will determine the applications in accordance with their planning training and with an open mind. Any member who does not feel they are open minded to determine the applications should make a declaration to that effect and not vote on the application.’

One Member highlighted the minutes of the meeting held on 11 December 2025 were not included within the agenda.

The determination of the minutes were DEFERRED to the next meeting.

Proposal: Change of Use of agriculture to multi-functional Nature Reserve and associated engineering operations

Location: Bourne North Fen Nature Reserve, Spalding Road, Twenty, Bourne, PE10 0AU

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

Proposal: Change of Use of agriculture to multi-functional Nature Reserve and associated engineering operations

Location: Bourne North Fen Nature Reserve, Spalding Road

Twenty, Bourne, PE10 0AU

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

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Agent                                     Mark Tarttelin - Wild Planet Associates (Working on behalf of the Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust) [Answer questions only]

Together with: 

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

·       No comments received from Anglian Water.

·       No comments received from Bourne Town Council.

·       Comments received from Environmental Agency.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Heritage Trust of Lincolnshire.

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire County Council Highways.

·       No comments received from Natural England.

·       Comments received from SKDC Tree Officer.

·       No comments received from South Holland District Council.

·       No comments received from Welland and Deepings Internal Drainage Board.

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

·       Whether the site had any proposals for a level of access open to members of the public.

The agent confirmed there were no proposals at present for full public access to the site. It was noted that public open days would be explored going forward.

·       How the long-term management of the site would be secured and enforced.

A S106 agreement would be secured and monitored.

·       Whether the Agent could address the points outlined by the SKDC Tree Officer.

The Agent confirmed the comments had been taken on board. It was hoped all trees would be maintained and the proposal outlined would not impact any trees and would be monitored through the S106 agreement.

·       Whether there were any harms against the current use of the site as agricultural land.

It was highlighted the project going forward would explore the way that nature reserves sit within the landscape, however, there would still be agricultural activities within the site. It was noted there were no harms.

·       Clarification was sought on lack of information on paludiculture.

It was noted that parts of the reports were redacted around protected species, which was routine in a planning process.

·       Whether there was a concern for possible flooding and whether any mitigations would be implemented as a preventative.

The Agent confirmed they were aware of the flooding concerns. They were open to working with the Environment Agency and explore funding opportunities for studies.

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

·       Whether the Officer was satisfied that S106 conditions were robust enough to secure the benefits of the development.

The S106 agreement predominantly related to a habitat management and monitoring plan going forward. Part of that plan was to secure a mechanism on how many units created might be used.

It was highlighted the legal agreement was based on the same template used for the Boothby Wildland application.

·       It was queried whether any engineering works would require building regulations alongside any traffic concerns during construction phase.

The Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.

Proposal: Change of use from an area of the recreation ground to a community activity hub

Location: Dysart Park, Houghton Road, Grantham

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

Proposal: Change of use from an area of the recreation ground to a community activity hub

Location: Dysart Park, Houghton Road, Grantham

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

(Councillor Patsy Ellis declared this application was within her Ward, however, she came to the meeting with an open view).

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Planning Agent                                         Planning Agent - Georgina McCrae

Inspire + - Emma Sharpe

District Ward Councillor                            Councillor Charmaine Morgan (Statement)

Together with: 

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).

·       No comments received from Grantham Town Council.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways).

The following comments were made by the public speaker:

·       The District Ward Councillor highlighted the applications would be a real investment in the targeted support for young people who had previously been hard to reach.

·       It was outlined that there had previously been anti-social behaviour concerns within the park and the applications were desired to support the young people whilst protecting residential amenity.

·       Inspire + commented on the clear significant benefit that the applications would bring to the community, alongside the health and wellbeing improvement.

·       The applications were in line with the Council’s policies and Lincolnshire County Council (Highways) had not raised any objections.

·       The hub would be around 40m away from the nearest residential property, there was an overall support from the local community.

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

·       A query was raised on who would lead the forest school at the hub.

It was confirmed the forest school would be led by Inspire +, however, local experts and contacts would be involved in the running of the forest school.

·       Whether an application for a community fund would be considered for additional security to the site.

Inspire + were aware of the anti-social behaviour within the park, security measures were being considered and funding options were being explored.

·       Clarification was sought around the type of organisation that Inspire + were.

It was clarified that Inspire + was a charity founded in 2011. At present they had a holiday club provision, deliver apprenticeships in local schools and had been successful in the local area.

