AGENDA

Committee - PLANNING COMMITTEE

Date & Time - Wednesday, 12 February 2020 at 6.30 pm

Venue - Council Chamber, Council Offices, Priory Road, Spalding

Membership of the Planning Committee:

Councillors: B Alcock, J Avery (Vice-Chairman), C J T H Brewis, F Biggadike, H J W Bingham, P E Coupland, H Drury, R Gambba-Jones (Chairman), R Grocock, C J Lawton, G T D Rudkin, M D Seymour, A C Tennant, J Tyrrell and A C Beal

Substitute Members of the Planning Committee

Any member may sit on the pool of substitutes for the Planning Committee provided they receive training every 12 months as approved by the Council (minute 290(c)/05 refers). Substitutions are for individual meetings only. Quorum: 5

Persons attending the meeting are requested to turn their mobile telephones to silent mode

Democratic Services Council Offices, Priory Road Spalding, Lincs PE11 2XE

Date: 4 February 2020

Please ask for Democratic Services: Telephone 01775 764626 e-mail: [email protected]

A G E N D A

1. Apologies for absence.

2. Minutes (Pages To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on (copy 5 - 8) enclosed).

3. Declaration of Interests. (Where a Councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest the Councillor must declare the interest to the meeting and leave the room without participating in any discussion or making a statement on the item, except where a Councillor is permitted to remain as a result of a grant of dispensation.)

4. Questions asked under the Council's Constitution (Standing Orders).

5. H23-0848-19 (Pages Full application for proposed residential gypsy/traveller site at Bleu Raye 9 - 30) Farm, Millgate, Whaplode (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

6. H13-1096-19 (Pages Reserved Matters – Residential development comprising 58 dwellings 31 - 40) and associated work – outline approval H13-0844-17 at Lane south: Roman Road, Moulton Chapel, Spalding (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

7. H02-0889-19 (Pages Full application for change of use of land to crane storage and 41 - 50) demonstration area (B2 Use) – approved under H02-0421-17. Modification of Condition 5 to allow external storage/stacking height to change from 2 metres to 5 metres at Crowland Cranes Ltd, Crease Drove, Crowland (Report of the Development Manager enclosed).

8. H02-0020-20 (Pages Full application for proposed self-storage facility (B8 Use Class) 51 - 58) including secure compound access and parking and removal of existing dilapidated industrial building at James Road, Crowland, Lincs (Report of the Development Manager enclosed).

9. H23-1206-19 (Pages Full application for single-storey flat roof side extension at 3 Randall 59 - 64) Bank, Moulton Eaugate, Spalding (Report of the Development Manager enclosed).

10. H19-1198-19 (Pages Full application for rear single-storey extension at 9 Coronation Avenue, 65 - 70) Throckenholt, Spalding (Report of the Development Manager enclosed).

11. Appeals (Pages To provide an update on recent Appeal decisions (report of the 71 - 72) Development Manager enclosed).

12. Planning Updates. (Pages To update members on the conclusions of the Performance Monitoring 73 - 78) Panel and to invite the Committee to submit any comments back to the Panel (Report of the Development Manager enclosed).

13. Any other items which the Chairman decides are urgent.

Note: No other business is permitted unless by reason of special circumstances, which shall be specified in the minutes, the Chairman is of the opinion that the item(s) should be considered as a matter of urgency.

This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 2. - 1 -

Minutes of a meeting of the PLANNING COMMITTEE held in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Priory Road, Spalding, on Wednesday, 15 January 2020 at 6.30 pm.

PRESENT

R Gambba-Jones (Chairman) J Avery (Vice-Chairman)

B Alcock P E Coupland J L Reynolds C J T H Brewis H Drury M D Seymour F Biggadike R Grocock A C Tennant H J W Bingham C J Lawton J Tyrrell

In Attendance: Development Manager, Planning and Building Control Manager, Senior Planning Lawyer and Democratic Services Officer.

79. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE.

There were no apologies.

In relation to Item 5 on the agenda Councillors Casson, Woolf were in attendance as ward members and did not have voting rights.

In relation to Item 7 on the agenda Councillor Beal was in attendance as a ward member and did not have voting rights.

80. MINUTES

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 18 December 2019.

AGREED:

That the minutes be signed as a correct record.

(Moved by Councillor Seymour, Seconded by Councillor Drury)

81. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS.

Councillors Avery and Bingham stated that they did not have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in application HH14-0029-19 but in the interests of transparency they wished it to be noted that they knew the applicant as they are in the same industry.

82. QUESTIONS ASKED UNDER THE COUNCIL'S CONSTITUTION (STANDING ORDERS).

There were none.

Page 5 - 2 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 15 January 2020

83. H13-1215-18

Planning No. and Applicant Proposal

H13-1215-18 Larkfleet Homes Full application for the erection of 86 dwellings and associated works at Land north of Roman Road, Moulton Chapel, Spalding.

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance. The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed in full at www.sholland.gov.uk for a limited period of time following which the recording could be made available by request, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

AGREED:

That planning permission be granted subject to:

1) An archaeological evaluation first being carried out to the satisfaction of Lincolnshire Archaeology; 2) The applicant entering into a Section 106 obligation relating to affordable housing and a financial contribution to cater for extra NHS and education capacity; 3) Those conditions listed at Section 9.0 of this report plus any additional archaeological conditions required. 4) Submitted details in relation to conditions 10 and 12 refuse collection points and management responsibilities to be referred to Chairman Panel once information is received.

Supporter – Hannah Guy (Applicant)

(Moved by Councillor Drury,Seconded by Councillor Biggadike)

Councillor Brewis requested that his vote was recorded.

Councillors Casson and Woolf left the Chamber at 19.50pm

Page 6 - 3 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 15 January 2020

84. H14-0029-19

Planning No. and Applicant Proposal H14-0029-19 E M Cole (Farms) Ltd Full application for use of land to site 4 static caravans for seasonal workers at Small Drove Lane, West Pinchbeck, Spalding.

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance. The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed in full at www.sholland.gov.uk for a limited period of time following which the recording could be made available by request, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

AGREED:

That a 3 year temporary Permission be granted subject to those Conditions listed at Section 9.0 of the report.

(Moved by Councillor Avery, Seconded by Councillor Tyrrell)

85. H23-1012-19

Planning No. and Applicant Proposal

H23-1012-19 Mr M Coles Full application for erection of one detached bungalow at Land off Green Bank, Whaplode Drove.

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance. The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed in full at www.sholland.gov.uk for a limited period of time following which the recording could be made available by request, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

AGREED:

That Planning Permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Section 9.0 of the report.

(Moved by Councillor Seymour, Seconded by Councillor Drury)

Page 7 - 4 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 15 January 2020

86. PLANNING APPEALS

Members considered the report of the Development Manager which provided an update on recent Appeal Decisions.

AGREED:

That the report be noted.

87. ANY OTHER ITEMS WHICH THE CHAIRMAN DECIDES ARE URGENT.

There were none.

(The meeting ended at 8.12 pm)

(End of minutes)

Page 8 Agenda Item 5.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: Polly Harris-Gorf - Principal Planning Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H23-0848-19

Application Number: H23-0848-19 Date Received: 27 August 2019

Application Type: FULL

Description: Proposed residential gypsy/traveller site

Location: Bleu Raye Farm Millgate Whaplode

Applicant: Mrs M A Compton Agent: Robert Doughty Consultancy Ltd

Ward: Whaplode and Holbeach St Ward Councillors: Cllr A C Beal Johns Cllr P A Redgate

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H23-0848-19

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 The application raises matters of planning policy worth committee consideration.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 Full application for a residential gypsy/traveller site for four pitches, with access from Millgate. Occupation of the development is proposed to be limited to a person or persons who meet the definition of a gypsy or traveller as defined by national guidance and any resident dependants.

2.2 Since submission additional information has been submitted to indicate the nature of development and structures proposed to be installed and a landscaping proposal has been provided. This additional information was sought by the case officer to ensure that the Council has a complete picture of all structures and activities proposed and envisaged to be accommodated on site.

2.3 The submitted revised layout indicates each pitch accommodating a single household, and utilising the following structures:

2.4 -A static caravan -Space for the location of two smaller touring caravans -Day room with laundry and store facilities -A domestic shed -Location for the parking of domestic and commercial vehicles (No businesses planned to be located upon the site as part of this proposal)

2.5 The application proposes to move the Pageexisting 9field entrance to the land further to the south, away from the boundary with the existing dwelling and add to the existing landscaping with further planting.

2.6 The access road to the site would be finished in tarmacadam. The road would be constructed in accordance with the LCC Highway requirements, and would remain as a private access and road. A refuse collection point would be provided at the site entrance.

2.7 Within the "blue line" land, which is owned by the applicant, the planting of trees and a copse of trees is proposed.

2.8 The application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment and Planning Statement.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 The application site consists of a site of approximately 1.1 hectares, which forms part of a larger unused agricultural field, accessed via Millgate. The site is outside of defined settlement limits and is, therefore, designated as being located in the open countryside. There is sporadic residential development within Millgate, however the character of the wider area is open and rural.

3.2 The eastern, southern and western boundaries are defined by mature planting, providing screening to the application site. The northern boundary of the site is presently open as it forms part of a larger field which is under the applicant's ownership.

3.3 The application site lies within Flood Zones 1 and 2 and is identified as being at low to medium risk for tidal and fluvial flooding on the Environment Agency's flood mapping. The South East Lincolnshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (March 2017), indicates that the application site is shown to have no hazard rating on both the South Holland District present day and 2115 flood maps.

3.4 The dwelling of Home Farm is located to the east of the main area of the application site and north of the access track application site. There is open agricultural land to the north, south and west.

3.5 At this point Millgate is a quiet and straight rural road with good visibility on both directions. There are no pedestrian footways however.

3.6 The village of Whaplode lies approximately 3km to the north and Whaplode St Catherine lies approximately 3.2km to the east.

3.7 The greater part of this site is allocated in Policy 20 of the South East Lincs Local Plan as a 'Proposed Residential Gypsy/Traveller Site', to provide accommodation for four households. There is a difference between the application site and the boundary of the site within Policy 20 in the form of a minor variation to the northern boundary as it would appear that the plan in the Gypsy and Traveller local plan paper differs from the actual local plan allocation. The northern site boundary line from Policy 20 does not follow a feature on the ground, it is no more than a line across the field.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019

If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Policy 1 Spatial Strategy Page 10 Policy 2 Development Management Policy 3 Design of New Development Policy 4 Approach to Flood Risk Policy 11 Distribution of New Housing Policy 17 Providing a Mix of Housing Policy 19 Rural Exception Sites Policy 20 Accomm. for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople Policy 28 The Natural Environment Policy 36 Vehicle and Cycle Parking APPENDIX 6 Parking Standards

4.2 All of the above polices are important to the assessment of this application, however for ease Policy 1 and Policy 20 are set out below in full:

4.3 Policy 1 Spatial Strategy Sets out a hierarchy of areas in which development would be directed, and states of open countryside the following -

The rest of the Local Plan area outside the defined settlement boundaries of the Sub-Regional Centres, Main Service Centres, Minor Service Centre and Other Service Centres and Settlements is designated as Countryside.

4.4 In the Countryside development will be permitted that is necessary to such a location and/or where it can be demonstrated that it meets the sustainable development needs of the area in terms of economic, community or environmental benefits.

4.5 Paragraph 3.2.17 of the South Lincolnshire Local Plan, adopted in March 2019, sets context to Policy 20: Accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople as follows -

4.6 Housing needs may also, by exception, be justified in the Countryside; for example, for Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople accommodation (Policy 20: Accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

4.7 This is discussed in greater detail below.

4.8 Policy 20 Accomm. for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople The redevelopment or change of use of an Existing Residential Gypsy/Traveller Site or Existing Residential Travelling Showperson's Site (as identified on the Policies Map) will be permitted only if an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown that the site is no longer required to meet the accommodation needs of the Gypsy/Traveller or Travelling Showpersons communities. Between 2011 and 2036, evidence suggests that, in South East Lincolnshire, there will be a need for the provision of: 4 new permanent residential pitches for gypsies and travellers; and 1 new permanent residential plot for travelling showpeople. This need will be met through the development of the sites identified on the Policies Map and listed below:

Land at The Stables, Baulkins Drove, Sutton St James allocated as a 'Proposed Residential Travelling Showperson's Site', to provide accommodation for one additional household; and Land at Bleu Raye Farm, Mill Gate, Whaplode Fen allocated as a 'Proposed Residential Gypsy/Traveller Site', to provide accommodation for four households.

Planning permission will be granted for the development of these sites, provided that proposals:

1. will be adequately provided with appropriate infrastructure such as electricity, drinking-water, Page 11 waste-water treatment and recycling/waste management; 2. will not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users (and proposals must therefore give careful consideration to layout, landscaping, external lighting schemes, and the type of business uses that would be appropriate (if mixed residential and business use is proposed)); and 3. will be successfully assimilated into both their immediate environs and the wider landscape. Additional needs which may arise during the Local Plan period will be met through the determination of planning applications on other, unallocated sites. Planning permission will be granted for proposals on such sites, provided that they meet criteria 1 to 3 above, and they: a. provide occupants with an acceptable standard of amenity; b. are not located adjacent to uses likely to endanger the health of occupants, such as a refuse tip, water recycling centres or contaminated land;

c. respect the scale of the nearest settled community; d. will not place undue pressure on local infrastructure; e. will not adversely affect heritage assets or areas of importance to nature conservation;

f. will not prejudice highway safety or give rise to problems of parking or highway access; g. for sites for permanent residential use they: i. provide occupants with access to education, health care and recreational facilities, shops and employment within reasonable travelling distances, preferably by walking, cycling or public transport; ii. are suitable (or capable of being made suitable) for mixed residential and business use; iii. are not located within Flood Zone 3a or 3b and, if located in Flood Zone 2, the Sequential and Exception Tests have been passed; and h. for sites for transit or stopping place use, are not located within Flood Zone 3b and, if located within Flood Zone 3a, the Sequential and Exception Tests have been passed.

4.9 The polices in the SELLP that deal with other detailed matters are set out above, and the development has been considered in the light of these policies and the national guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.10 National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019

2. Achieving sustainable development 4. Decision-making 5. Delivering a sufficient supply of homes 8. Promoting healthy and safe communities 11. Making effective use of land 12. Achieving well-designed places 14. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change 15. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Particular note is to be taken of para 61 of the NPPF - Within this context, the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, those who require affordable housing, families with children, older people, students, people with disabilities, service families, travellers, people who rent their homes and people wishing to commission or build their own homes).

4.11 Although para 61 has been quoted, all relevant sections and guidance within the NPPF are of Page 12 relevance and have been considered.

4.12 DCLG Planning Policy for Traveller Sites. August 2015. Policy A: Using evidence to plan positively and manage development Policy B: Planning for traveller sites Policy C: Sites in rural areas and the countryside Policy D: Rural exception sites Policy H: Determining planning applications for traveller sites Policy I: Implementation Annex 1

The definition of gypsies and travellers is clarified within the Annex to this document, as follows - Persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family's or dependants' educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling showpeople or circus people travelling together as such. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 H23-0880-16. Change of use of stable to dwelling (retrospective). Refused. 05-10-16. Appeal dismissed. 28-03-17.

5.2 H23-0407-16. Certificate of Lawful Use or Development. Use of building as dwelling. Refused. 25-07-16.

5.3 ENF-152-16-E23. Retrospective change of use of stable to dwelling. Enforcement Notice served. 18.03.2011.

5.4 H23-0222-10. Proposed stable block. Refused. 02-07-10. Appeal dismissed. 20-04-11.

5.5 H23-0647-03. (Land adjacent to Home Farm). Change of use from agricultural land to paddock for horses and erection of stable block. Approved. 25-07-03.

5.6 H23-0123-78 (Oaktree Farm, Millgate) Use of land for the siting of a mobile home. One year permission. Approved. 3.07.78.

5.7 Recent planning decisions within the District preceding the adoption of the SELLP

5.8 H16-0190-16. Land off Drain Bank North - Provision of gypsy and traveller caravan site with 10 pitches each accommodating up to 3 caravans (permanent site) - approved under H16-1003- 13. Amendments to road surfacing. Approved. 09-03-16.

5.9 H23-0440-17. Eccles Place Hurdletree Bank. Use of land for siting of caravan. Approved. 22- 01-18.

5.10 Recent planning decisions within the District post adoption of the SELLP (March 2019)

5.11 H06-0233-19. Green Acres Park, Ropers Gate. Change of use of land (part retrospective) to provide five additional gypsy/traveller pitches with one day room per pitch and existing stables converted to dayrooms. Also, erection of one new store and retention of sheds for pitch 1, with construction of internal road to facilitate separate ingress and egress to and from the site, including hardstanding. Approved 05-09-19. Page 13 5.12 H16-0734-19. Akita Place Clay Lake. Siting of mobile home (retrospective) - re-submission of H16-0030-17. Approved. 20-09-19.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Whaplode Parish Council Objections submitted. - The previous application which was refused by SHDC and SOS on appeal for one dwelling - this application is for 4 and the previous reason for refusal remain that the development is not a suitable location for residential development as there would be total reliance on private cars as there is no bus service and is not in accord with SG1, SG2 and H7 of the SHDC local plan and also conflict with para 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework there will also be considerable adverse reaction from the nearest local population. - The application is totally unsuitable for this location. - No services.

6.2 Ward Councillor - Cllr AC Beal SHDC refused permission for a single residence on this site under reference H23-0407-16 stating "The proposed development is considered to be inherently unsustainable given its location in the open countryside outside of the development boundary of any settlement."

Upon the applicant appealing, this was refused (upholding SHDC' decision) with the Secretary of State concurring that the location is unsustainable given its location to the nearest facilities and being in a rural location. The SoS also emphasised the need to protect the character and appearance of the rural landscape. The previous application and appeal were for a single residence whereas the new application is for 4 family sites/units; thus substantially increasing the need to reply on motor vehicles. This means that it would be even more detrimental with regards to being unsustainable and prejudicial to the rural nature of this location. The location has not moved, neither have the nearest settlements; accordingly unless SHDC now wishes to go against its previous policy and the SoS refusing the appeal, this application must be refused.

6.3 South East Lincolnshire Joint Policy Unit

6.4 The South East Lincolnshire Local Plan makes provision for accommodation for Gypsies within Policy 20, Accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople, which indicates this site specifically.

The Policy refers to Land at Bleu Raye Farm, Mill Gate, Whaplode Fen, and allocates it as a 'Proposed Residential Gypsy/Traveller Site', to provide accommodation for up to four households. The Plan goes on to state that planning permission will be granted for the development provided that proposals: 1. will be adequately provided with appropriate infrastructure such as electricity, drinking-water, waste-water treatment and recycling/waste management; 2. will not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users (and proposals must therefore give careful consideration to layout, landscaping, external lighting schemes, and the type of business uses that would be appropriate (if mixed residential and business use is proposed)); and 3. will be successfully assimilated into both their immediate environs and the wider landscape. In considering the above issue from a Policy perspective, note that whilst currently no business uses are proposed, consideration should be given as to whether conditions should be attached to cover such future eventualities. In terms of recycling and waste management,Page the14 agent states: "As the driveway into the site will not be an adoptable highway, refuse collection will be made available at the entrance to the site, close to the junction with Millgate". The application statement says that there is significant planting along the eastern boundary of the site, but neither the plans, nor the aerial photograph, show this. The planting to the east appears to be around the western boundary of the dwelling and a distance from the sites eastern boundary, this should also be addressed in order to protect the character and amenities of the area. Comparing the allocation as shown on Inset Map 72, to the details submitted, the main part of the site appears larger and seems to extend eastwards along the access track more than the allocation. However, overall I do not consider this is significant but it does raise the importance of ensuring that the eastern boundary is well delineated and landscaped to address criteria 2 and 3. Overall, this is in accordance with the Local Plan allocation and there are no policy objections in principle.

It is important to note that refusal of this proposal is not only likely to lead to a loss on appeal, but could well bring forward other ad-hoc sites throughout the district which would be difficult to refuse or defend on appeal if we had actually refused the allocation to meet our needs within the Local Plan.

6.5 SHDC Legal Services On the basis that the Council did not have an adopted local list at the time the application was validated, I am content that the application was validated correctly on the procedures in place at the time it was received. As Local Planning Authority we can at any time ask the applicant/agent for such additional information as maybe required to enable the application to be determined. The Council can request additional information if it will assist in the determination of an application. The additional information was sought, so that the Council could understand what would physically be on site for the occupiers of each pitch. I consider that the amendments have been consulted on correctly, as they generated further objections, which are set out below. Therefore, the application has been dealt with appropriately.

6.6 SHDC Environmental Protection Officer No comments or objections.

6.7 SHDC Environmental Health Officer No objection.

6.8 LCC Highways & SUDS Support Does not wish to restrict the grant of permission.

6.9 LCC Historic Environment Officer

6.10 Environment Agency No objections, and suggest an informative setting out standard advice regarding flooding.

6.11 Anglian Water

The applicant has indicated on their application form that their method of foul and surface water drainage is not to an Anglian Water sewer. Therefore, this is outside our jurisdiction for comment and the Planning Authority will need to seek the views of the Environment Agency, Internal Drainage Board and Local Lead Flood Authority to gauge whether the solutions Page 15 identified are acceptable from their perspective.

6.12 South Holland Internal Drainage Board No objection.

6.13 NHS England No request for funding. Officer note - It is to be noted that the application is below the numerical threshold for contributions.

6.14 Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor No objection.

6.15 Public There have been a significant number of objections from members of the public, which are summarised in the report in the usual way. However if Members wish to see these objections in full, then officers can provide this in full if required. With regard to the original submission, 24 objections have been received from and on behalf of local residents and individuals from 18 properties located in Whaplode, Whaplode St Catherines, Spalding and Holbeach raising the following matters -

- Scope and transparency of the Proposed Development -The site area for the application within the submission appears to differ from that identified in inset 72 of the South East Lincs local plan in that the access appears wider and the site appears to extend further north than the inset plan. - No ecological assessment, landscaping proposals, light assessment or tree survey has been submitted -Although this site has 'accordingly' met specifications for standards as detailed in accordance with Policy 20, it is in original plans and proposals for this site that there has been a failure to acknowledge further dwellings located in close proximity. - Assessment of the need for the Proposed Development and policy 20 of the Local Plan -The proposal fails to address points 2 and 3 of the policy included by the inspector explicitly to overcome residential amenity and landscape concerns. -Not an effective use of current agricultural land. -If the proposal is intended to include any commercial or industrial usage, then it is essential that this is specified and quantified in order to provide a clear assessment of impacts. -The application is short on information and additional information and clarification must be sought. -Would not meet Paragraph 8 of the NPPF's environmental objective. -Isolated location in open countryside. - Incongruous use in the open countryside. -Assimilation into immediate Environs. -Not in a sustainable location. -Contrary to one of the core planning principles of paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework to make the fullest use of public transport. -Is contrary to Policies of the South Holland Local Plan the National Planning Policy Framework, 2012. -This new development would not be sympathetic to and maintain an area's prevailing character or contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by recognising the intrinsic character of the countryside as it falls outside of any settlement development boundary and is a greenfield development. -Would be even more detrimental than other decisions of refusal on this site with regard to being unsustainable and prejudicial to the rural nature of this location. -Incongruous form of development that would materially harm the character and appearance of the area and amenity of neighbouring residents. -Would not be an 'enhancement' to the area in the development of a natural landscape -Would be a permanent site. -Use of large vehicles during construction. Page 16 -Would dominate the settled community. -Impact on local residents. -Would not fit in with village or agricultural life in Whaplode. -Impact on wooded areas adjoining which host to numerous bird, animal and plant species. -Would be detrimental to the habitat and maintained environment that resides in close proximity. -Would affect this tranquil environment. -People may stray into local agricultural fields. -Personal safety for adults and children. -Antisocial behaviour would be caused by a temporary site. -Fear of crime and antisocial behaviour. -Recording who is staying on the site. -Potential for wildlife crimes. -Access Arrangements. -The entrance is on a very quiet narrow country lane. -Development reliant on cars.. -No local services. -Limited public transport. -Whaplode is unsuitable for many reasons ie roads, doctors, dentists, schools and police. -No pathways or public lighting. -Increase in traffic. -Other developments and permissions in Crane Gate Bank North and also Spalding need to be taken in to account. -Already other sites that surround Spalding area. -History of refusal, appeals and local objection to development on the site. -Located in a flood area. -Location of commercial ventures not appropriate. -Is the size of the site adequate for 8 dwellings. -Locations of cess pits. -Should be no roadside parking. -Reduce property values - private purchase and rental income. -Rights of the original vendor. -Added security costs will have to borne by residents if this application goes through. - Ecology and biodiversity.

6.16 As a result of the additional information and plans that were submitted a further consultation exercise was undertaken and as a result, 10 objections have been received from local residents and individuals raising the following matters - - Reiteration of objections already raised. - Questioning why other applications elsewhere in Millgate and the wider District have been refused. - Development in this location is wholly unsuitable. - The road is already under pressure from excessive traffic and the site is too far away from local amenities to be viable. - Application proposes permanent structures. - Impact on local residents would be severe. - Impacts of reducing views of open countryside from gardens. - Buildings would be in contravention to the Council's building policy. - How can the reasons for the declinature to convert one dwelling now be overturned to support the erection of four amenity blocks in addition to their associated hard standing areas, spaces for numerous vehicles, treatment plants and so on now become a viable proposition? - Further expansion of the site to accommodate children wishing to 'leave' the family home but still live within the family environment. May result in overcrowding or additional 'residents' living on site. - does this now mean, all local residents to the site will be permitted to build brick properties with basic facilities on their property. - There are no immediate amenities for people with children or older relatives. - Adjacent woodland and trees are used by wildlife and specifically roosting owls. - A buffer zone of scrub and trees should be retained to the western boundary. - Foraging owls use the site. Future management of the site should build in the future management of the rough grassland. - There is a pole mounted owl box nearby that should not be disturbed. -Location of the site notice on a road sign. -Whaplode have not been satisfactorily informed of the application. -Process matters regarding the receipt and processing of the application. Page 17 7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations

7.2 Identified need for this development

7.3 Paragraph 3.2.17 of the South Lincolnshire Local Plan, adopted in March 2019, sets context to Policy 20: Accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople as follows -

Housing needs may also, by exception, be justified in the Countryside; for example, for Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople accommodation (Policy 20: Accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople) or to meet the specific housing needs of a settlement (see Policy 19: Rural Exceptions Sites).

7.4 As part of the SELLP work, an independent Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment was undertaken on behalf of the Joint Planning Unit, and the report published in November 2016. At the time of the report In South Holland there were no public sites; 10 private sites with a total of 57 pitches; 1 unauthorised site with 10 pitches; and 3 Travelling Showpeople yards with 14 plots. There was no other provision for Gypsies, Travellers or Travelling Showpeople.

7.5 This report concluded that at the time of publication there are 5 Gypsy or Traveller households identified in South Holland that meet the government definition and 37 'unknown' households that may meet the definition. This approach is consistent with the outcomes of a recent Planning Appeal where access to a site was not possible but basic information was known about the number of households residing there. (Planning Inspectorate Ref: APP/Z6950/A/14/2212012).

7.6 The components of future need are as follows: - Older teenage children in need of a pitch of their own. - Households living on sites with temporary planning permissions. - New household formation. - In-migration.

7.7 Need for 4 additional pitches for households that meets the definition is made up of new household formation based on the demographics of household members - this allocation has been set as the land at Bleu Raye Farm.

7.8 In addition, the report goes on to set out that there may be a need across the plan period for up to 13 additional pitches for 'unknown' households.

7.9 The South Lincolnshire Local Plan (SELLP) acknowledges there is unmet need for additional Gypsy/Traveller residential accommodation within its district between the period 2011-36.

7.10 Principle of Development and Planning Policies

7.11 The principle of this proposal is to be considered in the light of the NPPF, the policies of Planning Policy for Traveller Sites. August 2015, published by DCLG and the wider, and more detailed policies of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan.

7.12 In addition detailed matters relating to the impact of the development on neighbouring residents, visual impact, highway matters and flooding and other matters are to be considered in the usual way, taking in to account the guidance of the NPPF and the SELLP, and these are addressed below.

