Agenda item

Full Planning Permission:

Erection of 70 dwellings including associated landscaping, an electric substation, walls, fencing, provision of car parking courts, construction of vehicular and pedestrian access, internal roads, associated landscaping and the extension of an attenuation basin and provision of surface and foul water drainage comprising Phase 5 Heron Park, Boston in accordance with amended plans and additional documents received by the Local Planning Authority on 08 Aug 2023.

 

Land to the north of Slippery Gowt Lane, Boston, north of previous phases of the Heron Park development

 

Chestnut Homes

Erection of 70 dwellings including associated landscaping, an electric substation, walls, fencing, provision of car parking courts, construction of vehicular and pedestrian access, internal roads, associated landscaping and the extension of an attenuation basin and provision of surface and foul water drainage comprising Phase 5 Heron Park, Boston in accordance with amended plans and additional documents received by the Local Planning Authority on 08 Aug 2023.

 

Land to the north of Slippery Gowt Lane, Boston, north of previous phases of the Heron Park Development

 

Chestnut Homes

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and confirmed that the application had been referred to the committee by officers due to the level of public interest generated by the case and to allow a full and public discussion of the material planning considerations involved. These include the principle of the development, amenity impacts, open space provision, design and appearance in relation to local character, flood risk and drainage and other matters. The ward member had been consulted and concurs with this referral.

The application site consisted of 2.12 hectares of arable land. The southern part of the site was part of a larger parcel of 7.9 hectares forming the Heron Park development of up to 200 dwellings. The northern western part of the site was not part of Heron Park as originally consented and was not allocated under the Local Plan.

The site was on the south-eastern fringe of the built form of Boston and was bounded to the south and east by earlier phases of Heron Park and a drainage dyke, to the west by existing residential development on Wyberton Low Road and to the east by Heron Way.

A belt of woodland lay to the north of most of the site, beyond which was the Marsh Lane commercial park. An attenuation pond lay to the north of the extreme north-western part of the site. The site was adjacent to earlier phases of Heron Park to the south and east which are either occupied or at an advanced stage of construction. The topography was flat, and the site lay entirely within Flood Risk Zone 3 (FRZ3).

The Senior Planning Officer further referenced the historic builds on the site and the level of representation received in respect of the application.  A visual presentation highlighted the application in detail addressing key material planning decisions, statutory consultee responses and concluded by advising members that it was a complex proposal, and one which raised significant planning issues.  Whilst some aspects were clear cut, in others the material planning considerations were more finely balanced despite the considerable level of work undertaken by the Authority and the applicant to improve the scheme.

However, whilst the location and the site history made the background to the scheme a complex one, careful analysis showed the principle of the development to be sound.  In terms of the planning balance, the negatives - including the ‘loss’ of land previously considered as public open space, neighbour impacts and development in an area of elevated flood risk - wee considered to be either limited in their materiality in planning terms or capable of adequate mitigation. And crucially, whilst there were clearly arguments on both sides of the planning balance, with those negatives considered to be outweighed by positive benefits and particularly the delivery of housing in general and affordable housing in particular.

Overall, therefore, it was considered that subject to the use of appropriate conditions and legal agreements the proposal is in keeping with policies 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 17, 18, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 36 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and with relevant paragraphs of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The recommendation is one of approval subject to conditions and the signing of legal agreements.

 

Representation was received in objection to the application by Mr Taylor which is recorded verbatim as requested:

 

Confirming her was speaking on behalf of the residents living in the area, whose views and signatures had been collected, as part of a petition signed by 80 of these residents, Mr Taylor advised that the petition was available should members wish to view it.  Committee were advised that there was an abundance of objections submitted by residents regarding the proposed phase 5 development, but that his intent was to focus on just one point. From day one residents felt the developer had intensions to develop the whole site and had been misleading residents and the planning committees about the layout and quantity of housing and leaving us feeling, in the words of the planning officer “cheated”, stressing se was not accusing the developer of wrongdoing.  The planning officer’s report had meticulously laid out how they had been able to negate concerns such as flooding. There have been numerous revisions to applications for phases 1-4 throughout the whole development. Those revisions included material use, design and layout.  In the Planning officer’s report, approving Phase 4, it clearly stated that it was to be the fourth and final phase of the Heron Park development. So, residents ask why Phase 5 has even been proposed, especially considering it was put forwarded without prior consultation with the planning council? who were as surprised as the residents. Members attention was then drawn to the illustrative master plan (document HWB/002 B). That document, 6 years on, is referenced by the developer in their supplementary planning statement for Phase 5, in section 1 ‘principals of development’. It stated that (On plan ref HWB5/16) “Area 1 edged red was proposed for housing as per the master plan” With the approval of phase 4, and the completion of Phases 1-4, the housing should have already reached the northern woodland boundary of the site, as per this master plan. However, the master plan had originally been approved in 2017 for up to 200 houses as per the S106 document. 

