S/195/02091/23: View the Plans and documents online, please click on the Application Number.  (Please note: If viewing as a pdf document, this hyperlink is not available).

Applicant:                      C W Parker (Wainfleet) Limited

Location:                       Land off Boston Road, Wainfleet St Mary

Recommendation:           Approval with Conditions

Officer:                          Stephanie Watson (Andy Booth)

Application Type:         Full Planning Permission

Proposal:                     Planning Permission - Erection of 5no. dwellings with the creation of internal roads, including the demolition of existing agricultural buildings.

Location:                      LAND OFF, BOSTON ROAD, WAINFLEET ST MARY

Applicant:                    C W Parker (Wainfleet) Limited

Members received an application for Full Planning Permission – Erection of

5no. dwellings with the creation of internal roads, including the demolition

of existing agricultural buildings at land off Boston Road, Wainfleet St

Mary.

The proposed development would constitute a departure from the

development plan for the district and was recommended for

approval.  It was therefore required to be determined by the

Planning Committee.

The main planning issues were considered to be:

·     The principle of development.

·     Impact on the character of the area.

·     Impact on residential amenity.

·     Drainage and Flood Risk.

·     Ecology.

·     Contamination.

·     Highways Safety.

·     Biodiversity and Net Gain.

·     The Planning Balance.

Members were referred to the additional information contained on pages 2 to 3 of the Supplementary Agenda

Stephanie Watson, Planning Officer, detailed site and surroundings information to Members at Paragraph 2, together with the description of the proposal at Paragraph 3, pages 33 to 34 of the report refer.

There were no speakers on this application.

Following which, the application was opened for debate and Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward. 

-      A Member commented that the application was better designed than previous similar applications as a Class Q planning exemption was not required. 

Following which, the application was Proposed for approval in line with officer recommendation.

-      Further to a query whether the open front barn was to be converted, the Planning Officer advised Members that this would be demolished.  The Development Management Lead Officer explained that he was content that the Class Q fallback position would allow for the conversion of 5 dwellings.

-      A Member considered that the application should be refused on the grounds of flood risk, open countryside and could see very little betterment from the proposal.

-      A Member queried how much of the current building would be retained for Class Q.  The Development Management Lead Officer explained the planning balance to Members, referring them to Paragraphs 7.45 to 7.49, page 43 of the report refers.

-      A Member commented that the proposed application was a disappointment, however considered that the building was in an open rural area and on a good site in a desirable location.  He was of the opinion that the plot would be better suited to 3 well designed houses which would enjoy the area with a natural border of trees benefiting from less traffic movement, noise and lighting resulting in a lesser impact on the area.

-      A Member raised further concerns around the foul water drainage and queried whether the drainage currently in place was able to cope with 5 dwellings.  The Development Management Lead Officer referred Members to Paragraph 7.29 of the report which confirmed how this would be dealt with and assured Members that there was a condition in place to ensure that the foul water dispersal was adequate prior to the development taking place.

Following which, the application was Seconded for approval in line with officer recommendation.

Following which, the application was Proposed and Seconded for refusal against officer recommendation.

-     A Member considered that the only betterment to the site was the character and design.  The Development Management Lead Officer agreed with the above comment and added that there was also betterment from the biodiversity net gain element.

Upon being put to the vote, the proposal for approval in line with officer recommendation, subject to conditions, was as follows:

Vote:           7 In favour            3 Against              0 Abstention

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved subject to the following conditions: