Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence and notification of substitutes (if any).

There were apologies for absence from Councillors Colin Brotherton, Claire Rylott and Paul Skinner

To sign and confirm the minutes of the last meeting, held on 11^th October 2016.

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 11^th October 2016 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman with the addition of the drawing number (Dwg No 0210 LPA1)  indicated in condition 1 of application number B/16/0210 (Minute 48 refers). 

To receive declarations of interests in respect of any item on the agenda.

Councillor Maureen Dennis declared having discussed application number B/16/0317 with the parish council but had not formed an opinion.

Councillor David Brown declared a pecuniary interest in application number B/16/0313 and would leave the room when this item was considered.  Councillor Brown also declared that he had seen the plans relating to application number B/16/0322 at Wyberton Parish Council and at the planning office and had made an enquiry about it with the Senior Planning Officer, but this was a matter of predisposition and not predetermination.

Councillor Alison Austin declared she had also been present at the Wyberton Parish Council meeting when application number B/16/0322 was discussed, but had taken no part in the discussion. 

Councillor Stephen Woodliffe declared having received e-mails with respect to applications, but it was his practice not to read them and kept an open mind.

Councillor Brian Rush declared having seen application number B/16/0282 purely for information, but had not discussed it.

To answer any written questions received from members of the public no later than 5 p.m. two clear working days prior to the meeting.

There were no public questions.

Application Type:     Outline Planning Permission

Proposal:                   Outline application with some matters reserved for later approval (consideration given to access only) for the demolition of outbuildings and the construction of 14no dwellings

Site:                            Yew Lodge, Wigtoft Road, Sutterton, Boston, Lincolnshire, PE20 2EE

Applicant:                  Mr Dan Sullivan

Proposal:     Outline application with some matters reserved for later approval (consideration given to access only) for the demolition of outbuildings and the construction of 14no dwellings

Site:              Yew Lodge, Wigtoft Road, Sutterton, Boston, Lincolnshire, PE20 2EE

Applicant:    Mr Dan Sullivan

[Councillor David Brown left the room for the entire consideration of this application.]

The Development Control Manager presented this application, stating that it was, effectively, a resubmission and that only the matter of the access was before the Committee for consideration.  It was recommended that, should the Committee be minded to approve it, an additional condition be attached to permission that no more than 14 dwellings be constructed.

An additional communication had been received, from the resident of Acacia House on Rainwall’s Lane, who was mainly concerned about the additional strain of surface water drainage and that a full evaluation of it should take place before development. 

The Committee then received representations from members of the public as follows.

Mr J Maltby spoke in objection to the application, citing the objections of the parish council, which were that the site was outside the village envelope; traffic issues; the effect on the street scene of the buildings to be demolished; lack of amenities and public transport and the lack of sustainability in terms of services, in particular the doctors’ surgery and the school, which had no room to expand even with a contribution from the developer.  This was not the preferred location for development; there were other safe sites in the village.  The site was designated as countryside and development would damage the character of the area.  If approved, the development should be restricted to bungalows in order to fit with existing bungalows.  Mr Maltby also referred to the lack of discussion of the riparian drain; the lack of a management plan for the pond on the site; the lack of consideration of light and noise pollution and the existence of two petitions relating to the lack of amenities. 

Mr R Lowe, the applicant’s agent, said that this was a repeat application that was exactly the same as the previous one, which had been revised to reduce the number of proposed dwellings to 14, except that it now came with a Section 106 Agreement for an education contribution of £22,500.  The objections raised were the same as those raised with respect to the previous application and the justification remained the same.  The decision to refuse the previous application had been appealed and had been dismissed purely on the grounds of the lack of an education contribution and this was now in place.  The application was outline only, with design and siting matters to come later.  However, it would cause difficulties to restrict dwellings to bungalows due to flood risk.  With respect to the concern raised by the resident of Acacia House, a full surface water survey was included in the application.  In conclusion, Mr Lowe stated that if the application was refused, the applicant would be likely to appeal and would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Application Type:        Full Planning Permission

Proposal:                     Proposed erection of 30 affordable dwellings, associated access roads, open spaces and attenuation pond

Site:                             Land off Meadow Way, Old Leake

Applicant:                    Mr Matthew Spittles, Boston Mayflower

Proposal:     Proposed erection of 30 affordable dwellings, associated access roads, open spaces and attenuation pond

Site:              Land off Meadow Way, Old Leake

Applicant:    Mr Matthew Spittles, Boston Mayflower

The Planning Officer presented this application and reported the following communications received after publication of the agenda:

·         Two further letters had been received from residents of Summerfields, reiterating objections regarding stretched public services; access to the doctor’s surgery; traffic congestion; drainage and flood risk; and noise. 

·         Old Leake Parish Council raised issues including the extra demand on services, specifically electricity and sewage; impact on the medical centre; maintenance of the pond; inclusion of grass cutting, landscaping and street lighting in a management plan; and the existence of a field entrance [which the Planning Officer pointed out was proposed to be blocked], adding that Boston Mayflower had attended their meeting in July and had spoken about prospective residents being elderly people, which was not the case.  However, the parish council had no objection in principle to the development with the recommended conditions. 

·         The application for the Co-op to set out its collection and delivery times had been approved as 7 am – 7 pm Monday to Sunday.

·         Councillor Barrie Pierpoint, writing as a Ward Member, said he would not be objecting to the scheme, but supported objectors’ comments, and also commended the applicant for consulting local residents. 

·         The Education Authority asked for a contribution.

·         The NHS had not replied to the consultation. 

[Councillor Anton Dani left the meeting at 3 pm]

The Committee then received representation from Mr I Penn of Longhurst Group who spoke on behalf of the applicant, Boston Mayflower, describing the application as an important step for the growth plans of this non-profit charity.  The proposal was for well-designed, good quality affordable housing for local people that would reflect the character of the area.  The parish council supported it and it responded to needs reported by the housing authority.  The proposal was not overly dense and included sufficient parking.  The buffer would minimise its impact.  A drainage strategy would be prepared in consultation with Anglian Water. 

Mr Penn pointed out that the site was identified as potential housing allocation in the emerging Local Plan.  The proposal would result in a £3.5m investment in Old Leake to fulfil local housing needs.  However, there were viability challenges, for example, flood risk had added to the costs due to ground conditions.  The scheme would not be viable if a Section 106 Agreement was attached.  Crucial external funding of £1m had been sourced, but this could be lost if the application was refused.  The application complied with planning policy and there had been no objections from consultees.

It was proposed by Councillor Mike Cooper and seconded by Councillor Jonathan Noble that authority be delegated to grant planning permission as recommended. 

Vote: Unanimous

RESOLVED that AUTHORITY BE DELEGATED TO GRANT Planning Permission subject to the submission of a satisfactory Unilateral Undertaking to ensure that the affordable housing is retained in perpetuity, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Application Type:        Full Planning Permission

Proposal:                    Demolition of a chandlery, detached house and cottage and reduction in height of boundary walls plus the construction of 23 residential apartments (originally 24) together with ancillary external works including parking provision and the extinguishing of a vehicular access point

Site:                             5-7 Witham Bank East, Boston, Lincolnshire, PE21 9JU

Applicant:                    Mr Oliver Tookman, Grand Gables Ltd

Proposal:     Demolition of a chandlery, detached house and cottage and reduction in height of boundary walls plus the construction of 23 residential apartments (originally 24) together with ancillary external works including parking provision and the extinguishing of a vehicular access point

Site:              5-7 Witham Bank East, Boston, Lincolnshire, PE21 9JU

Applicant:    Mr Oliver Tookman, Grand Gables Ltd

The Senior Planning Officer presented this application and reported the following communications received after publication of the agenda:

·         A letter from a resident of Lambs Row, objecting to the application on the grounds of visual impact, loss of light, proximity, overshadowing, inaccuracy of the plans and inadequate parking. 

·         The Environment Agency had withdrawn its objections relating to the Flood Risk Assessment subject to conditions 2 and 12, which would be revised in accordance with the amended plan. 

·         The local registered housing providers had confirmed they were not interested in acquiring any of the proposed apartments.

Members were advised that there had been in-depth discussions between the agent and the Head of Operations and Operations Manager with respect to waste disposal, resulting in a condition for a waste management strategy to be approved by the Local Planning Authority.  The height of the proposed building was indicated in comparison with the height of the building previously proposed and it was confirmed that the proposed building was of comparable height of other buildings in the wider context. 

It was proposed by Councillor Brian Rush and seconded by Councillor Yvonne Stevens that planning permission be granted as recommended. 

Vote: 5 for, 3 against, 1 abstention.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.           The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

§  Location plan ref A1171-01 (1/10)

§  Site layout plan ref A1171-002 Rev A ( 2a/10)

§  First and second floor layout ref A1171-003 Rev A (3a/10)

§  Roof plan ref A1171-004 Rev A (4a/10)

§  Site sections ref A1171-005 Rev A (5a/10)

§  Elevations sheet 1 of 2 ref A1171-006 Rev A (6a/10)

§  Elevations sheet 2 of 2 ref A1171-007 Rev A (7a/10)

§  View points and contextual elevation ref A1171-008 Rev A (8a/10)

§  Eastern boundary wall details ref A1171-10 (10/10)

            Reason: To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with the approved details and to accord with Adopted Local Plan Policy G1.

