N/134/002323/23: 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:                      Boulevard Care Ltd

 

Location:                       Orby House, Gunby Road, Orby

 

Recommendation:           Approval with Conditions

 

Officer:                          Jane Baker

 

N.B. The Committee broke for a comfort break at 11:43am and reconvened at 11:51am.

 

In the absence of Councillor Stephen Eyre who had declared an interest on this item and the absence of Councillor Alex Hall, it was proposed and seconded that Councillor Daniel McNally be nominated as Chairman for the remainder of the Meeting.

 

COUNCILLOR DANIEL MCNALLY, CHAIRMAN IN THE CHAIR

 

Application Type:           Full Planning Permission

 

Proposal:                         Planning Permission - Change of use of 2 no. buildings containing 20 no. training flats into 20 no. holiday flats. Change of use, alterations to existing social block to provide 4 no. holiday flats, change of use, extension and alterations to existing education block into an amenities building and provision of a playground.

 

Location:                          ORBY HOUSE, GUNBY ROAD, ORBY, PE23 5SW

 

Applicant:                        Boulevard Care Ltd

 

Members received an application for Full Planning Permission – Change of

use of 2 no. buildings containing 20 no. training flats into 20 no. holiday

flats. Change of use, alterations to existing social block to provide 4 no.

holiday flats, change of use, extension and alterations to existing

education block into an amenities building and provision of a playground

at Orby House, Gunby Road, Orby, PE23 5SW.

 

The application was referred to Planning Committee due to the level of local objection. The proposal had also received an objection from Lincolnshire County Council as Lead Local Highway Authority.

 

The main planning issues were considered to be:

 

·       Principle of development in that location

·       Impact on neighbour amenity

·       Impact on visual amenity

·       Highway and pedestrian safety

·       Other matters

 

Members were referred to the additional information contained on page 2 of the Supplementary Agenda.

 

Jane Baker, Senior Planning Officer, detailed site and surroundings information to Members at Paragraph 2, together with the description of the proposal at Paragraph 3, pages 57 to 58 of the report refer.

 

Councillor Stephen Eyre spoke as Ward Member.

 

Members were invited to put their questions to the speaker.

 

-     A Member asked the Ward Member if in his opinion it would encourage drink driving if holiday makers were advised not to walk on the road in order to visit the pub in the village. Councillor Eyre responded that he hoped people would be sensible and not resort to that.

 

N.B. Councillor Stephen Eyre left the Meeting at 12.05pm.

 

Following which, the application was opened for debate. 

 

-     Following a query as to whether the accommodation was seasonal or all year round, the Senior Planning Officer confirmed that it would be all year round for holiday use.

 

-     A Member further queried why there were 3 retail units included on the application.  The Senior Planning Officer responded that the applicant may want to have a range of uses on the site.

 

-     A Member commented on the negative impact of the application, including no benefit from council tax, unsuitable roads and an increase in traffic in the area.  It was further highlighted that as the application was for an all year round holiday use, lighting would be an issue during the winter months as currently there was no street lighting.  It was further highlighted that the consultation would not be completed until mid-November and some serious objections could be received during this process.

 

The Senior Planning Officer advised Members that the consultation was still ongoing as additional information relating to traffic movement had been received.   As it had not been picked up that the proposed development was a major application, it had to be advertised in the local press and additional consultees had also had to be contacted for their comments.

 

-     A Member queried the speed limit on the road to where the entrance was to the proposed development.  The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that it was within the 30mph speed limit zone.

 

-     A Member considered there would not be a problem granting approval if the accommodation was seasonal and not all year round, and highlighted the dangers during the winter months for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

-     Several Members added their concerns with regards to the danger to pedestrians due to the lack of footpaths.

 

-     A Member queried whether there was any information available in relation to any difference in traffic movement.  Members were referred to Paragraph 7.19 onwards, pages 66 to 68 of the report refer.

 

-     Following a query with regards to in the provision of a new footpath for pedestrians, the Senior Planning Officer informed Members that there was insufficient verge for a footpath.

 

Following which, the application was proposed for refusal, contrary to officer recommendation.

 

-     A Member raised a concern that the site would become derelict if the application was refused.

 

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

 

The application was then seconded for refusal contrary to officer recommendation.

 

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

 

Further discussion ensued with the following points raised.

 

-     A Member commented that the proposed 7pm closing time on the  children’s playground on the site was too early.

 

-     A discussion ensued relating to the distance between the site and the village pub.  Concerns were raised that holiday makers would be walking along a dangerous road to visit the village pub, and further discussion was held whether the facilities on site could encourage holiday makers to utilise the site restaurant.

 

-     A Member outlined reasons for refusal including Policy SP10, the open countryside and the Highways Agency’s concern relating to there being no footpath.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the proposal for refusal contrary to officer recommendation was agreed.

 

Vote:         4 In favour            4 Against              0 Abstention 

 

The Chairman was required to use his casting vote.  After due consideration, the Chairman voted to refuse the application contrary to officer recommendation on the basis of the highways issue.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be refused.