7.13 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is read in conjunction with the Government's Planning Policy for Traveller Sites. The DCLG document, Planning Policy for Traveller Sites, sets out that in determining planning applications for such sites, applications should be assessed and determined in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the application of specific policies in the National Planning Policy Framework and this planning policy for traveller sites.Page 18 7.14 Policies A and B of the DCLG document set out the requirements for Local Planning Authorities to use evidence to plan positively and manage development and specific Planning for traveller sites. Policy B is particularly helpful in advising the production of local plans, stating that Local planning authorities should, in producing their Local Plan: a) identify and update annually, a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide 5 years' worth of sites against their locally set targets b) identify a supply of specific, developable sites, or broad locations for growth, for years 6 to 10 and, where possible, for years 11-15

c) consider production of joint development plans that set targets on a cross-authority basis, to provide more flexibility in identifying sites, particularly if a local planning authority has special or strict planning constraints across its area (local planning authorities have a duty to cooperate on planning issues that cross administrative boundaries) d) relate the number of pitches or plots to the circumstances of the specific size and location of the site and the surrounding population's size and density e) protect local amenity and environment.

7.15 Policy C of the DCLG document sets out that: When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community.

7.16 Policy H sets criteria for determining planning applications for traveller sites and in particularly paragraph 24 states:

Local Planning Authorities should consider the following issues amongst other relevant matters when considering planning applications for traveller sites: a) the existing level of local provision and need for sites b) the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation for the applicants c) other personal circumstances of the applicant d) that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come forward on unallocated sites e) that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections

7.17 The Communities and Local Government's Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites Good Practice Guide, has been superseded but gives helpful general guidance that an average family pitch must be capable of accommodating an amenity building, a larger trailer and touring caravan, (or two trailers, drying space for clothes, a lockable shed (for bicycles, wheelchair storage etc.), parking space for two vehicles and a small garden area.

7.18 It is considered that Policy 20 of the South Lincolnshire Local Plan (SELLP), which has been subject to considerable public consultation and scrutiny, the scrutiny and amendment of the Planning Inspectorate and adoption by South Holland District Council and Boston Borough Council, is sound and in accordance with the DCLG advice, and gives sound and clear criteria for the assessment and consideration of applications for gypsy and traveller sites.

7.19 With regard to the principles of development of this site, the current application extends slightly beyond the boundary of the site identified within Policy 20 of the SELLP, but not to such an extent that the Policy would be prejudiced or negatively impacted. As explained above, the boundary indicated in Policy 20 of the SELLP does not follow a feature such as a boundary line or hedge on the site.

7.20 Within the SELLP the application site at Bleu Raye Farm is identified to provide pitches for four households, subject to the following criteria, which is already set out, along with the rest of the policy, above: Page 19 Planning permission will be granted for the development of these sites, provided that proposals: 1. will be adequately provided with appropriate infrastructure such as electricity, drinking-water, waste-water treatment and recycling/waste management; 2. will not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users (and proposals must therefore give careful consideration to layout, landscaping, external lighting schemes, and the type of business uses that would be appropriate (if mixed residential and business use is proposed)); and 3. will be successfully assimilated into both their immediate environs and the wider landscape.

7.21 Appropriate infrastructure and servicing

7.22 Looking at each of these matters in turn, the site has the benefit of an electricity supply and a supply of drinking water.

7.23 The submitted plans show the provision of foul and surface water drainage being provided to each pitch in the form of soakaways and package treatment plants. These facilities are considered to be appropriately located. The Environment Agency, Internal Drainage Board and Anglian Water have no objections to the arrangements within the application.

7.24 Provision for recycling/waste management can be provided on each plot, with a shared collection point at the frontage of the site, adjacent to the public highway of Millgate. This arrangement, which is accepted on other recently approved schemes, shall require refuse and recycling to be presented on the due days of collection. As this proposal is for four households, it is considered that the refuse collection point to be provided is acceptable, and its retention can be controlled via condition as suggested below.

7.25 Effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users

7.26 The impact of four households on this site, together with the associated vehicular movements, is not considered by officers to represent a form of development of a nature and intensity that would warrant refusal of planning permission on the grounds of having a significant adverse effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users. The proposed development respects the scale of the nearest settled community, being sporadic residential dwellings within the countryside.

7.27 Specifically, looking at the layout of the site, the pitches would be sited at the widest part of the site and away from the adjoining dwelling Home Farm. The distance of eastern boundary of the site to the Home Farm is approximately 42m, and the distance between the dwelling of Home Farm and the first pitch would be approximately 80 metres.

7.28 The dwelling of Home Farm is to the north of the application site, and was approved as a replacement dwelling in 2004, (H23-1269-04 refers), and has in the side elevation, facing the access road to the site, a landing window and a secondary bedroom window, with two other windows serving the bedroom in the rear, or western elevation. These windows would be a minimum of 25 metres from the edge of the site adjacent to the access road.

7.29 It is considered that a landing is not a habitable room. A bedroom is considered to be a habitable room, however the bedroom in question has primary windows in the western elevation, and would not be impacted by reason of privacy, overlooking or undue noise by the site and the access road. The bedroom windows at the first floor would look towards the main part of the site, at a distance of approximately but sufficient landscaping can be provided and maintained within the site and the wider landholding to protect the amenities of this neighbouring dwelling.

7.30 The proposed access, which is to be of tarmacadam, is to be sited away from the nearest dwelling of Home Farm , rather than using the existing field access to the site which is to be retained, which would remove the vehicular movements as far as possible within the applicant's ownership from the adjoining occupier of Home Farm. There is also a fall back position that the existing field access could be utilised byPage agricultural 20 and associated vehicles and trailers if an agricultural use were to recommence, that although sporadic in use, could be a source of noise and disturbance, which is the norm in such rural locations.

7.31 The dwelling to the north, which was approved as a replacement dwelling in 2004, (H23-1269- 04 refers), as a two storey replacement dwelling, has in the side elevation, facing the access to the site, a landing window and a secondary bedroom window, with two other windows serving the bedroom in the rear, or western elevation.

7.32 It is considered that a landing is not a habitable room. A bedroom is considered to be a habitable room, however the bedroom in question has primary windows in the western elevation, and would not be impacted by reason of privacy, overlooking or undue noise by the site and the access.

7.33 The bedroom windows at the first floor would look towards the site at a distance of approximately 80 metres, and sufficient landscaping can be provided and maintained within the site and the wider landholding to protect the amenities of this neighbouring dwelling.

7.34 Within Hurdletree Bank are the dwellings of Longacres and Southernwood. The house of Longacres is at distance from the closest edge of the site of approximately 70 metres, with the nearest point of the domestic garden boundary being approximately 25 metres.

7.35 The dwelling of Southernwood is approximately 100 metres from the closest boundary of the application site with the nearest point of the domestic garden boundary of approximately 75 metres.

7.36 As well as considering the criteria of Policy 20, the criteria of Policies 2: Development Management and Policy 3: Design of New Development of the SELLP have been used to assess the development impact on the wider area as well as local residents.

It is considered that due to the distances involved and the landscaping and nature of the site and surrounding area, the development would not be detrimental to the residential amenities of Home Farm, Longacres or Southernwood nor to dwellings in the vicinity of greater distance to the application site than these dwellings, and would be in accordance with national guidance in the NPPF and with Policies 2 and 3 of the SELLP, as well as Policy 20 of the plan.

7.37 Objection has been raised that the development would impact on views of the open countryside, however the right a view is not in statute, and the amenities of residents in the area have been considered.

7.38 A condition is recommended below in order that a lighting scheme be submitted and approved by the Council and maintained as approved, in order that light does not become an issue to impact negatively on the residents of the area and the wider countryside.

7.39 Immediate environs and the wider landscape

7.40 The landscaping of the application site proposes the formation of hedging and post and rail fencing along the northern and western boundaries, which would serve to shield the development from the adjoining dwelling and from wider views from the north.

7.41 The southern boundary, which will be altered by the formation of the access road, is to be augmented by planting to fill existing gaps. This could be resolved by utilising the line of the existing access and laying a wider running surface over it.

7.42 The area of rough grassland within the site is not to be built upon and the land within the ownership of the applicant (within the blue line), is to have an area planted with trees, what would soften the edge of the site and the access road when viewed from the adjoining dwelling.

7.43 Once the existing landscaping on the site is augmented by the landscaping proposed, this site would only be glimpsed from neighbouring dwellings and the wider rural area, and would not be an incongruous feature in the landscape.Page 21 7.44 An external lighting scheme has not been submitted in detail, however it is envisaged that a detailed scheme could be approved and controlled by condition, to provide low level lighting and retain the rural character of this part of the District, as well as protecting the amenities of the occupiers of the site and adjoining dwellings.

7.45 The application does not propose businesses to be sited on the site, and it is considered that this site would not be an appropriate location for businesses relying on significant noise, outdoor storage, outdoor working or the movement of significant numbers of business vehicles. It is reasonable to provide a parking space of business vehicles within each pitch, and these vehicles can be restricted to the parking area proposed and be no greater than 3.5 tonnes in weight. These matters can be controlled by conditions, set out below.

7.46 It is not considered that the provision of four pitches on this site would have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of existing local residents or adjoining land users and could be successfully assimilated into both their immediate environs and the wider landscape. The development for this reason would be in accordance with national guidance in the NPPF and with Policies 2, 3 and 28 of the SELLP, as well as Policy 20 of the plan.

7.47 Sustainability

7.48 The principle of the use of this site has been accepted through the consideration and examination of the SELLP and Policy 20 is adopted; the SELLP, the policy and the allocation of Bleu Raye Farm was within the remit of the wider sustainability appraisal undertaken on the plan as a whole.

7.49 Bleu Raye Farm is 1.6 miles from Whaplode St Catherine, 4.3 miles from Holbeach, 2.2 miles from Whaplode and 4.1 miles from Moulton. Bleu Raye Farm is considered to be in a sustainable location with regard to accessibility of services, hence the adoption of Policy 20 in the SELLP.

7.50 The application site is not close to public transport routes and would rely on the use of the private car, however this site is considered to be acceptable on balance for the purposes of the use proposed within the SELLP, and in the light of para 3.2.17 of the SELLP, set out above.

7.51 Comparison to previous planning decisions on the site

7.52 There is planning history on this site including the refusal of development for residential purposes by the stable to dwelling. This was upheld at appeal. If such an application were forthcoming in 2020, or a proposal to develop the land for residential purposes not within the remit of the Policies 10, 11, 19 and/or 20 of the SELLP, then it is very likely that refusal would be recommended by officers for clear planning reasons.

7.53 This application however is to be considered for the use it proposes, in the light of Policy 20 which sets criteria for the consideration of sites for gypsy and travellers, and allocates this site for development.

7.54 Loss of agricultural land

7.55 The greater part of the application site is allocated within the SELLP as an allocated site for the provision of 4 pitches for gypsy and traveller use. It has been accepted in principle that the use of this site would be subject to change away form agriculture and it is considered that there will be sufficient agricultural land remaining in the District that permission could not be refused on this basis.

7.56 Highway safety and access arrangements

7.57 The revised access details would not prejudice highway safety or give rise to problems of parking or highway access, and this is confirmed by the LCC Highways service. The details of the access road are recommended to be controlled by condition. Page 22 7.58 Millgate is a rural road without footways or lighting, however it is considered that it would be prohibitive to expect the proposed development to provide a footway or lighting outside the site.

7.59 It is not considered that the development would lead to on road parking, as residents of the site and visitors to the site would enter via the access road and drive in to the site.

7.60 Flooding Matters

7.61 The application site lies within Flood Zones 1 and 2 and is identified as being at low to medium risk for tidal and fluvial flooding on the Environment Agency's flood mapping. The South East Lincolnshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (March 2017), indicates that the application site is shown to have no hazard rating on both the South Holland District present day and 2115 flood maps.

7.62 The Environment Agency has no objections to this application and suggests standard informative advising of flood warning, with no other special measures. It is therefore considered that the application accords with national guidance in the NPPF and with Policies 2 , 3 and 4 of the SELLP.

7.63 Natural Environment and Wildlife

7.64 The application site is disused agricultural land, and as such has value as open land for wildlife, however, it has not been suggested that the site is home to protected species, although mention is made of foraging owls using the site. There are adjacent areas of tree planting and wider open countryside that accommodates wildlife, as well as the existing trees that are to be kept, and augmented.

7.65 A boundary treatment would be removed to enable the new access, and replacement planting is proposed.

7.66 A number of conditions are suggested below, to ensure that if approved an up to date ecological assessment is submitted.

7.67 Issues of wildlife crime have been raised and this is covered by the Wildlife and Countryside Act and any future harm to wildlife on adjoining land would be a Police matter. There is a pole mounted owl box nearby that would not be disturbed by the proposals.

7.68 It is considered that the development, when supported by the conditions set out below, would be in accordance with national guidance in the NPPF and with Policies 2, 3 and 28 of the SELLP.

7.69 Further expansion of the site

7.70 If in the future a proposal is made to extend this site, then the formal planning application would be considered in the light of the prevailing national and local planning and relevant policies of that time.

7.71 Fear of crime and antisocial behaviour

7.72 Objections have been received regarding the potential for crime and antisocial behaviour. In addition the possibility of antisocial behaviour being caused by a temporary site has been raised. It is to be noted that this application does not propose a transit site, and the Police have been consulted and have not raised objection.

7.73 Other matters

7.74 By its nature, works of layout and construction are temporary, and although builders vehicles would be used, this can be controlled Pagevia a condition 23 as set out below to require a construction management plan, to reduce the impact of the laying of the road and wider development during building on the neighbouring residents and any impacts on highway safety.

7.75 Issues relating to property values, either for private purchase and rental income, the rights of the original vendor and/or security costs are not planning matters and as such can be given very little weight.

7.76 Objection has been raised to the location of the site notice, which was placed on a traffic sign on the same side of Millgate to the proposal, and adjacent to open land. The siting of this site notice, together with the consultation by letter of local residents, and the consultation of Whaplode Parish Council is considered to be in accordance with the Council's usual practice and has resulted in a significant number of representations to the application.

7.77 With regard to matters of the processing of the application that have been received, the opinion of the Council's Legal Service are set out above.

7.78A dditional Considerations

7.79 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.80 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the need (in discharging its functions) to: A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are underrepresented) of people with a protected characteristic(s). C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.81 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.82 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149. It is only one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.83 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic.

7.84 Human Rights

7.85 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property).

7.86 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

7.87 Conclusion Page 24 7.88 The application proposal is in accordance in principle with Policy 20 of the SELLP and the provisions of the NPPF and government guidance.

7.89 The details of the application, which set out the extent of development that would be required, and the landscaping proposals, are considered to be acceptable and would mitigate against undue impact on neighbouring residents. Other material considerations that have been raised area addressed in the report above.

7.90 Officers consider that subject to the conditions set out below, this development is acceptable and it is appropriate to grant consent, for the reasons set out above.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Grant permission subject to the conditions listed in Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Application form Planning Statement 1365 1 PS/FRA GF LMS 1365-1-PL-BP02 C 1365-1-PL-BP01 1365-1-PL-SP01 C 1365-1-PL-LP01 1365-1_PL_GA01 1365-1_PL_GA02 1365-1_PL_GA03

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. The maximum number of gypsy/traveller households to be accommodated upon each of the four pitches within the red line boundary shall be limited to one household. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and the character of the surrounding area. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 20 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019)

4. Occupation of the development hereby permitted shall be limited to a person or persons who meet the definition of a gypsy or traveller as defined by national guidance set out in 'Planning policy for traveller sites'(August 2015) (or as may be amended) and any resident dependants.

Reason: Permission has only been granted for this development in the open countryside on the basis of an identified need for gypsy/traveller pitches. Occupation of this site by non- gypsy/traveller individuals or families would be contrary to established national and local policies of rural restraint. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 1, 2 and 20 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 which reflect national guidance contained in both the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and 'Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2015'.

Page 25 5. No touring caravan or day room on the site shall be used to provide permanent residential accommodation. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 20 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 which reflect national guidance contained in both the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

6. Not more than 2 touring caravans and 1 mobile home shall be sited on each of the gypsy/traveller pitches hereby approved, and no storage or sales of materials, machinery, commercial vehicles weighing over 3.5 tonnes or other vehicles weighing over 3.5 tonnes, waste or other commercial uses or processes, shall take place or be stored on the site.

A maximum of one additional touring caravan may be sited on each of the gypsy/traveller pitches hereby approved for no more than 28 days in any one calendar year. Visiting touring caravans shall be logged in and out of the site. This information will be available in writing for the Council to view on request at any time.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, levels of residential amenity and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set, and to provide for short term family gatherings. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 1, 2 and 20 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 which reflect national guidance contained in both the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and 'Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2015'.

7. A detailed scheme of construction management to minimise disturbance during the construction process through noise, dust, vibration and smoke shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences and the construction process shall be carried out in accordance with the scheme so approved. It shall also include a method statement, detailing how construction traffic, site personnel vehicles, materials deliveries and site accommodation will be managed to safeguard highway safety, free passage along Millgate and residential amenity. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of local residents. This issue is integral to the development and therefore full details need to be finalised prior to the commencement of works. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

8. Prior to the occupation of any part of the development details of the external illumination of the access road, all buildings and areas of the site including details of luminance and fields of illumination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first use of those buildings and areas and there shall be no external illumination other than that so approved. Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over these matters, in the interests of the visual amenity of the overall development, to prevent light pollution and to ensure that the development is adequately lit. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 30 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

9. The refuse and recycling storage facilities at the rear of the property as shown on Drawing No BP02 C and approved under this Decision Notice, shall be provided before any part of the development is brought in to use and shall thereafter be so maintained.

Reason: To ensure that adequate facilities are made available for refuse storage and disposal to avoid pollution, to protect residential amenity, and in the interests of the appearance of the site and the area within which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 30 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

Page 26 10. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme of landscaping for the site, to include all boundaries and that area of planting identified on plan number 1365- 1_PL_BP02 RevC as "indicative planting" beyond the fencing around the site, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Note: The applicant is recommended to employ a qualified and experienced landscape designer to produce a landscaping scheme for the development. Reason: To ensure the provision of the landscaping of the development, in order to protect the amenities of adjoining residents. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

11. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied, until the landscaping required by condition 10 above is installed and has been certified complete by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme as is approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be carried out in its entirety within a period of twelve months beginning with the date on which development is commenced. All trees, shrubs and bushes shall be maintained by the owner or owners of the land on which they are situated for the period of five years beginning with the date of completion of the scheme and during that period all losses shall be made good as and when necessary. Reason: To ensure the provision of the landscaping of the development, in order to protect the amenities of adjoining residents. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

12. Before each pitch is occupied, the access road shall be constructed to a specification to enable them to be adopted as Public Highway, less the carriageway and footway surface courses.

Reason: To ensure that a safe and suitable standard of vehicular access is provided for residents. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policy 2 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and national guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

13. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, (or any Order or Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order), none of the following developments or alterations shall be carried out. i) the erection of freestanding curtilage buildings or structures including car ports, garages, sheds, greenhouses, pergolas or raised decks; ii) the erection of walls, fences or other means of enclosure.

Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over the future extension and alteration of the development, in the interests of its architectural and visual integrity, levels of residential amenity, and the visual amenity and character of the area within which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 20 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 which reflect national guidance contained in both the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and 'Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2015'.

14. Before the commencement of the development hereby permitted beyond oversite a schedule of external materials of construction of buildings and hard surfaced areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the materials so approved. Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over the external materials of construction of the development in the interests of the character and appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019.

Page 27 15. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, (or any Order or Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order), no walls, fences or other means of enclosure other than those illustrated on the plans forming part of the application hereby approved shall be erected on the site. Reason 1: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over means of enclosure, in the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenity and character of the area within which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019.

16. The applicant is reminded that it is an offence under the wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended) to kill, injure, or take (handle) any protected species occupying a place of shelter or protection and also to take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built. If evidence of bats is found before or whilst the work is carried out you are advised to contact Natural England at their Lincoln office (telephone 03000 603900).

17. Flood resistance and resilience

The Environment Agency strongly recommend the use of flood resistance and resilience measures. Physical barriers, raised electrical fittings and special construction materials are just some of the ways you can help reduce flood damage. To find out which measures will be effective for this development, please contact your building control department. In the meantime, if you'd like to find out more about reducing flood damage, visit the flood risk and coastal change pages of the planning practice guidance. The following documents may also be useful: Department for Communities and Local Government: Preparing for floods http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/odpm/4000000009282.pdf Department for Communities and Local Government: Improving the flood performance of new buildings: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/flood-resilient-construction-of-new- buildings. Floodline The applicant/occupants should phone Floodline on 0345 988 1188 to register for a flood warning, or visit https://www.gov.uk/sign-up-for-flood-warnings. It's a free service that provides warnings of flooding from rivers, the sea and groundwater, direct by telephone, email or text message. Anyone can sign up. Flood warnings can give people valuable time to prepare for flooding - time that allows them to move themselves, their families and precious items to safety. Flood warnings can also save lives and enable the emergency services to prepare and help communities. F

or practical advice on preparing for a flood, visit https://www.gov.uk/prepare-for-flooding. To get help during a flood, visit https://www.gov.uk/help-during-flood.

For advice on what do after a flood, visit https://www.gov.uk/after-flood.

18. The permitted development requires the formation of a new/amended vehicular access. Applicants should note the provisions of Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980. The works should be constructed to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority in accordance with the Authority's specification that is current at the time of construction. For further information, please telephone 01522 782070 or e-mail [email protected].

19. Should unexpected contamination be discovered on the site at any time, the applicant is advised to contact the District Council's Environmental Protection department immediately.

Page 28 20. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and by identifying matters of concern within the application and negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal. This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , Development Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected]

Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 29  & .! & .








 

  





 


' (















 



& $% #"" !
"  







! "#$
 %# &#'' &#$ 

 Page 30 !(&)% !(*!+ "* ,"#&'*&%&*-
     *- "# Agenda Item 6.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: Lucy Buttery - Principal Planning Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H13-1096-19

Application Number: H13-1096-19 Date Received: 11 November 2019

Application Type: RESERVED MATTERS

Description: Residential development - comprising 58 dwellings and associated works - outline approval H13-0844-17

Location: Land south: Roman Road Moulton Chapel Spalding

Applicant: Postland Developments Ltd Agent: Mr Gordon Smith

Ward: Cowbit, Weston and Moulton Ward Councillors: Cllr R Grocock Cllr A Casson Cllr A R Woolf

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H13-1096-19

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 Significant development, objections received and an individual with an interest in the land is related to an SHDC employee.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 This is a reserved matters application, relating to outline application H13-0844-17, for residential development comprising of 58 dwellings and associated works on land south of Roman Road, Moulton Chapel.

2.2 The proposed scheme comprises of 43 market units and 15 affordable units. The affordable mix includes 10 x rent (4 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed, 2 x 3 bed) and 5 x shared ownership (5 x 3 bed) - Approximately a 67/33% split.

2.3 A variety of house types and designs are proposed with dwellings ranging from 1-storey to 3- storey. These 3 storey townhouses are proposed to be confined to the centre of the site, forming a crescent around the formal central ornamental pond and open space. The properties adjoining the northern boundary would be predominantly 1 or 2-storey.

2.4 The site includes a single vehicle and pedestrian access to the north onto Roman Road, where the current commercial garage business will be demolished. The proposed estate road runs through the centre of the site with a number of private drives off to the north and south.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION Page 31 3.1 The site is approximately 2.9 hectares in size and is comprised of a commercial vehicle repair business directly adjacent Roman Road and agricultural land to the rear of properties/businesses on Roman Road, and Cekhira Avenue. The former village playing field is to the east, there are fields to the south and a Grade II Listed Mill is to the north-west.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Policy 2 - Development Management Policy 3 - Design of New Development Policy 4 - Approach to Flood Risk Policy 17 - Providing a Mix of Housing Policy 18 - Affordable Housing Policy 28 - The Natural Environment Policy 29 - The Historic Environment Policy 30 - Pollution Policy 32 - Community, Health and Well-being Policy 36 - Vehicle and Cycle Parking Appendix 6 - Parking Standards National Guidance

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019 Section 2 - Achieving sustainable development Section 8 - Promoting healthy and safe communities Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places Section 14 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Section 15 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Section 16 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 H13-0844-17 - Outline application for proposed development of up to 58 houses with vehicular access (garages to be removed) (resubmission of H13-1280-16) (approved October 2018).

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Moulton Parish Council

The Parish Council will support this planning application providing that the plans are not changed and the developers stay with what they have applied for.

6.2 SHDC Building Control Plots 57, 4-7, 21, 26-27, 30-31 and 44-48 exceed the distance that rubbish should be carried from a property under building regulations. Please also provide details on rubbish collection points.

6.3 SHDC Strategic Housing Page 32 No objection to proposed affordable scheme.

6.4 SHDC Conservation Officer Having reviewed the block plan for the above application, I confirm that the comments of the previous Conservation Officer with regards the impact upon the nearby Grade II listed Mill still remain salient in that I do not consider this proposal to suggest any great risk to the setting or significance of Moulton Chapel Mill. The proposal is set back from the extant highway and therefore would not impact upon any views of the Mill from any portion of the public realm. In addition, the mill is already situated within a residential setting and so it cannot be argued that a development of this type would be out of keeping with the current setting of the mill and should not be considered to cause 'Substantial Harm' to the designated asset.

Considering the above, I do not wish to raise any objections at this time.

6.5 LCC Highways/SUDS Does not wish to restrict the grant of permission.

6.6 South Holland IDB

Outlines the consenting process and supports the Lead Local Flood Authority's request that the applicant provide evidence that the riparian watercourse is adequate to convey the surface water discharged from this development.

6.7 Anglian Water

No objections. The site is within the catchment of the Cowbit Water Recycling Centre which currently does not have capacity to treat flows from the site. However, Anglian Water are obligated to accept the flows and take the necessary steps to ensure there is sufficient treatment capacity.

6.8 Lincolnshire Policy

No further comments to make beyond those submitted at outline stage.

6.9 Public There have been 13 objections from members of the public. The key issues are summarised as follows: - Concern re highway and pedestrian safety, increase in traffic and congestion and impact on existing poor condition of roads and footpaths - Concern re proposed drainage method and existing drainage problems - surface water slow to drain and query re whether there is capacity at the sewage pumping station for the number of dwellings. Queries regarding the existing drain on the northern boundary and how it is shown on the plans; is it interrupted on the northern boundary or does it continue all the way along? - Query re appropriateness of 2.5 and 3 storey properties in terms of character - Standard type of dwellings proposed with no interesting design features - Impact on privacy and loss of light, outlook and noise and disturbance during construction and subsequent occupation - Hours of work during construction should be limited and noise restrictions should be imposed - Request that a wall be constructed between a particular property and the proposed development for security and noise mitigation reasons - Agricultural land should be used for growing crops, not housing - Gardens look small - Absence of any environmental benefits - Local Plan earmarks the site for only 46 properties - Villages will lose identity with additional development - No public transport so cars are relied upon - Concerns re lack of capacity at services and facilities and distance of some from Moulton Chapel - Potential for increase in crime - Wildlife and environment affected - Impact on the Listed mill and St James Church Page 33 - What benefits would these dwellings bring to village character and community and local businesses - Will there be houses for local people - Loss of local garage - Developer should not be allowed to renege on affordable housing or other s106 contributions

7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations

7.2 The principle of residential development on the site has been established by virtue of the outline consent. Therefore the key matters to be considered are: - Detailed layout and design; - Access and highways concerns; - Landscaping and open space; - Drainage; - Impact upon residential amenity; - Affordable housing provision; and - Other matters.

7.3 Design and layout

7.4 A variety of house types and designs are proposed with dwellings ranging from 1-storey to 3- storey. Queries have been raised regarding the appropriateness of 2.5 and 3-storey properties in character terms given that property types in the village are predominantly 1 and 2-storey. It is accepted that there are a number of larger properties proposed that are not generally reflective of typical development in Moulton Chapel however, it does not necessary go that an application should be refused if a new development attempts to create its own character. In this case, a number of the proposed dwellings are more visually interesting and of higher quality design than is typically seen in the area and paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) makes it clear that developments should be visually attractive as a result of good architecture. Furthermore, there are also a number of dwelling designs incorporated within the scheme that are more reflective of existing development in the area. Moreover, the bulk of the site is located to the rear of existing development and so it is not considered that the proposed dwelling types would result in an impact on the character of the village so severe as to justify refusal of the application.

7.5 In terms of the location of the larger properties within the site, the 3-storey townhouses proposed would be confined to the centre of the site, forming a crescent around the formal central ornamental pond and open space. The properties adjoining the northern boundary, and thus existing residential development, would be predominantly 1 or 2-storey.

7.6 Dwellings would be accessed from either the adoptable estate road running through the centre of the site or from one of the private drives. Each dwelling has the required level of off-road parking space, in accordance with the parking standards in the Local Plan (Appendix 6).

7.7 Refuse collection would be a combination of kerbside for the main estate road and collection points for private drives. There is a condition on the outline approval for specific details of waste storage and disposal to be submitted prior to the commencement of the development.

7.8 It is accepted that the Local Plan indicates a capacity of 46 dwellings for this site, however the outline permission allows for up to 58 dwellings and, at outline stage, the Council's Planning Policy Team verbally confirmed that this number relates to a previous iteration of the Plan before it was adopted where the identified site was smaller.

7.9 Taking the above into account, it is concluded that the design and layout of the scheme accords with Policies 2 and 3 of the Local Plan. Policy 2 of the Local Plan requires development proposals to take into account sustainable development considerations such as: quality of design; and size, scale, layout, density, impact on character and appearance of the area and the relationship to existing development.Page Policy 34 3 requires development proposals to respect the density, scale and massing of neighbouring buildings and the landscape character of the location.

7.10 Access and highways concerns

7.11 The site includes a single vehicle and pedestrian access to the north onto Roman Road, where the current commercial garage business will be demolished. Dwellings would be accessed from either the adoptable estate road running through the centre of the site or from one of the private drives. The Highways Authority have confirmed that the Banjo turning area at the east of the site is sufficient for a refuse vehicle to turn around.

7.12 Local concern has been raised about highway and pedestrian safety and the perceived inadequacy of the local highway network to cope with the development. However, outline permission has already been granted for residential development of the site and the Highways Authority have no objections to the proposal. On this basis, it is not considered that there is a defendable reason for refusal on highways grounds and the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy 2 of the Local Plan which requires it to be demonstrated that access and vehicle generation levels will be acceptable.

7.13 There is a condition on the outline approval that requires the developer to submit, and have approved, details for the junction (including the visibility splay) with Roman Road before any dwelling is commenced.

7.14 The level of parking provision is in accordance with the standards set out in Appendix 6 of the Local Plan.

7.15 Landscaping and open space

7.16 A pond which acts as a detention basin, thus forming part of the drainage strategy for the site, is located at the centre of the site. Formal open space is located either side of this and to the west and east of plots 52 and 40 respectively. Further areas of open space, which also have the ability to function as drainage features, are located on the southern boundary. The scheme also includes a tree lined 'avenue' from Roman Road into the site as well as tree planting and small hedges across the development. Overall, 20% of the site (0.57ha) is dedicated as open space, which is above the 0.1ha required by Policy 32 of the Local Plan. This is considered to be a suitable landscaping scheme for the site. The proposed scheme therefore complies with Policy 3 of the Local Plan in respect of its provisions on landscaping.

7.17 Drainage

7.18 Local concern has been raised regarding a number of drainage related matters. The proposal is for surface water to drain through permeable paving as well as the pond and swales, which will ultimately be discharged into the riparian watercourse on the eastern boundary. This eventually discharges into the South Holland IDB network. The Lead Local Flood Authority had queried whether the riparian watercourse is adequate to convey the surface water-run off from the proposed development. However, following the submission of additional information regarding this they have advised that they have no objections. Furthermore, the Internal Drainage Board has issued a Notice of Intention to Grant Consent to discharge surface water run-off into the watercourse.

7.19 In terms of foul water disposal, the site is within the catchment of the Cowbit Water Recycling Centre which currently does not have capacity to treat flows from the site. However, Anglian Water are obligated to accept the flows and take the necessary steps to ensure there is sufficient treatment capacity. They therefore have no objection to the proposal.

7.20 Queries have been raised regarding the drain adjacent to the northern boundary of the site and whether it continues along the entire boundary rather than being interrupted as the plans depict. The agent has advised that some of the drain has been filled in, which is the reason it appears as it does on the plan.

Page 35 7.21 Given the above, it is considered that the proposed drainage scheme accords with Policies 2, 3 and 4 of the Local Plan which require proposals to provide appropriate means of drainage.

7.22 Impact upon residential amenity

7.23 Concerns have been raised by nearby residents regarding impact upon their amenity.

7.24 In terms of separation distances between dwellings, these are considered to be more than satisfactory. 21m and 24m are typically considered to be appropriate separation distances where there is a rear to rear relationship with 2 and 3 storey dwellings respectively. This can be reduced to 15m where there is a rear to side relationship. Considering this in the context of the proposed scheme, the existing properties fronting onto Roman Road and Cekhira Avenue (with the exception of 33 Roman Road) have long rear gardens of 20+ metres in length. Where existing and proposed properties sit rear to rear, the minimum separation distance would be 32m, which is far in excess of the typically accepted distances. In terms of those properties that sit with a rear to side relationship, all with the exception of 33 Roman Bank would be over 20 metres separation distance. Furthermore, of those two storey properties along that boundary that have this relationship, only plots 5 and 21 have a window at first floor and this would serve a bathroom, thus would be obscure glazed. 33 Roman Road does have a shorter garden but would be adjoined by a bungalow which would be offset from the rear elevation of that property. Given this and the single storey nature of that dwelling it is not considered that the new dwelling would be overbearing or that there should be issues of overlooking provided a suitable boundary treatment is installed (to be dealt with via a condition compliance application). It is therefore not considered that there would be a material adverse impact in terms of overlooking, loss of light or any of the properties being overbearing in nature.

7.25 Loss of outlook and noise generated by occupants of the new properties is a consideration but one which carries very limited weight in the planning balance.

7.26 There is a condition on the outline approval that a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to commencement of development on site. This will cover working hours and how noise generation during the construction period will be minimised. It falls to the developer to carry out the development in a responsible manner.

7.27 Boundary treatments will be the subject of a separate condition compliance application.

7.28 In terms of garden sizes, the smallest would be approximately 55m2 which is not unusual for new build properties.

7.29 Overall, there are not considered to be any significant or demonstrable adverse impacts relating to residential amenity that would warrant refusal of this proposal. The proposal is considered to accord with Policies 2, 3 and 30 of the Local Plan in respect of their provisions on residential amenity.

7.30 Affordable housing provision

7.31 The outline application was granted subject to a s106 agreement for the provision of 25% of the site as affordable housing and a financial contribution toward healthcare provision. No education contribution was requested by the Local Education Authority. The developer is not seeking to amend the s106 contributions at present.

7.32 In light of comments made by Strategic Housing colleagues, an amended affordable housing scheme has been submitted by the applicant. In total, 15 (25.9%) affordable dwellings are proposed, comprising of 10 x rent (4 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed, 2 x 3 bed) and 5 x shared ownership (5 x 3 bed). This is approximately a 67/33% split of rent to shared ownership, which is broadly in accordance with Policy 18 of the Local Plan. No objections are raised to this revised affordable scheme.

7.33 A local planning authority cannot reasonably impose strict controls on who purchases a property, although given the size of the site it is expected that there would be sufficient Page 36 opportunity for local people to be able to purchase a home.

7.34 Other matters

7.35 A number of other concerns raised by objectors relate to the principle of development on this site and thus do not warrant consideration at reserved matters stage, including: Concerns regarding a lack of capacity at services and facilities and distance of some from Moulton Chapel; Loss of agricultural land; Loss of the local garage; and No public transport.

7.36 That there will be an increase in crime is an assumption at this stage and would be a matter for the police if such incidents were to occur.

7.37 As previously stated at outline stage, concerns raised regarding trees and wildlife are not considered to be an issue in this case. There are no protected trees within the vicinity of the site and no buildings/structure that would indicate the likelihood of protected species being present. As such, a protected species survey is not considered necessary in this instance. Clearly should anything arise during construction/demolition then protection is offered under separate legislation.

7.38 The presence of the Listed Mill to the north-west of the site has been taken into consideration in the proposed layout with dwellings being set back from the western boundary and a tree/landscaped avenue incorporated on that side. Furthermore, SHDC's Conservation Officer has no objections.

7.39 A combination of formal and less formal open space and landscaping are proposed as part of the scheme, including a tree lined avenue entrance feature and a central ornamental pond adjoined by green space. Small 'kickabout' areas are also incorporated at the south of the site. The central pond also forms part of a drainage scheme for the wider site. It is therefore not considered that there is an absence of any environmental benefits from the proposal.

7.40 There is a condition on the outline approval that requires details of the management of landscaping, open space, incidental open space, refuse/recycling collection points and private drives to be submitted before the commencement of the development.

7.41 Given the above, there is not considered to be any issues in relation to Policies 28 and 29 of the Local Plan.

7.42A dditional Considerations

7.43 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.44 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the need (in discharging its functions) to: A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are underrepresented) of people with a protected characteristic(s). C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.45 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.46 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149.Page It is only 37 one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.47 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic.

7.48 Human Rights

7.49 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property).

7.50 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

7.51 Conclusion

7.52 Taking all of the above into account, the proposal is considered to comply with the local development framework and national planning policy.

7.53 The recommendation is therefore for the application to be approved.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Authorised to grant permission subject to those Conditions listed at Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

Page 38 1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Plan 4531-D200A 2351-03A 2351-04A 2351-05 2351-06 The Ashton - Plans and Elevations The Blakely - Plans and Elevations The Chester - Floor Plans and Elevations The Churchill - Plans and Elevations The Darby - Plans and Elevations The Eaton - 3 Bed Detached Bungalow The Elton - Floor Plans and Elevations The Fulton - Plans and Elevations The Hornsby - Plans and Elevations The Kinsley - Plans and Elevations The Old Chapel - Plans and Elevations The Stanton - Plans and Elevations The Tyndall - Plans and Elevations The Willoughby - Plans and Elevations Garage Plans and Elevations Street Elevations Planning and Design Statement (prepared by Matrix Planning Ltd, dated 8th November 2019) Flood Risk Assessment & Sustainable Drainage Strategy (prepared by MTC Engineering Ltd, Rev C, dated November 2019) Correspondence from MTC Engineering Ltd re suitability of riparian drain (dated 20th January 2020) Housing Mix Schedule and accompanying plan indicating affordable mix Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and by identifying matters of concern within the application and negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal. This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , Development Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected]

Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 39  & .! & .









 



 

 

 

 

  *1!  

#

*7  (  #"

'





# & %











 

# 





5



$



 



#"$ "  4& #

 76 6 

 



  -3 6   4-2 -   -.





+6 

 

570 

)*+,





 





  

 

   # /0

/0

"   

-  

  

 



   

*

! ! 

  



  



 



(#

"

30 #

'  

 )36 6 3,   %

4# +

4-1  4-1  

*1!  

2    3

 











! "#$
 %# &#'' &#$ 

 Page 40 !(&)% !(*!+ "* ,"#&'*&%&*-
     *- "# Agenda Item 7.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: Polly Harris-Gorf - Principal Planning Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H02-0889-19

Application Number: H02-0889-19 Date Received: 05 September 2019

Application Type: S73A CONTINUATION

Description: Change of use of land to crane storage and demonstration area (B2 Use) - approved under H02-0421-17. Modification of Condition 5 to allow external storage/stacking height to change from 2 metres to 5 metres

Location: Crowland Cranes Ltd Crease Drove Crowland

Applicant: Crowland Cranes Ltd Agent: Andrew M Wright Ltd

Ward: Crowland and Deeping Ward Councillors: Cllr B Alcock Cllr J R Astill Cllr N H Pepper

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H02-0889-19

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 The application raises issues worthy of Committee consideration.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 Change of use of land to crane storage and demonstration area (B2 Use) - approved under H02-0421-17 - Modification of Condition 5 to allow external storage/stacking height to change from 2 metres to 5 metres.

2.2 Since submission additional information has been sought from the applicant and received in the form of Shadow Study Sections to enable the assessment of the proposal on the proposed dwellings on the adjacent land, which has a resolution to grant planning permission for 108 dwellings subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 The application concerns part of the existing site of Crowland Cranes. Crease Drove is directly adjacent to the east. On the northern section of the site is a 5m deep bund, which is topped by planting.

3.2 The site of Crowland Cranes is an existing commercial site and there is no actual current restriction on height of cranes to be stored. The height restrictions relate to the storage or stacking of other materials and items that are related to the business but are not cranes. Page 41 4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019

Policy 1 - Spatial Strategy Policy 2 - Development Management Policy 3 - Design of New Development Policy 4 - Approach to Flood Risk Policy 7 - Improving S E Lincolnshire's Employment Land Portfolio Policy 8 - Prestige Employment Sites Policy 28 - The Natural Environment Policy 30 - Pollution If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019

Section 2 - Achieving sustainable development Section 4 - Decision-making Section 6 - Building a strong, competitive economy Section 8 - Promoting healthy and safe communities Section 11 - Making effective use of land Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places Section 14. - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 H02-0888-19 - Change of use of land to crane storage and demonstration area (B2 Use) - approved under H02-0421-17) - Amendment to colour of palisade fencing from dark green to silver (galvanised steel) - Approved 13 September 2019.

5.2 H02-0421-17 - Change of use of land to crane storage and demonstration area (B2 use) - Approved 5 October 2017.

5.3 H02-0369-12 - Change of use of land to test and storage area for cranes and associated equipment (B2 Use) - Approved 5 July 2012.

5.4 H02-1008-11 - Change of use of land to test and storage area for cranes and associated equipment - Approved 7 March 2012.

5.5 H02-1000-11 - Extension to TMC building and provide training facilities and reception area - Approved 16 February 2012.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Crowland Parish Council Support.

6.2 North Level Internal Drainage Board Page 42 No objection in principle, however, the Middle Divisional Drain forms the western boundary and, therefore, the Board's byelaws apply to this watercourse. In particular byelaw No.10 prevents any construction whether temporary or permanent within 9 metres of the brink of this watercourse, including any perimeter fencing.

6.3 SHDC Environmental Health

No objections.

6.4 Public One objection has been made by the developer of the land off Crease Drove, citing the following matters:

-The original condition allowing storage and stacking of associated equipment and materials not to exceed 2m was an appropriate condition to be imposed by the planning department and had taken into account the visual impact on the housing developments that were to surround this industrial site.

- To allow stacking now of equipment and materials to 5m (the height of the eaves of a two- storey house) would be visually unacceptable to the homeowners on the surrounding housing developments on Crease Drove. - Looking at Policy 3 of the Local of the Local Plan - Landscape and Character of the Location. With this increase in height and the land in this area being so flat there will be a significant visual impact on the wider area. Has there been consideration to this policy? - Disappointed that Crowland Cranes have been allowed to bring this land into use without complying with their existing planning conditions and that no enforcement action has been taken by South Holland District Council due to the breaches to this planning.

7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations Policy 2: Development Management, of the SELLP provides a framework for an operational policy to be used in assessing the sustainable development attributes of all development proposals. In essence, it is a compendium of the sustainable development considerations contained in other policies in the Local Plan and is provided as an overarching 'summary' policy to help decision makers, and applicants alike, focus on the type of factors that will be assessed in considering development proposals. All types of planning applications requiring a decision will be subject to the considerations of this policy.

7.2 The NPPF stresses that 'good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.' As such, Policy 3: Design of New Development, seeks to ensure that design and good design is considered.

7.3 Policy 3: Design of New Development sets out criteria for the consideration of design within proposals, and has specific criteria to look at how certain elements of good design will be secured.

7.4 The purpose of the policy is to provide a list of issues to be considered when development schemes are being prepared, rather than prescribing a particular design approach, consistent with the NPPF9. Design is a cross cutting issue so may be covered by other policies elsewhere in this Local Plan. Not all of the issues listed will be relevant in all cases. The issues can be grouped into: Place, Accessibility/Transport, Amenity and Flooding.

7.5 It is the opinion of officers that It is not the purpose of the policy to be a prescriptive list, that might fetter development, and expectations of information need to be proportionate to the scale and nature of the development proposals. Page 43 7.6 The broad criteria of Policy 3 are discussed in more detail below.

7.7 Principle of Use and Potential Intensification

7.8 The application site is designated in the SELLP as within countryside. The site is immediately adjacent to and part of the company holding of Crowland Cranes, which is indicated in Policy 7 as being within the Existing Main Employment Area.

7.9 Policy 7: Improving South East Lincolnshire's Employment Land Portfolio, sets out, inter alia, that when looking at "Other Employment Sites", New employment development/businesses or the extension of an existing business outside the above allocated employment sites will be supported provided that the proposal involves the re- use of previously-developed land or the conversion/re-use of redundant buildings. Where it can be demonstrated that no suitable building capable of conversion/re-use is available or the re- use of previously-developed land is not available or is unsuitable, proposals on non allocated sites may be acceptable provided: a. the development does not conflict with neighbouring land uses; b. there is no significant adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the area; c. the design is responsive to the local context; d. there will be no significant adverse impact on the local highway network; e. there will be no significant adverse impact upon the viability of delivering any allocated employment site; f. proposals maximising opportunities for modal shift away from the private car are demonstrated; and g. there is an identified need for the business location outside of identified employment areas on the Policies Map.

7.10 The use of this land and the wider site has been established by the planning consents granted upon the land. The business has been in operation on this site for a number of years and is an established business within the area.

7.11 In 2012 planning permission was granted to Crowland Cranes for the change of use of the land to the south of the application site to test and storage area for cranes and associated equipment (B2 Use) (H02-0369-12 refers). This planning permission was subject to a series of conditions, with Condition 4 stating Other than those cranes being tested/stored, there shall be no external storage or stacking of materials above a height of 5 metres outside those areas indicated on Dwg. No. LOC 443.35.11/01B (received 29 May 2012) without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. The reason for this condition in the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set.

7.12 In October 2017 planning permission was granted to extend the site to the North of the original site (H02-0421-17 refers), and this is the land the subject of the current planning application. This planning permission was also subject to a series of conditions, with Condition 5 stating Other than those cranes being tested/stored there shall be no external storage or stacking of associated equipment or materials above a height of 2 metres on the site without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. The reason for this condition was in the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set, consistent with the previous decision on the site. This was to enable the Council to control the height of storage and to be able to consider the implications of any change to this height restriction in the light of prevailing circumstances at the time of formal submission, such as the application now before the planning committee.

7.13 This permission also included a 5 metre wide bund with hedging to be planting on top to the northern boundary with a requirement for the hedge to be maintained at a height of at least 2.5 metres.

7.14 The boundary of the application site adjoins the site to the north where the Planning Committee at the November 2019 meeting resolvedPage to grant 44 permission for 108 dwellings, subject to a S106 legal agreement. The layout for that housing development includes a 3 metre wide easement then rear gardens of properties approximately 9 metres long, which would back on to the Crowland Cranes site.

7.15 In assessing this proposal, the criteria of Policy 7, as well as the considerations of Policies 2 and 3 of the SELLP have been considered.

7.16 The application site is now part and parcel of the Crowland Cranes site, and is land in use for a business use.

7.17 Given the distances to the adjoining residential developments that are under construction and have approvals in principle, it is considered that the proposal to increase the height of storage on this part of the site has been considered in the context of the local surroundings and additional information was sought to assess wider impact.

7.18 The increase in the height of storage on the site would not have a significant adverse impact on the local highway network; the wider site is industrial in nature and access from Crease Drove is considered as a result of previous consents on this site to be an appropriate access. There would not be such an intensification of use on the site that would lead to the site no longer being appropriate or resulting in a significant adverse impact on the local highway network.

7.19 The proposal is proposed to support an existing employment site, and given the nature of the business on the site, this application would not be the vehicle for encouraging a modal shift away from the private car. This site has identified a need for this proposal and is already located on the wider site.

7.20 It is considered that the increase in the height of storage on part of the site would enable the business to undertake business more efficiently, and would not result in such a intensification of use of this part of the site. The application would be supported by NPPF guidance regarding economic development and support for businesses, as well as Policy 7: Improving S E Lincolnshire's Employment Land Portfolio.

7.21 It is also considered that within the wider site that the impact of this business would not be detrimental to the character of the area, or highway safety, thus in accordance with Polices 2 and 3 of the SELLP. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal is in accordance with local and national planning polices, however, this is to be tempered by the issues set out below.

7.22 Impact of Height of Storage - on character of countryside and on residential development

7.23 Looking at the broad issues raised in Policy 3:Design of New Development, matters of Place, Accessibility/Transport, Amenity and Flooding in turn:

7.24 Good design will seek to provide a development that sits well in its surroundings by respecting the character of the place within which it is located and carefully incorporates infrastructure. The character of this part of Crease Drove and the wider environs is changing in nature due to other development under construction and in the pipeline, however recognition needs to be accepted of the nature of this established business and its visibility in the area. The landscape in this part of the District is flat and open and the exiting site is a significant feature in the landscape. When travelling along Crease Drove the site is clearly viewed and it is considered that an increase in storage height on this part of the site would be seen in the context of the wider site.

7.25 With regard to Accessibility and Transport, as discussed above, the application is proposed to support an existing employment site, and given the nature of this application, it would not be the vehicle for encouraging a modal shift away from the private car, and there is no opportunity to encourage residents (or those employees local to the area) to walk or cycle This site has identified a need for this proposal and is already located on the wider site.

7.26 Looking at the impact on amenity, the use or operation of sites also needs to respect neighbouring uses. As this is an established site, and there is a balance that was considered in the granting of the most recent neighbouring residential development with approval in principle Page 45 (H02-0189-19) with regard to the guidance set out in Paragraph 182 of the NPPF, and permission was agreed in principle that the residential development for 108 dwellings could be accommodated and integrated effectively with the existing commercial activity on the application site.

7.27 For clarity, Paragraph 182 of the NPPF states: Existing businesses and facilities should not have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result of development permitted after they were established. Where the operation of an existing business or community facility could have a significant adverse effect on new development (including changes of use) in its vicinity, the applicant (or 'agent of change') should be required to provide suitable mitigation before the development has been completed.

7.28 Thus it can be seen that there is a need to take a balanced view of national and local polices and take a view as to competing needs and interests.

7.29 The application has been considered in the light of the local planning polices set out above, as well as the guidance given by the NPPF. The development would have an impact on the character of this open countryside location. However, in the context of the wider setting of adjacent existing commercial operations and the set back of housing development, this is not deemed to outweigh the economic benefits of supporting the expansion of the current business.

7.30 Additional information was sought by officers, and the information submitted on the drawing ref PD02 P1 (Shadow Study Sections) demonstrates the impact that the 5m height storage would have on the proposed residential development to the north. The information (in the form of the drawing) is publicly available and forms part of the condition 1. After careful consideration by officers in the light of the information submitted to inform this application, and the objections that have been received, it is not considered that the increase in the height of storage on this site from 2 metres to 5 metres would have such a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the current and future adjoining residential occupiers of the site that consent should be withheld; the application site houses an established business and to a degree sets the character of this part of Crease Drove.

7.31 The dwellings under construction to the east are set back from Crease Drove and would have gardens backing on to the site, and although the storage area is viewed from this housing development, no loss of light, nor overbearing effect would be caused.

7.32 With regard to the site to the north with the resolution to approve 108 dwellings, officers sought additional information from the applicant to clarify impact. As a result of receiving the additional information, and an assessment of the application and the adjacent development (with a resolution to approve), the opinion of officers is that there is potential at certain times of the year during the winter months for there to be an element of overshadowing of rear garden areas, however due to the approved northern boundary treatment and the easement and rear gardens of the site to the north with a resolution to approve, it is considered the impact upon residential amenity of that development, would on balance be acceptable.

7.33 Conclusion

7.34 The application has been considered in the light of the policies of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan and the provisions of the NPPF and is recommended for approval for the reasons set out above, subject to the conditions expressed in this report, which in part are a duplication of conditions that are already in place on the land and which seek to limit the impact upon residential development in the vicinity of the site.

7.35A dditional Considerations

7.36 Matters Subject to Enforcement Investigation

7.37 Any matters subject to enforcement investigations are confidential in nature and this planning application is to be considered on its merits. Page 46 7.38 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.39 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the need (in discharging its functions) to: A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are underrepresented) of people with a protected characteristic(s). C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.40 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.41 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149. It is only one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.42 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic.

7.43 Human Rights

7.44 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property).

7.45 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Grant permission subject to the conditions listed in Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: PD01-P1 PD02 P1 Flood Risk Assessment (GCB/Wright - April 2017) Noise Assessment (Acoustic Associates - July 2017) Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Page 47 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, (or any Order or Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order), the site shall be used only for the storage and demonstration of cranes and associated equipment and for no other purpose Class B2 of the Schedule to the Town & Country Planning (Use Classes) Order (as amended), or in any Order or Statutory Instrument revoking and re- enacting that Order). Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over the future use of the site in the interests of local amenities. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

3. Noise from fixed plant and machinery shall not exceed a level of 5 dB(A) above the background noise level when measured as a L(A)eq15min at any residential boundary not within the applicant's ownership. Reason: To ensure that there is no noise nuisance to nearby residents. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 30 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

4. Other than those cranes being tested/stored there shall be no external storage or stacking of associated equipment or materials above a height of 5 metres on the site without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

5. No further external illumination of buildings and/or areas of the site shall be installed on the site unless formally submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority The lighting shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over these matters, in the interests of the visual amenity of the overall development, to prevent light pollution and to ensure that the development is adequately lit. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 30 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

6. The fencing, bund and hedging as approved, as shown on approved drawing PD01-P1, shall be erected/planted prior to the first use of this part of the site for storage over 2 metres in height. The hedgerow shall be allowed to grow and thereafter be maintained at a height of no less than 2.5 metres above ground level.

Reason: In order to ensure that the site is adequately screened, in the interests of the character and appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

7. The palisade fencing to the boundary of the site shall be coloured silver (galvanised steel) and thereafter be so maintained. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity and character of the locality. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019 and the provisions of the NPPF 2019.

Page 48 8. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and by identifying matters of concern within the application and negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal. This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

9. It is recommend that site owner sign up to Environment Agency's Floodline Warnings Direct Service.

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , Development Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected]

Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 49 Page 50 Agenda Item 8.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: David Grant - Planning Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H02-0020-20

Application Number: H02-0020-20 Date Received: 09 January 2020

Application Type: FULL

Description: Proposed self-storage facility (B8 Use Class) including secure compound access and parking and removal of existing dilapidated industrial building

Location: James Road Crowland Lincs

Applicant: Ruthkay Ltd Agent: Moulton Land and Planning Ltd

Ward: Crowland and Deeping Ward Councillors: Cllr B Alcock Cllr J R Astill Cllr N H Pepper

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H02-0020-20

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 A District Councillor is an employee of the applicant company.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 This is an application for a proposed self-storage facility (B8 Use Class) including secure compound access and parking and removal of existing dilapidated industrial building at James Road, Crowland.

2.2 The proposal is for 21 storage containers. 18 containers will measure 6.1 metres long, 2.5 metres wide and 2.6 metres in height. 3 containers will measure 3 metres long, 2.5 metres wide and 2.6 metres in height. The containers will be dark green coated steel and will be placed on existing hardstanding.

2.3 The site will be enclosed by galvanised palisade security fencing at a height of 1.8 metres with 3 parking spaces within the fencing. An additional 6 places will be provided to the front of the site, with an existing gated entrance repositioned to provide secure independent access for site tenants and uses.

2.4 An existing industrial building on site is to be demolished to facilitate the development. The applicant is not seeking a restriction on operational hours.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION Page 51 3.1 The proposal is outside of defined settlement limits, with the built up area of Crowland sited to the western side of James Road. The surrounding area to the north, east and south is predominately rural with buildings of varying ages and design.

3.2 The application site including the access is 0.13 hectares and is part of an established industrial site. There is an existing vehicular access to James Road, which has a 50mph speed limit.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Policy 2 - Development Management Policy 3 - Design of New Development Policy 7 - Improving South East Lincolnshire's Employment Land Portfolio National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019

Section 6 - Building a strong, competitive economy. Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 H02-0454-79 Outline - Erection of storage building - Approved - 19 June 1979

5.2 H02-1007-79

Full - Erection of warehouse for storage of caravan and camping equipment - Approved - 24 October 1979

5.3 H02-0741-87 Full - Three quarter steel portal framed building - Approved - 12 August 1987

5.4 H02-0977-03 Full - Additional use of warehouse building to include light industry - Approved - 01 October 2003

5.5 H02-1531-03

Full - Additional use of southernmost warehouse to include light industry - Approved - 02 February 2004.

5.6 H02-1033-07 Full - Demolish existing building and construct light industrial unit (475 square metres) - Approved - 25 September 2007. This Pagepermission 52 was not implemented. 5.7 H02-1343-07 Condition Compliance - Details of landscaping and tree planting (Condition 2 of H02-1033-07) - Approved - 06 November 2007.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 SHDC - Inward Investment Manager Support

6.2 SHDC - Environmental Protection Officer Requests unexpected contaminated land informative.

6.3 SHDC - Environmental Health (Noise) No objection

6.4 LCC - County Highways & SUDS Officer No objection.

6.5 LCC - Historic Environment Officer No objection.

6.6 North Level Internal Drainage Board No objection.

7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations

7.2 The issues in this case are: Principle; Character/appearance; Impact on residential amenity; Highway Issues.

7.3 Principle of development

7.4 The proposal site is on an existing industrial site and replaces a dilapidated industrial building. Planning permission was previously granted in 2007 to demolish the existing building on the application site and construct light industrial units. No restriction was imposed on the hours of operation. The applicant states that permission was not implemented at that time for economic reasons. The proposal would make use of a constrained area of the site and have no impact on the existing business on the wider site. Further it is considered it would meet a need for storage by either small businesses or local residents in Crowland, which is experiencing significant growth.

7.5 The application site is not an identified employment site in the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, but as an established employment site Policy 7 is applicable. It is considered that the proposed development complies with Policy 7 is that it satisfies the relevant criteria: -It involves the re-use of previously developed land; -There is no conflict between the proposal and neighbouring uses; -There is no adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area; -There is no adverse impact on the local highway network; -It does not conflict with the delivery andPage viability 53 of allocated employment land. 7.6 Character/appearance

7.7 The existing building is used for storage but according to the applicant it is not in a safe condition and is beyond economic repair. It is constructed of corrugated metal sheeting and is of poor appearance. The proposed containers at 2.6 metres would be lower in height than the existing building and the adjacent industrial buildings. The metal containers will be factory finished in dark green. Given this, the set back of approximately 35 metres from James Road at the nearest point and boundary landscape screening it is considered that there would be no adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area.

7.8 Impact on residential amenity and Highway Issues

7.9 There is not considered to be an impact on residential amenity arising from this proposal. The nearest residential boundary is 50 metres. The scale of operation is for 21 containers only and the proposed use should not result in a material increase in traffic to James Road and the surrounding area.

7.10 Adherence to policy

7.11 Policy 2 of the SELLP is titled Development Management and states: "Proposals requiring planning permission for development will be permitted provided that sustainable development considerations are met, specifically in relation to: 1. size, scale, layout, density and impact on the amenity, trees, character and appearance of the area and the relationship to existing development and land uses; 2. quality of design and orientation; 3. maximising the use of sustainable materials and resources; 4. access and vehicle generation levels; 5. the capacity of existing community services and infrastructure; 6. impact upon neighbouring landuses by reason of noise, odour, disturbance or visual intrusion; 7. sustainable drainage and flood risk; 8. impact or enhancement for areas of natural habitats and historical buildings and heritage assets; and 9. impact on the potential loss of sand and gravel mineral resources." The size, scale and layout is considered to be appropriate for the site. The area of land covered by the storage containers is comparable to that of the existing industrial unit to be demolished. There is considered to be a positive impact on amenity through removal of the dilapidated building and the business is considered complimentary with the existing Jabba Sport business adjacent.

7.12 Access would utilised the existing access onto James Road but each site would be secured by 1.8 metre high palisade fencing. Whilst the site is proposed to be accessible to key holders 24 hours a day, there is not expected to be a large amount of nocturnal usage, and the separation distance of 50 metres to the nearest residential boundary should not generate a material level of disturbance.

7.13 With regard to Policy 3 of the SELLP is title Design of New Development and states: "All development will create distinctive places through the use of high quality and inclusive design and layout and, where appropriate, make innovative use of local traditional styles and materials. Design which is inappropriate to the local area, or which fails to maximise opportunities for improving the character and quality of an area, will not be acceptable. Development proposals will demonstrate how the following issues, where they are relevant to the proposal, will be secured: 1.creating a sense of place by complementing and enhancing designated and non designated heritage assets; historic street patterns; respecting the density, scale, visual closure, landmarks, views, massing of neighbouring buildings and the surrounding area; 2. distinguishing between private and public space; 3. the landscape character of the location; 4. accessibility by a choice of travel modes including the provision of public transport, public rights of way and cycle ways; Page 54 5. the provision of facilities for the storage of refuse/recycling bins, storage and/or parking of bicycles and layout of car parking; 6. the lighting of public places; 7. ensuring public spaces are accessible to all; 8. crime prevention and community safety; 9. the orientation of buildings on the site to enable the best use of decentralised and renewable low-carbon energy technologies for the lifetime of the development; 10. the appropriate treatment of facades to public places, including shop frontages to avoid visual intrusion by advertising, other signage, security shutters, meter boxes and other service and communication infrastructure; 11. residential amenity; 12. the mitigation of flood risk through flood-resistant and flood-resilient design and sustainable drainage systems (SuDS); 13. the use of locally sourced building materials, minimising the use of water and minimising land take, to protect best and most versatile soils; 14. the incorporation of existing hedgerows and trees and the provision of appropriate new landscaping to enhance biodiversity, green infrastructure, flood risk mitigation and urban cooling; 15. the appropriate use or reuse of historic buildings." It is considered that the proposal accords with the above relevant criteria. The design caters for the needs of the applicant with an appropriate scale and design that does not impact upon the built character of the vicinity. The use of security fencing will help to separate public and private space and the scale of the units is lesser in height than that of the existing building, thereby respecting the adjacent business use. The separation distance of 50 metres to the nearest residential boundary should not generate a material level of disturbance.

7.14 Policy 7 of the SELLP concerns "Improving South East Lincolnshire's Employment Land Portfolio" and the section concerning "Other Employment Sites" states:

"New employment development/businesses or the extension of an existing business outside the above allocated employment sites will be supported provided that the proposal involves the re- use of previously-developed land or the conversion/re-use of redundant buildings. Where it can be demonstrated that no suitable building capable of conversion/re-use is available or the re- use of previously-developed land is not available or is unsuitable, proposals on non allocated sites may be acceptable provided: a. the development does not conflict with neighbouring land uses; b. there is no significant adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the area; c. the design is responsive to the local context; d. there will be no significant adverse impact on the local highway network; e. there will be no significant adverse impact upon the viability of delivering any allocated employment site; f. proposals maximising opportunities for modal shift away from the private car are demonstrated; and g. there is an identified need for the business location outside of identified employment areas on the Policies Map."

This application is considered to accord with the relevant criteria of the above policy. The development will help to improve the visual appearance and security of the site and is sited in a location that is appropriate for a storage business due to good transport links, good parking provision and being located away from residential properties.

7.15 Conclusion

7.16 No objections have been received and, in light of the considerations above, the proposed development is in accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 7 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019 and Sections 6 and 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

7.17A dditional Considerations

7.18 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.19 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the Page 55 need (in discharging its functions) to:

7.20 A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.

7.21 B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are under represented) of people with a protected characteristic(s).

7.22 C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.23 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.24 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149. It is only one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.25 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic.

7.26 Human Rights

7.27 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property).

7.28 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Grant permission subject to the conditions listed in Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Page 56 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Application Form RUTH/pl/001 RUTH/pl/002 RUTH/pl/003 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and subsequently determining to grant planning permission. This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

4. Should unexpected contamination be discovered on the site at any time, the applicant is advised to contact the District Council's Environmental Protection department immediately.

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , Development Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected]

Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 57  & .! & .







 









  

! "#$
 %# &#'' &#$ 

 Page 58 !(&)% !(*!+ "* ,"#&'*&%&*-
     *- "# Agenda Item 9.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: Maria Salemme - Planning Policy Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H23-1206-19

Application Number: H23-1206-19 Date Received: 12 December 2019

Application Type: FULL

Description: Single-storey flat roof side extension

Location: 3 RANDALL BANK MOULTON EAUGATE SPALDING

Applicant: Mrs F Bowers Agent: South Holland building Consultancy

Ward: Whaplode and Holbeach St Ward Councillors: Cllr A C Beal Johns Cllr P A Redgate

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H23-1206-19

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 The agent is South Holland Building Consultancy.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 This is a householder application for a single-storey flat roof side extension to 3 Randall Bank, Moulton Eaugate.

2.2 The proposed extension would be off the southern elevation of the existing dwelling and would create a kitchen and shower room. Bricks would match the existing and the roof would be of felt/fibreglass construction.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 3 Randall Bank is a two-storey semi-detached dwelling, set within a good sized plot. The dwelling is set back from Randall Bank, and has a large front garden which is grassed. The property has a small 1m mature hedge to the front, along the western boundary. To the south, there is a shared access for no's. 2 and 3 Randall Bank.

3.2 Existing built development in the immediate area is limited, comprising of two pairs of semi- detached dwellings of the same design. It should be noted that no. 2 to the south already has a flat roof side extension. Beyond these dwellings is open countryside.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES Page 59 4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, March 2019 If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Policy 2 - Development Management Policy 3 - Design of New Development

National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019 Section 12 - Achieving well designed places Planning Practice Guidance(PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 None.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Lincolnshire County Council, Historic Environmental Officer No archaeological impact.

6.2 Public

One comment received, summarised as follows: Concern about surface water run off and that digging of the foundations will undermine the stability of the shared driveway. Vehicle usage of this for services such as fuel delivery and drainage/sewer emptying will continue to make the ground worse. Inspection requested, for a discussion to resolve this issue.

7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations

7.2 Key issues for consideration in respect of this application are: - Design and layout; - Residential amenity; and - Other considerations.

7.3 Design and Layout

7.4 The proposed development will enhance the space at ground floor by creating a kitchen area to the rear and a shower room to the front. The proposed extension would have a width of approximately 2.7m and would be approx. 4.1m from the southern boundary. It would have a depth of approx. 6.7m being flush with the existing rear elevation of the property. Given this, and the single storey nature of the extension, it is considered that it would be subservient to the existing dwelling. Furthermore, vehicles would still be able to park to the side of the property due to the gap retained. It is therefore acceptable in terms of scale and size.

7.5 Flat roof side extensions are not usually preferred because of their unappealing appearance in conjunction with visibility from public vantage points. However, the neighbouring property to the Page 60 south has an existing flat roof side extension. Therefore, on balance, it is not considered that there is a justifiable reason to refuse the proposal on design grounds.

7.6 Residential Amenity

7.7 The proposed extension is single storey in nature, therefore it is not considered that there would be a material adverse impact in terms of overshadowing or the development being overbearing for the neighbouring property.

7.8 No. 2 to the south has ground floor and first floor windows facing windows, and no. 3 already has a number of windows facing towards that property. The proposed extension will be approx. 6.8m from the boundary of No.2 neighbouring elevations and windows of the north elevation of No. 2 property. This is approx. 2.7m closer to the neighbouring property with the proposed development.

7.9 With the proposed extension, only one window will be facing No.2 which is from the shower room. As the kitchen window is proposed to face the rear of the property.

7.10 It is therefore not considered that the positioning of the window on the southern elevation of the proposed extension would result in a material adverse impact on privacy.

7.11 Given the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable on amenity grounds.

7.12 Other Considerations

7.13 Structural stability issues are a civil matter between landowners.

7.14 The agent has confirmed that drainage will be via a rainwater soakaway system. There are no known soil permeability issues in this area and so the proposed means of drainage is considered acceptable.

7.15 Additional Considerations

7.16 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.17 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the need (in discharging its functions) to: A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are underrepresented) of people with a protected characteristic(s). C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.18 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.19 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149. It is only one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.20 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic. Page 61 7.21 Human Rights

7.22 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property).

7.23 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

7.24 Conclusion

7.25 In light of the considerations above, the proposed single-storey flat roof extension at 3 Randall Bank, Moulton Eaugate is considered to be in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019) and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Grant permission subject to those conditions listed at Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

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

Reason: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 18 20 19 01 15 04 05

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and subsequently determining to grant planning permission.

This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , PageDevelopment 62 Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected]

Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 63  & .! & .



 









   







 



 

  

 

! "#$
 %# &#'' &#$


 Page 64 !(&)% !(*!+ "* ,"#&'*&%&*-
     *- "# Agenda Item 10.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - 12 February 2020

(Author: David Grant - Planning Officer)

Purpose: To consider Planning Application H19-1198-19

Application Number: H19-1198-19 Date Received: 11 December 2019

Application Type: FULL

Description: Rear single-storey extension

Location: 9 Coronation Avenue Throckenholt Spalding

Applicant: Mr John Cook Agent: South Holland Building Consultancy

Ward: The Saints Ward Councillors: Cllr M D Seymour

You can view this application on the Council's web site at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningDetails?reference=H19-1198-19

1.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1.1 The agent is South Holland District Council Building Consultancy.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 This is an application for a proposed rear single-storey extension to a semi-detached house at 9 Coronation Avenue, Throckenholt. The proposed extension would be 8.05 metres in width and project 5.85 metres from the original rear wall. It would be built adjacent to the common boundary with the adjoining house and be 2.778 metres from the northern side boundary. The eaves height would be 2.55 metres with a maximum height of 2.7 metres. The extension would contain a bedroom, bathroom and a small kitchen. Brick would be to match that of the existing dwelling. The flat roof would be constructed from fibreglass.

2.2 The proposed extension would replace an existing single storey flat roof rear extension. There would be a blank elevation to the side wall along the common boundary and one small window to the other side elevation.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 The proposal is within defined settlement limits and the immediate area is characterised by semi-detached houses. The properties have relatively long rear gardens and the existing rear extension is built close to the common boundary with the adjoining house with a hedge beyond. There is a standard close boarded fence to the northern boundary.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES Page 65 4.1 The Development Plan South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (SELLP), March 2019 If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, Section 38 (6) to the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the 2004 Act states that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Policy 2 - Development Management Policy 3 - Design of New Development

National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2019 Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide

5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 None

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 LCC Historic Environment Officer No objections.

6.2 Public

One representation which raises concerns about boundary ownership and if the extension will be built in the correct location. This is not a material planning concern

7.0 CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Planning Considerations

7.2 Principle of development

7.3 The proposal site is within the defined settlement limits of Throckenholt and there are examples of other properties with rear extensions in the vicinity.

7.4 It is considered that there would be limited impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties or the character of the surrounding area. The size, scale, layout and impact on the amenity of the existing dwelling and neighbouring dwellings is considered acceptable. The design meets the needs of the client and the flat roof ensures that costs are minimised and potential overshadowing impacts are reduced. There is not anticipated to be an increase in noise or disturbance as a result of the extension being constructed as it is further away from the neighbouring dwelling than the existing building.