When Phase 4 was completed, it would not reach the northern boundary of the development but would leave additional land available for 27 houses which formed Area 1 (outlined in red on document HWB5/16) of the Phase 5 proposal.  From the resident's point of view that suggested that the developer, from the start of phase 1, had steered the progression of the site layout with Phase 5 already in mind creating space to allow them to maximise their return on their investment for this site. There was an article by Matthew Brown, on the Sept 2021 on Lincolnshire Live about the Heron Park development. The developers managing director stated that “The nine homes of the farmstead...will also benefit from an open public space which spans nearly a third of the development.”  That statement clearly showed the developers were using the open public space as a positive selling point for the available privately owned dwellings on the site.

That article could be seen as deliberately misleading existing and potential residents about the final layout of the site. Since 2017, phase 1-4 planning applications and revisions have shown a public open space at the rear of the properties on Low Road. Prior to the initial planning application in 2017 (B/17/0317) Hybrid outline application for up to 200 dwellings) residents of Low Road were approached by one of the original signatories of the S106 document, who assured them that the development would include a substantial, uninterrupted area of public open space, directly behind our properties, as shown on a master copy of the site proposal and also that there would be no more than 200 dwellings on the entire site.  

Again, I am not suggesting that the developer’s use of the system to try to further their own interests, was breaking any laws. Instead, I would like to emphasise how morally wrong this is as it seems they have deliberately misled residents and planning committees to increase the land available to build on.

We would therefore ask you to reflect upon how the residents and the planning committee have been given a very different idea about the outcome of this site by the developer and so request that the Phase 5 proposal is rejected, and the area landscaped in the way it was originally proposed to be. The central matter for the residents is the change in use of the land from public open space to housing and that the developer has created even more space for additional 27 houses next to phase 4. This remained a serious matter of planning principal.  You, the committee are the elected representatives of the people of the Boston Wards. Although the developer has met the criteria for this planning application in principle, you have a moral duty to protect the interests of the residents. In conclusion Mr Taylor asked that Committee please consider this when making their decision.

 

Member questioning of Mr Taylors representation followed, and Mr Taylor responded as follows:

 

The impact of the development on residents would be significant, they had video proof of flooding on the site during extreme weather conditions.  There was a lack of parking with on the site with the swales at the front for drainage currently used for parking as most residents had more than one vehicle.  With only one entrance to site the additional development impact would be substantial on traffic entering and exiting as the main road was a highway subject to the national speed limit.  Furthermore, residents were very concerned at the late submissions and number of revised editions of the application.  Members were further advised that the petition was available for viewing if required.

 

Representation was received from Councillor Richard Austin who read a statement on behalf of the Ward Member Councillor Alison Austin which is recorded verbatim at the request of Councillor Austin:

 

“I would like to start by congratulating the residents of Wyberton Low Road for their many letters of representation, they keep entirely to planning issues without any prompting by the ward member. A summary of the key contentious issues noted that the application was in common with the earlier phases of Heron Park, phase 5 is in an unsustainable location.    There was only one vehicular access to the entire development. All surrounding roads were subject to weight restrictions. The need to bring in construction materials past St Thomas’ School and Children’s Centre. Flood risk. The new houses would be built immediately behind the existing properties on Wyberton Low Road. The location and use of the public open space and SUDs. Developer contributions for both Education and Affordable housing.

This development, in common with the other phases of Heron Park was in an unsustainable location. It would be extremely difficult for anyone to live on Heron Park without access to a car or similar vehicle. There are NO busses along Wyberton Low Road. There was no public transport serving Heron Park. The nearest bus stops were on London Road, either near Black Sluice Pumping Station for travelling into Boston or opposite St Thomas’ Church for travel in the Kirton direction. The nearest shop, a convenience store and bakery was located at Newton’s Corner on London Road.  However, without transport, this is still a long walk there and back again carrying shopping.

All construction traffic - heavy lorries, machinery, additional soil etc. - will requireto be brought in via Wyberton Low Road. This was a residential road with houses and bungalows, but in particular both St Thomas School and Children’s Centre were located at the one point where the road narrowed part way along and where there is a slight bend in the road.  This was a large primary school (Academy) and attracted children from a wide area, meaning that many parents brought/collected their children by car. Consequently, there was a large number of parents dropping off and collecting children. The Children’s Centre operated over longer hours, serving working parents. I had sought officer advice on this matter because when the previous phases of Heron Park were being developed, on several occasions they had to go and speak to the site manager and request that these lorries do not come past the school / Children’s Centre at School time. I therefore requested that a Construction Management Plan should include reference to avoidance of critical school hours for all delivery of machinery, soil and other materials.

There was only one vehicular access onto Heron Park, namely via Curlew Road which led off Wyberton Low Road. That was described in the Officer Report as the spine road for the whole development. All traffic going to and from the new development will have to travel along Curlew Road.

Access to Wyberton Low Road was via the Marsh Lane roundabout on the A16 and then turning into the road at the traffic lights. This was a residential road and as referenced in the preceding paragraph has a weight limit.

All the surrounding roads have weight restrictions. Tytton Lane East (East) runs directly from the A16 however this is essentially a narrow country lane with bungalows at the top where there is a 30mph restriction and a footway on one side, but the remainder of the lane, leading down to Wyberton Low Road, is narrow and twisting with trees and hedges and dykes on either side. There is no footway. On NO account should this lane be used for access by construction vehicles. This condition should be added to the Construction management plan.  Moreover, Slippery Gowt Lane had a width restriction at the point where it branched off Marsh Lane. That is a physical restriction and therefore prevents lorries or busses other than the Call Connect vehicles and cars passing through.  Because there is only the one access point, pedestrians have long distance to walk before reaching Wyberton Low Road.

The whole of the Heron Park site was in a High-Risk area as regards flooding.  Consequently the whole site has to be raised by some metres. For phases 1 an.  this involved bringing in large amounts of soil purely to raise the whole site before building could commence. The same would be true for the land making up Phase 5. This land backed immediately on to the gardens of properties on Wyberton Low Road, meaning that the new houses, some of which will be flats, will therefore overlook these existing properties and potentially compromise the privacy of their gardens. Many properties on Wyberton Low Road are bungalows. A positive point is that I am advised that there will be “an interceptor” drain which is piped along the western boundary and which should prevent water running off the new development and flooding these existing gardens. This was a contentious matter.  At the time of the initial and subsequent applications, Councillor Alison Austin was advised that existing residents on Wyberton Low Road residents were clearly informed by Chestnut Homes that there would be public open space behind their properties.  That had turned out not to be true and it had left those local residents feeling let down and that promises have been broken. There were some parts of public open space on the present site where the green grassland was essentially part of the SUDS for the site and was waterlogged. That was unsuitable for children to play on unless they are wearing wellingtons.

Before any construction even for phase 1 was commenced, that land was a ploughed field that was the winter-feeding ground for little egrets. (Smallish white birds that come inland to feed in winter and that you now see on the RSPB land at Frampton Marsh.).  I had purposely suggested all the names of wild birds, many of which have now been displaced as a result, for the road names on this estate. They were not garden birds.  So far, the Heron Park development had decreased, not increased, wildlife or biodiversity.

Heron Park has provided a large amount of housing, both affordable and market. Over the whole site, however, the development is repetitive and boring. What is being proposed is “just more of the same”: repetitive and unimaginative. Many households like to have their cars where they can see them on their own drives. 

They do not like parking courts. Several of these courts were just hard surfaces where youngsters kick balls about. Consequently, if you look at the entrance to Heron Park there are a large number of cars parked on the road at the front of the properties. In many respects the whole development met the standards which are the bare minimum of acceptability. It is disappointing when Chestnut Homes’ “Show Site”, namely the Quadrant, is so well designed.

I have noted that it was regrettable that this development was not leaving a good impression with local residents’. They felt that Chestnut Homes have not been honest with them. Moreover, when considered some of the previous phases of Heron Park, as an elected member, I deplore the number of “non-material” amendments that have been submitted. Singly, none of these have been of much significance, but even with this development that is in front of the committee, some late documents were received only this last weekend. Again this is regrettable as reflects on potentially inefficient working practices by this developer.

Please can this developer get it right first time”?

 

Councillor Richard Austin confirmed he would try to answer any factual questions committee members had in respect of the statement made, but that he could not respond on the private comments made by Councillor Alison Austin.

 

Councillor Richard Austin left the meeting at this part in the proceedings.

 

Committee deliberation and questioning followed which included:

 

In response to questions tabled the Senior Planning Officer advised:

 

The six-week period identified in respect of the Section 106 Agreement was to agree in principle when the final decision would be made.  It was common practice for the decision itself to be made in the later stages of the development to enable an accurate assessment of the final demand to be identified.  The original sum identified would be protected and the agreement was subject to a legal agreement and was enforceable.  

 

A professional ecological assessment of the site had been carried out and the recommendations had been secured by condition.

 

Concerns in respect of tension between the Council’s Housing Team and the applicant in respect of the housing types proposed had been resolved and addressed within the supplementary report and were confirmed to comply to national safe standards. The only outstanding matter being the split in tenure which was being finalised with the legal department.

 

General concerns were noted in respect of there being only one road for access and egress for the site, which was sited on a terribly busy main road subject to the national speed limit.   Concerns were also tabled in respect of the heavy plant vehicles accessing the site for the build of the development and a request for a condition within the management plan for the site was made, restricting the times outside of the local schools’ drop-off and collection times.  Additional concerns noted the number of late amendments made by the applicant to the application, the over-development of the site with a lack of parking and play areas, and the impact the site would have on existing residents who had been mis-lead in respect of the site when they moved into previous phases of the development.

 

Members did however recognise that there were no sound planning reasons for refusal of the application and that no statutory consultee including Lincolnshire Highways had raised any objection that had not been resolved. They acknowledged that the application needed to be judged solely on planning grounds and there appeared no material planning considerations on which to base a refusal.  Further comment noted that should the committee refuse the application without sound planning reasons, the Planning Inspector would agree any appeal and the Council could be subject to substantial damages.

 

It was moved by Councillor Stephen Woodliffe and seconded by Councillor Claire Rylott that the application be approved in line with officer recommendation, subject to the signing of the legal agreements, the conditions therein and subject to a delegation to officers to amend the site management plan to included restricted access time outside of the local schools’ drop-off and pick-up times.

 

A second motion to refuse the application was tabled by Councillor Barrie Pierpont and later seconded by Councillor Suzanne Welberry                however as the motion was a negation of the original motion moved and seconded, without planning reasons identified at that point, the original motion to grant the application was taken to the vote in the first instance.

 

Vote:               In Favour 8                Against 5                   Abstentions 0

 

RESOLVED:   That committee resolved to approve the application, subject to the following conditions

 

1. The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

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

§  Drawing No. HWB5/01 Location Plan received by the LPA on 23-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HWB5/02 Site Layout received by the LPA on 23-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HWB5/03 Site Sections received by the LPA on 23-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HWB5/04 Proposed Highway & SUDS received by the LPA on 23-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HWB5/05 Planning History Plan received by the LPA on 08-Aug-2023

§  Drawing No. HWB5 / 14 Rev C A Refuse Strategy received by the LPA on 29-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HWB5/15 Rev B Open Space Assessment received by the LPA on 08-Aug-2023

§  Drawing No. HWB5/16 Phase 5 Site Layout Overlaid with Hybrid Masterplan received by the LPA on 08-Aug-2023

§  Drawing No. Type 104-V1 (3 Block) 01 - Floor Plans received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 104-V1 (3 Block) 02 - Elevations Plans received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 104 V1 01 Rev A Floor Plans and Elevations Plans received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 104-V1-105-V1 (op) - Floor Plans & Elevations Plans received by the LPA on 05-Apr-2023

§  Drawing No. Type 105-V2 (3 Block) 01 - Floor Plans received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 105 -V2 (3 Block) 02 - Elevations received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 105-V2 01 Rev A - Floor Plans and Elevations received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 105-V2 Detached (op) 02 Plans and Elevations received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 105-V2 Detached 01 Plans and Elevations received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

• Drawing No. 12541-WMS-P5-XX-D-C-39201-S3-P2-DRAINAGE_STRATEGY received by the LPA on 29-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. 16-225-01 Rev D Topographical Survey received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Type 908-V1 - 01 Floor Plans and Elevations received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. HER-DCE-XX-XX-DR-C-5000 Preliminary Drainage Strategy Sheet 1 of 1 received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022.

