Agenda item

Outline application for residential development (1 plot) with all matters (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) reserved for later approval (amended application form)

Rear of Gunby House  21 Sibsey Road  Boston  PE21 9QY

Mrs D Moore.

Outline application for residential development (1 plot) with all matters (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) reserved for approval (amended application form).

Rear of Gunby House  21 Sibsey Road  Boston  PE21 9QY

Mrs D Moore

The Growth Manager presented the report to the committee confirming there were no updates to the report tabled within the agenda.

Representation was received by the applicant which included:

The site itself had previously been used as a paddock and the whole site was in effect split into two sections:  the one for the development would be to the rear of the other, which would become the applicant’s garden.  The development at 25a Sibsey Road which was also one storey, had been granted so development to the rear of neighbouring houses has been established for all the houses who had the same size gardens.   There were existing buildings on the site with a stables and a garage having been in situ for many years and the new development would be no higher than those existing.  The development would not be seen from Sibsey Road and would not impact on the street scene, it would have its own garden amenity and its own access from Sibsey Road.   The removal of trees was with the consent of the neighbour and replacement trees on the site itself would be planted.  

A new development on Sibsey Road with 76 dwellings had been agreed and was certainly visual and overlooking from the existing houses on Sibsey Road.  They were not in keeping with the existing dwellings and had impacted significantly on the street scene:  they had no front or rear gardens; a significant number of trees had been removed from the site and the access had been agreed directly opposite the entrance to a hospital.

Whilst committee recognised the comments of the applicant in respect the questioning of the previous grant for 25a Sibsey Road, in general they agreed that the development was ‘back land’.  Additional concerns related to the general character of the area, the width of the plot and identified that although 25a had been granted it did not set a precedent.  Councillor Austin further identified a further element of refusal related to the driveway and the potential impact on the amenities of occupants of 19 and 21A Sibsey Road.

It was moved by Councillor Brian Rush and seconded by Councillor Alison Austin that the application be refused in line with officer recommendation.

The Growth Manager clarified the recommendation in relation to the potential impact on the amenities of occupants of 19 and 21a Sibsey Road and accepted this could be included within the reason for refusal if required.  Both Councillors agreed this.

Councillors Yvonne Stevens and Paul Skinner then identified that the 2017 appeal to the south was relevant and that the area was now seemingly ‘urban’ and this permission could be granted.

A negation motion was tabled by Councillor Paul Skinner and seconded by Councillor Yvonne Stevens.  This vote was taken and was defeated.

The original motion to refuse the application in line with officer recommendation was then taken:

Vote for Refusal:      6 in favour.     3 against.   1 abstention.

RESOLVED:    That the application be refused in line with officer recommendation for the reasons provided therein and including the additional element in relation to the impact on the amenities of occupants of 19 and 21A Sibsey Road.  The final reason being:

The proposed dwelling, by reason of its position and the characteristics of the site, would result in an unacceptable form of backland development. The tandem arrangement of dwellings (between the host property and the new dwelling) that would result would detract from the established spatial pattern of development. Furthermore, it would increase the apparent density of development at the expense of garden space. The resultant development would therefore be at odds with established character and would further diminish it in an unacceptable way. As such the development would be contrary to Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2011-2036) and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to secure a high standard of design that is sympathetic to the character of an area.

Refused Plans

§  Drawing No. 3443-18.02A - Proposed Indicative Site and Location Plans

§  Drawing No. 3443-18.03A - Bungalow & Detached Double Garage (In1dicative)

§  Drawing No. 3443-18.04 - Proposed Triple Garage Floor Plan & Elevations

In determining this application the Local Planning Authority has taken account of the guidance in Paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 in order to seek to secure sustainable development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the Borough.