Democracy | Planning Committee – 23 September 2020

Planning Committee – 23 September 2020

Chairman: Councillor N Sherwood
Venue: Virtual Meeting, Microsoft Teams
Time: 2 pm
Email address: planningcommittee@northlincs.gov.uk

Watch this meeting live

AGENDA

1. Substitutions

2. Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and Personal or Personal and Prejudicial Interests, significant contact with applicants, objectors or third parties (Lobbying) and Whipping Arrangements (if any).

3. To take the minutes of the meeting held on 29 July 2020 as a correct record and authorise the Chairman to sign.

4. Major Planning Application

5. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.

6. Diversion Order 2018, FP47, New Holland – Report of the Director: Operations.

7. Any other items, which the chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances, which must be specified.

Note: All reports are by the Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control unless otherwise stated.

MINUTES

PRESENT:- Councillor N Sherwood (Chair)

Councillors Evison (Vice-Chairman), Bainbridge, J Davison, and Grant.

Councillor(s)Briggs and Waltham MBE attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37(b).

This was a Microsoft Teams Virtual Online Meeting

2040 DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS, SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) AND WHIPPING ARRANGEMENTS (IF ANY)

The following member declared that they had been lobbied:-

Councillor N Sherwood
Application PA/2020/252 Minute 2042(i)

2041 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 29 July 2020, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the Chairman.

2042 MAJOR APPLICATIONS – The Group Manager – Development Management submitted a report containing details of major applications for determination by the committee, including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.

(i) PA/2020/252 by Partner Construction & Acis Group for planning permission to erect 24 dwellings comprising 12 rent to home buy, 6 shared ownership and 6 open market dwellings at land to the east of Hillside Road, Broughton.

Three objectors spoke against the applicant on behalf of a number of residents who had raised concerns with them with regard to the proposed development. In addressing the committee the areas of concerns covered the following areas: they felt it was unacceptable for the area and outside the current development boundary within the local plan, problems with drainage and surface water flooding, visitor parking and on street parking would cause major issues in an already congested area, traffic flow would be disrupted with potential safety issues. They also went into great detail about the wildlife habitat within the area and how this would be put at risk, they referred to the last submission that was refused and felt there was no change to this application, therefore, this application should also be refused.

The agent replied to the concerns, and in doing so highlighted that following refusal of the last application a great deal of work had been carried out with officers, and a great deal of the problems and since been resolved. He said there was a fresh view on the scheme and the officer’s had recommended approval. Drainage issues would be resolved with appropriate conditions attached to any approval, and there were no ecology or highways issues. He also stated that a local needs assessment had been carried out which proved a need for the development within the area.

The Chairman read out a letter from the local MP Andrew Percy in which he raised concerns received from a number of residents, and highlighted the issue of the proposal being outside the development boundary and detrimental to the area.

Cllr Waltham spoke as the local Ward member and urged the committee to refuse the application on the same policies and principles it was refused on previously. He stated it would be detrimental to the area, the environment, the wildlife habitat and was not in the right location for this kind of development. He said there were already 160 currently coming off that highway and drainage system and the development would have a major impact on safety and the infrastructure.

Cllr Evison felt that the proposal submitted was similar to the one before that was refused and felt it should be refused on similar grounds once again.

Cllr Bainbridge having read the report felt it was a robust analysis of the proposal, but could see it was a contentious application being outside the development limit. However, she felt there was a need for the development within the area and the affordable properties.

Cllr Grant stated that bio diversity and highways were issues with the development, but also stated that whilst it was outside the development boundary, it was an exception site that was allowed outside the development boundary so that part should be removed if refusing the application.

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control updated the committee, and advise them that if they were to refuse the application on similar grounds to the previous refusal then the first reason should be removed as a Local Needs Assessment has been provided with this application to demonstrate the need for affordable housing in Broughton. The second reason for refusal related to impact upon the character of the area and could remain.

Cllr Davison agreed with the previous speakers that it was an exception site and it being outside the boundary was not a reason for refusal, but felt it should be refused on the blight it would cause to local residents, the highways issues it would cause, and the detrimental affect it would have on the area.

It was moved by Cllr Evison and seconded by Cllr J Davison –

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons –

1.
The local planning authority is not convinced that Hillside Road is a suitable width to provide a satisfactory access to serve the proposed development and that this road can cater for the significant additional vehicle movements, including construction traffic, that the development would generate. Consequently, it is considered that the proposal would result in increased hazards to users of the local highway network to the detriment of highway safety. Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to policies T2 and H5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

2.
The proposal would introduce a significant amount of built form on a greenfield site outside the identified development boundaries of Broughton that would urbanise the existing rural landscape to the detriment of the scenic quality and local character of the landscape. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy CS2 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy and policies RD2 and LC7 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan. Motion Carried.

2043 PLANNING AND OTHER APPLICATIONS – The Group Manager – Development Management submitted a report incorporating a schedule containing details of applications for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications. The Head of Development Management updated the reports orally where appropriate. Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

(i) PA/2019/1026 by Mrs N Bell for planning permission to erect a detached dwelling with associated works at 182 Westgate Road, Westgate, Belton, DN9 1QB