Reason: To ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the approved details, in the interests of residential amenity and to comply with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following documents:

§  Roy Lobley Consulting Flood Risk Assessment Phase dated 5 August 2022 and received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. Drawing No. 12541-WMS-P5-XX-D-C-39201-S3-P2-DRAINAGE_STRATEGY received by the LPA on 29-Feb-2024

§  Drawing No. HER-DCE-XX-XX-DR-C-5000 Preliminary Drainage Strategy Sheet 1 of 1 received by the LPA on 07-Sep-2022

§  Drawing No. HWB5/04 Proposed Highway & SuDS received by the LPA on 08-Aug-2023

Prior to any works above slab level, an amended version of drawing 12541-WMS-P5-XX-D-C-39201-S3-P1 Phase 5 Drainage Strategy showing the western boundary filer drain extended to include the areas behind nos. 188, 190 and 192 Wyberton Low Road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The drainage systems set out in the above document and drawings and all mitigation measures shall be fully installed and operational in advance of first permitted dwelling being occupied and shall be so maintained at all times thereafter.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding or pollution to the proposed development, its future occupants and neighbours to the site in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and paragraph 167 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. Finished floor levels of all dwellings hereby permitted shall be set no lower than 4.0m above Ordnance Datum (AOD), or no lower than 3.4m AOD for dwellings equipped with flood doors or barriers to a height of 600mm to cover all ground floor doorways and French windows.

Reason:To reduce the risk of flooding or pollution to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and paragraph 167 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. The dwellings hereby permitted shall be built using flood resilient construction principles and techniques as set out in the Government document ‘Improving the Flood Performance of New Buildings Flood Resilient Construction’ (DCLG, 2007).

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and paragraph 167 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. Within one calendar month of being first occupied each dwelling in the development hereby permitted shall sign up to the Environment Agency flood alert system and to the Flood Warning & Evacuation Plan forming part of this application and the premises shall remain signed up to those protocols thereafter.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and paragraph 167 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved a detailed construction management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction management plan shall include:

-    Method statement detailing how construction traffic, site personnel vehicles, materials deliveries and site accommodation will be managed to safeguard highway safety and residential amenity including wheel washing facilities.

-    Phasing of development to include access construction, parking and construction compounds.

-    Details of measures to minimise disturbance during the site clearing and construction process through noise, dust, vibration and smoke.

-    Details of proposed means of ensuring adequate drainage during the construction phase and means of ensuring water from the site does not adversely impact existing neighbours.

-    Proposed hours and days of working.

The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved construction management plan.

 Reason: In the interests of the amenity of local residents in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

8. If during development contamination not previously considered is identified, then the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately, and no further work shall be carried out until a method statement detailing a scheme for dealing with the suspect contamination has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure adequate and appropriate remediation of the site in accordance with Policy 30 of the South East Lincolnshire Local and paragraphs 183 and 184 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. Prior to any works above slab level on the development hereby permitted a final schedule of all external materials to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: In the interests of the architectural and visual integrity of the development and of the character of the locality and to accord with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

10. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on site details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The streets shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance details until such time as an agreement has been entered into under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 regarding streets to be adopted by the Highways Authority or a private management and maintenance company has been established which shall be responsible for any other streets within the development or shared private drives. 

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the public and users of the site and to accord with Policies 2, 3 and 33 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

11. Prior to the first dwelling hereby permitted being occupied, details of the play and public amenity equipment to be installed in the play area shown in drawing HWB5/02 Site Layout received by the Local Planning Authority on 08-Aug-2023, and the timescale for its installation (which shall be no later than the completion of the 35^th dwelling) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of local residents and to ensure the timely installation of a facility contributing to the residential amenities of residents. This condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

12. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on site a final schedule of which foul and surface water drainage assets are to be adopted by a statutory body and which are to remain under the control of the site, together with a management plan for those assets not to be adopted, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be managed in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the site is properly drained in the future and of the amenity of local residents. This condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

13. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on site a management plan (including management responsibilities, maintenance schedules and any proposals for future adoption by a statutory authority) for the areas of publicly accessible open space and any outdoor play areas, any streets, shared drives or footways not to be adopted by the Highways Authority shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The management of these areas shall be carried out in accordance with the details so 11 approved.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of local residents. This condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

14. The development shall proceed in accordance with the recommendations of the document ‘Preliminary Ecological Appraisal’ received by the Local Planning Authority on 07-Sep-2022 and forming part of the approved application.

Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 28 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

15. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, prior to any works above slab level, a landscaping and biodiversity plan incorporating the principles shown in approved drawing HWB5/02 Site Layout received by the Local Planning Authority on 08-Aug-2023 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include full details of the species to be planted (grasses as well as trees and shrubs), details of bird and bat nesting sites, hedgehog access and other ecology measures, and a timetable for the implementation of those works. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the agreed details.

Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 28 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

16. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, prior to any works above slab level details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which demonstrate that refuse collections can be properly made, and refuse freighters maneuvered in appropriate locations and on appropriate load bearing road surfaces.

Reason: to ensure that practicable arrangements for the collection of waste and recycling are made in the interests of the residential amenities of occupants of the development, and to accord with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).