·       A query was raised on how the project would be funded ongoing.

Inspire + had received funding from the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, which was used to install perimeter fencing and put towards cost of equipment for the forest school. Local businesses and organisations had shown an interest in supporting Inspire +. Other funding opportunities were being explored.

·       The flexibility of opening times of the hub was queried. Further clarification was sought around the supervision and safeguarding of children when attending the forest school.

The hub would be flexible in terms of timings, and the ambition was for it to be owned by the local community as a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

Proposal: Use of land for multi-use games/sports area (MUGA) (Use Class F2) at Dysart Park

Location: Dysart Park, Houghton Road, Grantham

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT the Lawful Development Certificate

(Councillor Patsy Ellis declared this application was within her Ward, however, she came to the meeting with an open view).

Together with: 

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).

·       No comments received from Grantham Town Council.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways).

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

·       One Member queried the ongoing maintenance of the MUGA.

The Assistant Director of Planning and Growth reminded the Committee that the Lawful Development Certificate was to decide whether it was lawful for planning permission or not.

As the Council were the Applicant, the leisure team would take ongoing maintenance into consideration.

Final Decision

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed works.

Proposal: Division of 1no. dwelling into 2no. dwellings. The erection of a porch side extension and 3 x rear extensions

Location: 16 And 18 Market Place, Folkingham, Lincolnshire, NG34 0SF

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT the lawful development certificate

Proposal: Division of 1no. dwelling into 2no. dwellings. The erection of a porch side extension and 3 x rear extensions.

Location: 16 And 18 Market Place, Folkingham, Lincolnshire, NG34 0SF

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT the lawful development certificate

Together with: 

·       Provisions within the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

·       No comments received from Parish Council.

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

·       Whether the proposed works would enhance the building from its current condition.

·       Clarification was sought around the 10-year rule in terms of enforcement.

The Planning Officer clarified for the period for it to become immune from enforcement action was 10 years. The works were carried out in terms of the subdivision and extensions (side and rear). Following Officer assessment, the subdivision was completed prior in excess of 10 years.

·       A query was raised whether the cement mortar and replaced in any other areas of the site.

It was confirmed that where any cement mortar on the building has been removed, it had proposed to be replaced.

·       One Member raised how the application site had not been brought to the Committee’s attention previously and what had prompted the application to be brought to Committee.

The Planning Officer highlighted that the Officers had been made aware of the application and then invited Applicant’s to put forward the application and demonstrate it to be lawful.

The Lawful Development Certificate would show that the application was not completed in excess of 10 years. If the application was not lawful, sufficient evidence would need to be provided.

·       A query was raised on whether the Council owned the property.  

It was clarified the property was Council-owned.

The Principal Development Management Planner highlighted that the Lawful Development Certificate dealt with the extensions and any development elements of the application. The Listed Building Consent dealt with the retrospective elements of the application and also works that were being proposed in terms of enhancing the building.

The Assistant Director of Planning and Growth further clarified that the Planning Authority were only aware of the application due to discussions around works to make improvements to the property. At this point, the Planning Authority became aware of previous alterations to the property.

Final decision

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT the lawful development certificate.

Proposal: Various remedial works to restore the external facades and remove previous works that are not in-keeping with the building's heritage. Retrospective permission for internal works to divide the property into two dwellings, and for a small side extension as well as various rear extensions

Location: 16 And 18 Market Place, Folkingham, NG34 0SFL

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT listed building consent, subject to conditions

Proposal: Various remedial works to restore the external facades and remove previous works that are not in-keeping with the building's heritage. Retrospective permission for internal works to divide the property into two dwellings, and for a small side extension as well as various rear extensions.

Location: 16 And 18 Market Place, Folkingham, NG34 0SFL

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT listed building consent, subject to conditions.

Together with: 

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

·       No comments received from Folkingham Parish Council.

·       No comments received from The Big Six Amenity Societies

Final decision

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director – Planning to GRANT listed building consent, subject to conditions:

Time Limit for Commencement

1. The works hereby consented shall be commenced before the expiration of three years from the date of this consent.

Reason: In order to ensure that the works are commenced in a timely manner, as set out in Sections 18 and 74 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended).

