Agenda item

Outline application with some matters reserved (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping reserved for later approval) for the erection of up to 96.no dwellings, public open space, attenuation pond and associated infrastructure (access only to be considered).

Land to the north of Wigtoft Road  Sutterton  Boston  PE20 2EQ

Lincolnshire County Council

Outline application with some matters reserved (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping reserved for later approval) for the erection of up to 96 no. dwellings, public open space, attenuation pond, and associated infrastructure (access only to be considered)

Land to the north of Wigtoft Road, Sutterton, Boston, PE20 2EQ

Lincolnshire County Council

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and confirmed that a written submission of representation had been received by Mr Robinson of 9 Blows Lane which had been circulated to committee ahead of the meeting and confirmed that resulted in 17 letters of representation being received in total. Members were reminded that the additional representation was a material consideration in determination of the application.

A further update to the report was noted and members were referred to page 33 of the report – point 8.20.  The affordable housing figure should read 11 and not 22 as noted.

Representation was received in objection to the application by Mr Robinson which included:

Stating that his detailed objection was already made public Mr Robinson stated that he maintained they were still relevant against the revisions submitted by the agenda and applicant that indicated no in-depth resolution of the problems affecting the site and local area including issues in respect of drainage.   Referencing the proposal for 96 homes Mr Robinson stated members needed to consider it with the 23 new homes already agreed along the western edge which would result in 119 homes in all.  Concern was noted that the proposal relied on argument seeking to bypass existing policies, adopted measure and strategies which although out-of-date offered a democratic framework which was the civilised way of proceeding.  Noting the danger of urban sprawl and the adverse affect the development would have should it be granted, members were asked to note that the application failed to address scale and ignored severe drainage problems.  There was no demonstrated local employment need for the development which would overwhelm a fragile village infrastructure.  Concern was further noted that the development would set a precedent for a pattern of unsustainable development outside the village boundary which would prove difficult to refuse further such applications by local land owners.   Referring to the applicant Mr Robinson stated that they could not lay claim to consideration not otherwise available to other applicants and needed to adhere to the same rules as everyone else.    In conclusion members were advised Mr Robinson felt the application to have no integrity and to be opportunist; undemocratic and unprecedented.

Representation was received by the agent Ms. Swinburne which included:

Thanking the committee for the opportunity to make representation and the officer’s for their assistance in producing the scheme, Ms. Swinburne noted that as with many Council’s, Lincolnshire County Council owned land which had previously been rented out for farming or used by the council itself, which it was now considering selling off to produce income and in some cases to encourage residential development to help meet the need for housing.  The application site had been chosen because of its location on the edge of Sutterton which had been identified as a mains service centre where the principle of growth was generally supported.   A site that included part of the application site was included within the emerging local plan as a reserved site for housing which helped to demonstrate that growth in that part of the village was an acceptable principle.  It was however recognised that the larger site in the ownership of the County Council presented an opportunity to make significant contributions through the local area.  Members were advised contributions requested included provision for housing for sale on the open market but 15 affordable homes as well.  Financial contributions of £42k were required for the surgery in Sutterton along with more than £575k proposed to go towards education to included a new classroom at Sutterton Academy, a science laboratory at the Thomas MIddlecote School and a new sports hall at Boston Grammar School. The needs had been identified by needs assessments by Boston Council, The education authority and the NHS.   Contributions of such scale were only possible due to the amount of housing submitted in the application:  smaller sites simply would not attract the same level of funding.  The illustrated layout confirmed that the site was large enough to accommodate a significant amount of open space along with children’s play area and equipment:  as such the proposed development represented a sustainable option to growth contributing 96 new homes, 15 of which would be affordable.

Representation was received by Parish Councillor John Fitchett which included:

Members were advised that Sutterton Parish Council unanimously objected to  the application and believed it was undeliverable in a village already stretched with ongoing developments. Anglian Water had stated there was too much sewerage in the area and they could not cope with it.  The area was susceptible to flooding issues; the entrance to the proposed site was on a dangerous corner of a road which was already subject to speeding problems and the site if built would generate a significant increase in vehicles.   Furthermore the site was grade A arable land and as such should not be built on.

Following deliberation the Legal Officer provided members with the following points of information:  

Referencing concern in setting a precedent members’ were reminded that each application was determined on its own merits and in line with the SELLP that would assist in built-up area boundaries going forward.  Referencing comments in respect of Anglian Water the officer state he recognised that drainage issues were significant and did need to be dealt with correctly, however it was a statutory requirement on the statutory undertakers such as Severn Trent Water to provide a solution to construction.  Should members grant the application there was already a condition which required any developer to go to the statutory undertaker tabling their proposal and asking how they would deal with it satisfactorily.  

It was moved by Councillor Michael Cooper and seconded by Councillor Jonathan Noble that the application be refused contrary to officer recommendation because it was contrary to the objectives of Boston Borough Local Plan 1999 Policies C01, G1, G2 and H3, the environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development as contained within  the National Planning Policy Framework (2018).

Vote:   In favour: 10.         Against: 0       Abstention:   0

RESOLVED:   That the Planning Committee refuse the planning application contrary to officer recommendation for the following reasons:

1.    The application site is located along the western edge of the settlement boundary, outside the village envelope of Sutterton as defined in the Local Plan and within an area defined as ‘countryside’.  This development will extend the built up area of the village to the west and into open countryside with the loss of high quality grade 1 agricultural land, creating an awkward and alien encroachment within this flat, rural landscape.  The development would also consolidate the urban environment and the resultant effect would substantially erode the character and appearance of the area.  The development will also substantially erode the amenity of neighbouring residents. This scheme will therefore promote an unsustainable pattern of development in this area and any benefits the development may provide would be significantly and demonstrably outweighed by its adverse effects.  The application is therefore contrary to the objectives of Boston Borough Local Plan 1999 Policies C01, G1, G2 and H3, the environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development as contained within  the National Planning Policy Framework (2018) and the vision as set out in the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2011-2036 within ‘Our Vision’.

            Refused Drawing Numbers: 

§   Location plan ref LNBU 370338-01B (1/2)

§   Proposed illustrative site plan ref LNBU 370338-03G (2/2)

In determining this application the authority has taken account of the guidance in paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2018) in order to seek to secure sustainable development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the Borough.

It is recorded that Councillors David Brown and Stephen Woodliffe rejoined the meeting at this part in the proceedings with Councillor David Brown resuming his role as Chairman for the remainder of the meeting.