Agenda item

Application S19/0740

Proposal:                 Construction of 22 dwellings and associated infrastructure (all 22 dwellings to be classed as ‘Entry Level’ affordable housing units)       

Location:                 Land at Bourne Road, Morton

Recommendation:   To approve the application subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement


Proposal:     Construction of 22 dwellings and associated infrastructure (all 22 dwellings to be classed as ‘Entry Level’ Affordable Housing Units)


Location:      Land at Bourne Road, Morton


Decision:      Minded to refuse the application


Noting comments made during the public speaking session by:


District Councillor

Councillor Sue Woolley

Morton Parish Council

Nicholas Walker

Applicant/Applicant’s Agent

Hannah Guy


Together with:


·         Representation received from Lincolnshire County Council Education and Cultural Services requiring a contribution to Bourne Academy

·         Comments from Heritage Lincolnshire, including the requirement for a Scheme of Archaeological Work to be commissioned

·         Comments from the SKDC Affordable Housing Officer

·         Comments from NHS England and no requirement for a Section 106 contributions

·         Comments from Anglian Water Services

·         No objection from Lincolnshire County Council Highways and SUDS Support

·         An objection from Morton Parish Council

·         Representations received as a result of public consultation

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

·         Site visit observations

·         The additional information report published on 20 July 2020 and officer comment thereon

·         Further information relating to affordable housing needs and traffic data for Morton, circulated on 22 July 2020 prior to the meeting

·         Comments made by Members at the meeting


In considering the application, Members expressed concern about several factors relating to the proposed site.


Referring to the data circulated in relation to traffic on the A15, the Committee felt that there would be a risk to pedestrian safety if the application were to be approved. Reference was made in particular to the location of local amenities, including the school, which was on the opposite side of the road from the proposed development site. Members asked if there was potential for the speed limit (currently 40mph) to be lowered, or if any measures would be put in place to mitigate any risk to the potential residents of the development.


Referring to Local Plan Policy ID2, Members queried whether the application would support the requirement to minimise the use of travel by car and maximise sustainable transport modes. If was noted that there were limited bus services available in the village and that the provision of two parking spaces per property in the proposed development could encourage residents to travel by car rather than use sustainable transport modes.


Members expressed their support for the principle of affordable housing but questioned whether there was a demonstrable need for the application under consideration. Reference was made to the provision for the development of affordable homes already contained within the Local Plan for Morton. The Committee did not consider there to be a need for the additional affordable homes in the proposed application.


A proposition was put forward to minded to refuse the application. As the proposition to refuse the application was contrary to officer recommendations, the cooling off period set out in Article 9.1.9 (c) of the Council’s Constitution was invoked, in line with the meeting procedure for virtual Planning Committee meetings. In accordance with the Constitution, a recorded vote was taken:


For: Councillors Bellamy, Dilks, Milnes, Reid, Jacky Smith and Adams

Against: Councillors Clack, Cottier, Exton and Judy Smith

Abstain: Councillors Bisnauthsing, Kaberry-Brown and Selby


The vote was carried and those Committee Members who voted in favour of the proposition that they were minded to refuse of the application had five working days to provide the Interim Head of Development Management with the planning reasons for their view, together with supporting evidence. The application would be placed on the agenda for consideration at a future meeting of the Planning Committee when the Interim Head of Development Management would provide his opinion on whether the reasons advanced were substantial enough for the authority to defend the decision at an inquiry. In light of any additional information, the Committee would then be empowered to determine the application without being fettered by their vote at the previous meeting.

Supporting documents: