Agenda item

Proposal: Application for the approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the erection of 150 residential units (Use Class C2), together with ancillary care, communal and wellbeing facilities pursuant to outline planning permission S20/2056

Location: Land to the north of Barnack Road, Stamford

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

Proposal: Application for the approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the erection of 150 residential units (Use Class C2), together with ancillary care, communal and wellbeing facilities pursuant to outline planning permission S20/2056

Location: Land to the north of Barnack Road, Stamford

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

 

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

 

Ellen Pearce, Head of Planning, Inspired Villages (Senior Living Stamford Ltd)

Mark Flood, Director, Insight Town Planning Ltd on behalf of Burghley Land Ltd (both answering questions only)

 

Together with:

 

·       Provisions within South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036, Stamford Neighbourhood Plan, Design Guidelines for Rutland and South Kesteven Supplementary Planning Document, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and South Kesteven Local Plan Review 2021 – 2041.

·       No comments received from Anglian Water.

·       No comments received from Barnack Parish Council.

·       No comments received from Environment Agency.

·       No comments received from Gardens Trust.

·       No comments received from Historic England.

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

·       No comments received fromLincolnshire Crime Prevention Officer

·       Comments received from Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

·       No comments received from Ministry of Defence – Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

·       No comments received from Network Rail.

·       Comments received from Peterborough City Council.

·       Comments received from SKDC Conservation Officer.

·       No comments received from SKDC Environmental Protection Officer.

·       Comments received from SKDC Principal Urban Design Officer

·       No comments received from St Martins Without Parish Council.

·       Comments received from Stamford Civic Society.

·       No comments received from Stamford Town Council.

·       No comments received from Wothorpe Parish Council

 

During questions to Public Speakers, Members commented on:

 

·       Whether there was any parking provision for the elderly residents and a storage facility for mobility scooters.

 

The Applicant confirmed there were 158 licensed car parking spaces for residents. The residents residing in the unit would be typically enter at 78 years old and bespoke parking data outlined only 70% of residents would arrive with a vehicle. Mobility scooters could be charged and stored within the cycle stores.

 

A village transport service would be facilitated to take residents where they wish to go within a certain radius, which could be pre-booked.

 

·       Whether there was a proposal to have any health provisions on-site.

 

Residents would typically have a care package tailored to their own needs. The S106 agreement secured a healthcare contribution of a provision within two miles of the town centre of Stamford, which could include a digital consultation suite, new clinical administration room and expansion of new primary care facilities in Stamford.

 

·       Whether the buildings would be designed in internal with a view to provide easy access for the elderly.

 

The proposed properties within the site were designed to be accessible and adaptable for aging communities.

 

·       Whether the retired residents would have full use of the community room.

 

The community room would be open and accessible to any member of the public which would include classes for the elderly residents and wellness facilities.

 

·       Clarification was sought around the age of the residents that would be residing within the proposed scheme.

 

The S106 agreement secures the occupants of the properties to be aged 55 or over who require a form of care.

 

·       Whether the properties would be rented out or bought by the residents.

·       Whether the Applicant (Inspire Villages) would deliver the car or whether this would be undertaken by another care company.

 

The Applicant confirmed the resident would have option to rent or purchase the property.

 

Inspired Villages worked in partnership with an agency in order to provide care to residents, however, residents had the opportunity to choose their own care provider.

 

·       A query was raised on how the community clubhouse would be financed.

 

Residents would pay a service charge which would cover staffing measures, the fee would be non-profit making that would be put back into the village.

 

During question to Officers and debate, Members commented on:

 

·       Whether the climate change provisions were similar to the rest of the site and whether the design of these particular properties would be distinguishable to other properties on the site and if there would be adequate signage and way finding.

 

It was clarified that although building materials would be similar, distinct character areas would distinguish each part of the scheme. 

 

·       Where there would be dedicated staff on the site 24 hours a day, due to the vulnerability of residents and how many.

 

The site would have a 24-hour response, where a member of staff is on the site each day, number of staff would vary throughout different periods. As the number of residents increase, so would the staff numbers. At day one, there would be 18 members of staff and would increase up to 25 staff members over time.

 

·       Whether a provision for couriers or short-term parking had been considered.

 

Within the plan, a service and delivery area for commercial deliveries was proposed for the village.

 

·       Clarification was sought whether any of the housing was affordable.

 

At outline stage, a financial vialbility exercise had taken place to assess the deliverability of the scheme as a whole. The exercise concluded that affordable housing would not be viable for the retirement village and did not require any affordable units within it.

 

·       It was queried what work had been undertaken with the fire brigade, given the vulnerability of residents.

 

The Principal Development Management Planner clarified building regulations and requirements would be at the discretion of building control.

 

·       Whether there would be any restrictions on pet ownership of residents.

 

Residents were able to bring any pets with then upon moving in.

 

·       The location of the shop on site was queried.

 

A shop was located close by to the community clubhouse. Residents could access the shop via the village bus service or a 15-minute walk.

 

·       Whether the provision of dropped kerbs would be implemented on site.

 

It was confirmed dropped kerbs would be implemented throughout the site to cater for mobility scooters. The site would also have traffic calmed areas where level access would be implemented.

·       A member commented the application would bring further employment opportunity to the site.

·       It was established the layout of the site meant the gym would be accessible to residents with minimal impact on their amenity.

(Councillor Tim Harrison abstained from the vote, due to the advice received from Lincolnshire County Council in relation to SuDS).

 

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to GRANT reserved matters consent, subject to conditions:

 

Approved Plans

 

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

a.    Application Document List (Dated 19 June 2025) (Revision D)

b.     

Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.

Reason: To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt.

 

During Building Works

 

Design Quality and Visual Impact

 

Materials Sample

 

2)    Before any works above foundation level of any building hereby permitted are begun, a detailed specification of the materials (including the colour of render, paintwork or colourwash) to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

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

 

Before the Development is Operational

 

Design Quality and Visual Impact

 

Materials Implementation

 

3)    No building forming part of the development hereby permitted shall be first occupied / brought into use, until that building has been completed in accordance with the approved external materials details.

 

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