Approved Plans

2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following list of approved plans:

i.         Location Plan [received 06 October 2025]

ii.        12981-WMS-ZZ-ZZ-D-A-10201-S8-P01 – Proposed Works Building Plans [received 06 October 2025]]

ii         12981-WMS-ZZ-ZZ-D-A-10601-S8-P01  – Proposed Works Building Elevations [received 06 October 2025]

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 rendering hereby permitted is undertaken, specification of the render (including colour of any render, paintwork or colourwash) to be used in the construction of the external surfaces shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

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

4) Before the installation of any of the new external windows hereby consented, full details of all proposed joinery works for those windows, including 1:20 sample elevations and 1:1 joinery profiles, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The works shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory preservation of this listed building and in accordance with Policy EN6 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

5) Before the installation of any of the new external doors hereby consented, full details of all proposed joinery works for those doors, including 1:20 sample elevations and 1:1 joinery profiles, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The works shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory preservation of this listed building and in accordance with Policy EN6 of the adopted South Kesteven Local Plan.

6) Before any of the works  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

Proposal: Section 73 application to vary Condition 13 (Off-site highways works) of planning permission S24/1297

Location: Land to the north of Longcliffe Road, Grantham

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

Proposal: Section 73 application to vary Condition 13 (Off-site highways works) of planning permission S24/1297

Location: Land to the north of Longcliffe Road, Grantham

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

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

For                                                        George Wilkinson (Planning Manager from Allison Homes)

Together with: 

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

·       Comments received from Great Gonerby Parish Council.

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

·       No comments received from National Highways.

The following comments were made by the public speaker:

·       The application was for a variation of condition 13.

·       It was noted that traffic lights and signage had been agreed by Lincolnshire County Council (Highways).

·       Anglian Water had delayed works that were due to commence on 2 February 2026, these had been pushed back to the end of May 2026.

·       There had been no objections from Lincolnshire County Council (Highways) and a transport statement had been provided.

·       It was highlighted that highway footpaths and drive had been completed.

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

·       A query was raised on whether 13 of the properties were occupied. The condition stated that no houses could be occupied until the junction works had taken place meaning the condition had been breached.

The Public Speaker clarified that prior to the S278 agreement being in place, informal discussions had taken place with the Council and Lincolnshire County Council before a formal application was submitted. The site currently had 10 occupations on site as of September 2025. Since further analysis of the S278 agreement, no further properties had been occupied.

·       A query was raised on how many properties were complete and ready to sell.

It was confirmed that the site had 60 occupations and whilst the works are complete, there would be no breach of condition. By June 2026, the site would be around 50 occupations. The earliest that the properties could be occupied is mid-March 2026.

·       Whether the properties were social or public housing.

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

·       One Member questioned whether any record of the discussions had been documented, as they could not be seen in the report.

The Principal Development Management Planner clarified that the Council, Lincolnshire County Council and Alison Homes were notified of the likely breach of condition. The critical point for the Planning Authority was to determine whether it was expedient to take action and the likelihood of harm arising.

An informal conversation took place with Lincolnshire County Council about whether 60 occupations would be harmful to the junction in terms of capacity. They had informally confirmed that capacity would not be an issue, subject to evidence through the modelling as part of the transport assessment.

The Development Management and Enforcement Manager noted the application was a form of enforcement action. An alternative approach may have been to not submit a retrospective  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

Proposal: Application for approval of reserved matters relating to layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the erection of up to 50 dwellings pursuant to outline planning permission S20/0775

Location: Land West of Main Road, Long Bennington

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT reserved matters consent, subject to conditions

(Councillor Vanessa Smith joined the meeting).

Proposal: Application for approval of reserved matters relating to layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the erection of up to 50 dwellings pursuant to outline planning permission S20/0775

Location: Land West of Main Road, Long Bennington

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT reserved matters consent, subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Long Bennington Parish Council          Cllr John Leventhall

Applicant                                               Edward Langtry, Arkwood Developments Ltd (Lee Russell of Seagate Homes to answer questions)

Together with: 

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

·       Comments received from Long Bennington Parish Council.

·       Comments received from Local Highway Authority.

·       Comments received from Fire and Rescue.

·       Comments received from Anglian Water.

·       Comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Upper Witham IDB.

·       Comments received from SKDC Affordable Housing.

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

·       The Parish Councillor provided concerns from Long Bennington Parish Council around drainage. This had been recognised via local knowledge in the area.

·       It was noted there was a sewerage connection upstream of the development and a connection further south of the site.