3.           The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of a comprehensive contaminated land investigation has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and until the scope of works approved therein have been implemented. The assessment shall include all of the following measures unless the LPA dispenses with any such requirements in writing:

a)   A Phase I desk study carried out to identify and evaluate all  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

Application Type:        Full Planning Permission

Proposal:                     Change of use of ground floor flat from a Day Centre to a 3 bed HMO (Class C4)

Site:                             79 Hardwick Estate, Kirton, Boston, Lincolnshire PE20 1HQ

Applicant:                    Mr Anthony Glover, Boston Mayflower

Proposal:     Change of use of ground floor flat from a Day Centre to a 3 bed HMO (Class C4)

Site:              79 Hardwick Estate, Kirton, Boston, Lincolnshire PE20 1HQ

Applicant:    Mr Anthony Glover, Boston Mayflower

The Development Control Manager presented this application and asked Members to receive a petition signed by 64 residents and take it into account when considering the application. 

Members were asked to note that the application was for a return to the original use class and occupancy was limited to three individuals, not six as stated by an objector, and this would be a less intensive use than its current use as a day centre.  The only stipulation sought by the Senior Housing Officer was the removal of the external door to Bedroom 3, which had now been deleted from the scheme.

In response to questions, the Development Control Manager suggested that the proposed corridor to separate the kitchen from the lounge could be for fire safety reasons.  The applicant had said the flat could not be let to a family as it had no communal spaces outside and Members had to consider use of land issues rather than management issues.  There had been no response to consultation from Kirton Parish Council.

It was proposed by Councillor Mike Cooper and seconded by Councillor Yvonne Stevens that the petition be received and planning permission granted as recommended. 

Vote: 7 for, 2 against

RESOLVED that:

A:        The petition be received, and

B:        Planning Permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions and reasons:

1.            The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.            The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application forms and the flood risk assessment (FRA) received 3^rd August, 26^th September and 19^th October 2016 and the following approved plans:-

§  1/6 Site Location Plan 1:1250

§  2/6 Site Plan 1:500

§  5a/6 Proposed Floor Layout 1:50

And the written statement submitted by Martin Woods of Boston Mayflower on 17^th October 2016.

            Reason: To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with      the approved details and to accord with Adopted Local Plan Policy G1.

In determining this application the authority has taken account of the guidance in paras 186 – 187 of the NPPF (2012) in order to seek to secure sustainable development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the Borough.

[Councillor Maureen Dennis left the meeting at 3.20 pm]

Application Type:        Outline Planning Permission

Proposal:                     Outline application with all matters reserved (access, appearance, scale, layout and landscaping) for the construction of two two-storey dwellings

Site:                             The land between 287 London Road and 4 West End Road, Wyberton, Boston, PE21 7DD

Applicant:                    Mrs D G M Wright & Mrs R M Lorimer

Proposal:     Outline application with all matters reserved (access, appearance, scale, layout and landscaping) for the construction of two two-storey dwellings

Site:              The land between 287 London Road and 4 West End Road, Wyberton, Boston, PE21 7DD

Applicant:    Mrs D G M Wright & Mrs R M Lorimer

The Planning Officer presented this application, adding that the distance of the site from the junction was 52m and the centre of the application site to the centre of the junction was approximately 45m.

The Committee received representation from Mr R Lowe, the applicant’s agent, who said the proposal would provide a better shape, frontage and access than proposals previously granted permission on this site and the applicant was happy to accept the recommended conditions. 

Mr Lowe addressed the concerns raised by objectors as follows:

·         The site was an area overgrown with weeds and brambles;

·         The houses could be built so no windows overlooked neighbouring properties;

·         The plan was only indicative; it did not show the final proposal;

·         The Highway Authority raised no concerns about highway safety and both accesses were a safe distance from the junction;

·         The private road was not single-track and another access recently approved on appeal was only half a mile further down London Road;

·         In terms of traffic speed, London Road was safer than it used to be;

·         Parking on London Road and West End Road would be affected regardless of whether this applicant was approved; yellow lines could be applied to the highway if the parish council considered they were needed.

Councillor Richard Austin then spoke as Ward Member and raised the concerns of Wyberton Parish Council regarding traffic issues.  Traffic on London Road was high-volume and fast (40 mph) and vehicles would inevitably park on the road where the Co-op, which the Highway Authority had objected to, had just received permission on appeal; this would cause problems.  The West End Road junction was also busy with traffic often queuing here and on Saundergate Lane; the proposed access points would exacerbate this. 

The Planning Officer advised Members that access points would be set by this application. Also, there was already a farm/residential access at this point, the Highway Authority had not objected to the proposal and the recent appeal decision on the Co-op application was a material consideration; Members would have to consider whether the proposal would result in significant amounts of vehicular movements. 

It was proposed by Councillor Mike Cooper and seconded by Councillor Alison Austin that planning permission be granted as recommended with an additional condition that it be limited to two dwellings.

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1.            No development shall commence until details of appearance, access, layout, landscaping and scale of the development (hereafter referred to as the “reserved matters”) have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

Reason: This is an outline application only and such details must be approved before development commences in order to comply with the objectives of Local Plan policies  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Delegated Decision List for Period 26 September 2016 to 21 October 2016  - For noting

The delegated decision list for 26^th September to 21^st October 2016 was noted.