7.5 The design caters for the needs of the applicant with an appropriate scale and design that does not impact upon the built character of the vicinity or the amenity of neighbouring properties.

7.6 Design

7.7 The design is considered to be in keepingPage with 66the existing dwelling. The proposal meets the specific needs of the occupant and does not require a design that is at odds with the character of the surrounding area. It would be brick built with a fairly low level pitched roof, with brick to match the existing property.

7.8 Impact on residential amenity

7.9 There is not considered to be an impact on residential amenity arising from this proposal. There would be one small window in the northern side elevation which serves a hallway and faces an existing 1.8 metre high timber fence. The height of the extension does not come higher than the existing wood extension, and there is not considered to be an overlooking or overshadowing impact. Nor is there considered to be a material impact on the character of the surrounding area.

7.10 Conclusion

7.11 No objections have been received and, in light of the considerations above, the proposed development is in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019 and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

7.12A dditional Considerations

7.13 Public Sector Equality Duty

7.14 In making this decision the Authority must have regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equalities Act. This means that the Council must have due regard to the need (in discharging its functions) to:

7.15 A. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act.

7.16 B. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. This may include removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; taking steps to meet the special needs of those with a protected characteristic; encouraging participation in public life (or other areas where they are under represented) of people with a protected characteristic(s).

7.17 C. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, including tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.

7.18 The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

7.19 The PSED must be considered as a relevant factor in making this decision but does not impose a duty to achieve the outcomes in s.149. It is only one factor that needs to be considered, and may be balanced against other relevant factors.

7.20 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case will have a disproportionately adverse impact on a protected characteristic.

7.21 Human Rights

7.22 In making a decision, the Authority should be aware of and take into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998. Under the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority such as South Holland District Council to act in a manner that is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Authority is referred specifically to Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property). Page 67 7.23 It is not considered that the recommendation in this case interferes with local residents' right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence, except insofar as it is necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others (in this case, the rights of the applicant). The Council is also permitted to control the use of property in accordance with the general public interest and the recommendation to grant permission is considered to be a proportionate response to the submitted application based on the considerations set out in this report.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Grant permission subject to the conditions listed in Section 9.0 of this report.

9.0 CONDITIONS

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

Reason: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Application Form 01 02 03 18 19 15 05 16 17 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. All new and replacement brickwork utilised in carrying out the development hereby permitted shall match as closely as possible that of the principal existing building on the site in terms of the type of brick(s), mortar mix and method of bonding. Reason: In the interests of the architectural and visual integrity of the overall development and the visual amenity of the area in which it is set. This Condition is imposed in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019.

4. The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing it against all material considerations, including national guidance, planning policies and representations that have been received during the public consultation exercise, and subsequently determining to grant planning permission.

This decision notice, the relevant accompanying report and the determined plans can be viewed online at http://planning.sholland.gov.uk/OcellaWeb/planningSearch

Background papers:- Planning Application Working File

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler , Development Manager Telephone Number: 01775 764428 Email [email protected] Page 68 Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A3ODQ$

Page 69  & .! & .



 * ++ 

- +* .

  

/     



  

 





! "

"



)

& ' %&( %

%

$ 

# 

# ,  



! "#$
 %# &#'' &#$ 
 Page 70 !(&)% !(*!+ "* ,"#&'*&%&*-
     *- "# Agenda Item 11.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager To: Planning Committee Author: Richard Fidler

Subject: Planning Appeals Purpose: To provide an update on recent Appeal Decisions

Recommendation a) That the contents of this report be noted

1.0 OVERVIEW 1.1 Since the last report  appeal decision(s) have been received, the results are as follows:

Appeals Dismissed: 4

Appeals Allowed: 0

Appeals Part Allowed: 0

1.2 Since the 1st April 2017 111 planning appeal decisions have been received of which 83 have been dismissed, which equates to a success rate of 74.77%

2.0 PLANNING APPEALS DISMISSED

H01-0237-19 Mr F Pearson - Lucy Buttery

Land Adjacent: Waverley Villa 2 Drain Bank APP/A2525/W/19/3239236 South Proposed erection of one house and garage Decision Date: 10th January 2020 The Inspector concluded that the site was not a suitable location for residential development, being detached from the main settlement of Cowbit and would harm the character and appearance of the area by extending a small cluster of sporadic development into surrounding agricultural land. It would therefore be in conflict with the policies of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan.

H05-0849-18 Applegate Homes ( Lincs ) Ltd - Dave Gedney

Fleet Garden Centre Fleet Road APP/A2525/W/19/3229241 Demolition of existing site and proposed Decision Date: residential development and associated works 7th January 2020 (8 dwellings) - Re-submission of refused application H05-0871-17 The Inspector concluded that the proposal would not be a suitable location for housing development with regard to local and nationalPage planning 71 policy. The proposal would conflict with Policies 1 and 2 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan with regards to the provisions for development in the countryside and the effect on the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would also conflict with the NPPF with regards to achieving well-designed places, recognising the intrinsic character of the countryside, and building a strong economy and that a Sequential Test as required by the NPPF has not been undertaken in respect of the appeal proposal. The proposal would therefore be contrary to the NPPF with regards to taking account of flood risk. An application for costs was dismissed.

H16-0469-18 Minster Building Company - Mark Simmonds

The Fitness Company 38 Spring Gardens APP/A2525/W/19/3227640 Change of use of the existing building from use Decision Date: class D2 to use class C3, to include four 2- 30th December 2019 Bedroom apartments and two 1-bedroom apartments, proposed new four storey apartment building including twelve 1-Bedroom apartments, and associated external works and infrastructure. The Inspector concluded that the proposal would fail to preserve the setting, and therefore the significance of the Grade II listed former Christians Association, the Police House, the Sessions House and would neither preserve nor enhance the character and appearance of the Spalding Conservation Area. Although the Inspector concluded that the proposed development would cause less than substantial harm to these heritage assets, it was not considered that the public benefits of the proposal would outweigh the clear harm caused. As such the proposal would conflict with the NPPF and Policies 3 and 29 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan.

3.0 PLANNING APPEALS ALLOWED None

4.0 ENFORCEMENT APPEALS DISMISSED

(1)(0U$/LOOH\±3ROO\+DUULV*RUI

'DPDUN5\HILHOG/DQH+ROEHDFK)HQ$33$& :LWKRXWSODQQLQJSHUPLVVLRQWKHFKDQJHRIXVH Decision Date: RIWKHODQGIURPXVHIRUDJULFXOWXUHWRDXVHDV WK-DQXDU\ DFDUDYDQVLWHDQGDVVRFLDWHGDFFHVV

7KH,QVSHFWRUFRQFOXGHGWKDWWKHDOOHJHGFKDQJHRIXVHRIWKHODQGIURPDJULFXOWXUDOWRXVHDVD FDUDYDQVLWHDQGWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHDVVRFLDWHGDFFHVVKDVRFFXUUHG7KHUHIRUHWKHDSSHDO RQJURXQG E WKDWWKHPDWWHUVDOOHJHGLQWKH(QIRUFHPHQW1RWLFHKDYHQRWRFFXUUHGIDLOV7KH ,QVSHFWRUYDULHGWKH(QIRUFHPHQW1RWLFHWRVSHFLILFDOO\VHHNWKHUHPRYDORIFDUDYDQVIURPWKH VLWH7KHFRPSOLDQFHSHULRGRIPRQWKVIURPWKHGDWHRIWKHDSSHDOGHFLVLRQLV-XO\

5.0 ENFORCEMENT APPEALS UPHELD

None

Background Papers - Planning Application and Enforcement Working Files

Lead Contact Officer Richard Fidler; Development Manager 01775 764428 [email protected] Page 72 Agenda Item 12.

SOUTH HOLLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Report of: Development Manager

To: Planning Committee - Wednesday, 12 February 2020

(Author: Lucy Buttery, Principal Planning Officer)

Subject Review of Implemented Planning Decisions

Purpose: To report on the conclusions of the Performance Monitoring Panel and to invite the Committee to submit any comments back to the Panel

Recommendation:

1) That the Planning Committee considers the Performance Monitoring Panel’s conclusions and to agree any comments Members may wish to report back to the Panel.

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 The Local Government Association’s Probity in Planning guide highlights that it is good practice for councillors to visit a sample of implemented planning permissions to assess the quality of the decisions and the development. It is suggested that this should improve the quality and consistency of decision-making, strengthen public confidence in the planning system, and can help with reviews of planning policy.

1.2 At South Holland District Council, this review is undertaken by the Performance Monitoring Panel. Part 3, Section D (Delegations to Committees) of the Constitution states that the Performance Monitoring Panel shall ‘revisit a number of implemented planning decisions’.

1.3 The Panel had previously carried out a tour of the District on 8th November 2016.

2.0 THE TOUR

2.1 The latest tour took place on 5th September 2019 with morning and afternoon sessions taking in different areas of the district. Eight Members took part and were present for the whole day.

2.2 A selection of eight residential developments were visited after prior discussion with the Chairman of the Panel. The sites chosen comprised both small and large-scale schemes with some under construction and some now complete.

2.3 For the day, Members were provided with an electronic information pack outlining the background and key issues relating to each site as well as a block plan of the site. Paper copies of this pack were provided where required. Verbal assistance was given on site where necessary and Officers noted Members’ feedback for each site.

2.4 A debriefing was held after the tour to review the day and draw conclusions.

Page 73 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND AGREED ACTIONS

3.1 The main conclusions drawn from the exercise were that the sites visited - although all major residential schemes - varied in terms of their quality. As well as good quality schemes, it was considered that there were instances of development being let down by a lack of attention to detail and a lack of forethought. There were recurring themes throughout the day, such as the siting and standard of refuse collection points and the positioning of meter boxes.

3.2 It was noted that schemes that were of concern at the planning application stage had actually turned out better than expected once completed on the ground.

3.3 At the Performance Monitoring Panel on 12th November, Members discussed the report, and the following issues arose: - Those members that had attended agreed that the day had been useful and well organised, and that it was helpful to actually visit and see the sites, and to see the challenges that were faced. - It was agreed that the comments detailed in Appendix A were too much of a precis of comments made by members. More comments on each of the sites were required and members discussed this. Also, the précising of some of the comments did not make it clear whether they were beneficial or detrimental and required more explanation. - It was suggested that some commercial developments could be visited as part of the next review. - It was queried whether the comments from the tour could be incorporated into the work of the Planning Design Task Group once formed. - A camera should be taken on future tours to photograph any issues identified for later reference and for the benefit of members who couldn’t attend. Additionally, better quality photographs should be taken of sites when an application is presented to Planning Committee. - A 3D Computer Aided Design of what a building would look like would be useful in the future consideration of applications. - Care should be taken in the future to avoid scenarios where the maintenance of drain easements would be problematic. - A more general comment on infill plots was made in respect of some plots where larger properties are being built on plots that are too small for them.

3.4 A full account of comments made in respect of the sites visited can be found in Appendix A.

3.5 The Performance Monitoring Panel agreed: a) That the conclusions from the tour be reported to the Planning Committee and that the report include fuller comments on the sites visited; and b) That the Review of Implemented Planning Decisions should be undertaken on an annual basis in the future.

Background papers:- None.

Lead Contact Officer Name and Post: Richard Fidler, Development Manager Telephone Number 01775 764428 Email: [email protected]

Page 74 Appendices attached to this report: Appendix A Summary of Comments from Tour (Updated January 2020)

Page 75 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix A

Summary of Comments from Tour of Sites (Updated January 2020)

Aspects that had been done well

- There were two schemes where it was felt that the layout and design was good and in respect of one particular scheme it was commented that a good transition had been achieved from existing to new development - A good variety of materials (brick and tile types) had been used on one site which was liked - The pumping station on one development had been well located with vehicle flow in and out and there had been an attempt made to visually separate it from the development - On two sites, meter boxes had been located on side elevations were possible thus minimising their prominence - On one development in particular it was commented that it does not feel like a 100% affordable scheme and the stone cill details used were liked

Aspects that could be improved

- On one particular scheme the quality of the play area was felt to be poor as only limited pieces of equipment have been provided - Consideration should be given to the location of pumping stations – locating them in the middle of open space limits the functionality of it - Could be more variety of front door designs in some developments - Potential for more variation of ‘building line’ in places - Loose cables on the front elevation of houses for satellite dishes look poor - Obtrusiveness of meter boxes on front elevations in a number of instances - Peculiar position of tree in pavement on one particular development - On one specific scheme the easement to the IDB drain adjacent had been dedicated as open space but the grass had been damaged by the Board maintaining this drain. On another development, concerns were raised about possible future maintenance issues for the easement adjacent the IDB drain - External design of affordable units different to market units on one scheme - The colour of windows and door features were mismatched in one instance and the green windows used at the front of the development could have been continued throughout the scheme - On one development no railings/fencing had been erected around a refuse collection point to define it - Prominent parking space numbering was not liked - Some properties on one scheme had no level access and some were lower than the road meaning a drop down to the rear garden gate - There was one scheme in particular where it was felt that it was overdeveloped - Also on the above scheme, it was noted that there was a mismatch of brick type on semi-detached dwellings which was not liked as well as a mismatch of fencing on the eastern boundary. The pavements and road were block paved in parts which it was felt could create visibility issues - On the same site there were small or missing refuse collection points and it was unclear who had management responsibility for private drives - Bricked up windows were observed on one development but it was questioned whether this was a worthwhile design feature. Furthermore, the visual dominance of the balcony on certain house types was disliked

Page 77 Appendix A - One scheme was considered to be maze like in terms of layout overbearing in places. Comments were also made about the juxtaposition of 3 storey and 2 storey dwellings on parts of the site and that the planting scheme could be improved - Concerns were raised about poorly lit alleys between the rear ends of gardens and street lighting being located in inappropriate places - Unconventional doors that were not aesthetically pleasing had been added to the integrated parking spaces of some dwellings on one particular scheme. Furthermore, concern was raised about the potential for parking on frontages due to parking spaces and garages being located to the rear of properties - Flats Over Garages in car dominated areas offer a poor outlook for occupants of such dwellings - On one scheme it was noted that there was a peculiar weathering effect on the brickwork of some dwellings. Overall it was felt that that particular development had a confined feel and points were raised about ensuring that care is taken in the positioning of refuse collection points in relation to surrounding development

Page 78