·       It was stated there was periodic intervention from Anglian Water on capacity. It would be preferred if the site was connected further south of the site.

·       Concern was raised on the 1.8m mesh boarded fencing which would not provide a barrier for privacy.

·       The Applicant highlighted the site was secure for developing properties.

·       The existing outline permission was approved for 30% affordable housing (2-5 bedrooms), 1/5 of the site being bungalows.

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

·       Whether the Parish Councillor had any knowledge on how long concerns had been ongoing in relation to flooding.

The Parish Councillor clarified the sewerage would overflow a couple of times per year. Anglian Water were regularly called to unblock water treatments in the area.

·       A Member of the Committee sought reassurance that the Applicant would look into drainage concerns. They also requested that the Applicant liaises with local residents on their concerns.

The Applicant highlighted a revised drainage strategy would be completed alongside a pre-application with Anglian Water on the connection.

·       A query was raised on the hedgerow to the northern boundary of the site and the access to maintaining it.

In terms of boundary treatment, a 1.5m fence was proposed, however, privacy concerns raised would be taken into consideration. The hedgerow would still be maintained to facilitate birds, local ecology and habitation.

·       Clarification was sought around who was responsible for the drainage.

Condition 9 of the outline planning permission did require specification and the ongoing maintenance of the drainage.

·       One Member queried whether there were any pathways from the proposed properties to the children’s play area.

The Applicant’s confirmed footpaths and roads had ben discussed with Highways. Crossing points had been advised but had not yet been confirmed. Shared surface roads would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of a Residential Care Home (Use Class C2) to two 12-bedroom House of Multiple Occupancy (Use Class Sui Generis)

Location: Birchwood Nursing Home, 6 Dudley Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 9AA

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

Proposal: Planning application for a proposed change of use of a Residential Care Home (Use Class C2) to two 12-bedroom House of Multiple Occupancy (Use Class Sui Generis).

Location: Birchwood Nursing Home, 6 Dudley Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 9AA

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                  Cllr Matt Bailey – statement to be read out

Cllr Patsy Ellis

Cllr Graham Jeal

  Against                               John Morgan (speaking as St Vincent Town Ward Councillor but not on behalf of the Town Council)

Steven Preston

Caryn Garner

  Applicant                           John Benson – statement to be read out

Together with: 

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011 – 2036, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Lincolnshire County Council (Highways).

·       Comments received from Grantham Town Council.

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire County Council (Community Based Services).

·       Comments received Lincolnshire Police (Designing Out Crime).

·       Comments received from Grantham Town Councillor Tracey Forman.

·       Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer.

·       No comments received from Environmental Protection.

·       Comments received from Grantham Town Councillor John Morgan.

·       Comments received from Grantham Town and District Ward Councillor Charmaine Morgan.

Councillor Sarah Trotter made the following statement:

‘As community champions, it is legitimate for members to campaign on local issues and advocate for their residents. This is support by section 25 of the Localism Act 2011, which provides that members should not be regarded as having a closed mind, simply because they, directly or indirectly previously indicated a position they may take in relation to a particular matter.

A Member is entitled to be predisposed on a matter before it comes to Committee, provided they remain open to considering all the arguments and changing their views in light of the information presented at the meeting. Whilst it is the case that the SKDC Conservative Group have actively advocated for greater statutory rigour around HMO’s and a removal of associated permitted development rights. I personally consider that I have an open mind upon the application to be determined. I can openly consider all planning arguments and information presented upon this specific application before forming any firm view upon the decision to approve or refuse the application.’

(Councillor Helen Crawford and Gloria Johnson concurred with the statement made and remained open minded).

(Councillor Max Sawyer declared he knew a public speaker; however, he remained open minded on the application).

(Councillor Patsy Ellis did not sit on the Committee for this application, as she had registered to speak as Ward Councillor).

The following comments were made by the public speakers:

·       Excessive density contrary to Policy DE1.

·       Harm to Conservation Area through subdivision of heritage bay windows contrary to Policy EN6.

·       Adverse impact on neighbouring amenity contrary to Policy DE1 through waste management and noise.

·       Failure to demonstrate alternative uses explored as required by Policy SP6.

·       Nearby residents had sent 56 objection letters. This application would adversely impact residents of Dudley Road.

·       Concern was raised on cumulative impact of HMO’s in Grantham’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

There were none.

The Chairman closed the meeting at 16:38.