Agenda item

Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.


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


(i)             PA/2020/1345 by Mr Adrian Axe for planning permission to convert existing barn to residential and erect two detached dwellings with associated works at Barn, Station Road, Owston Ferry.


Resolved – That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained within the officer’s report.


(ii)            PA/2020/1729 by Mr Daniel Smith for planning permission to erect a first-floor extension to the front and a two-storey extension with balcony to the rear, with associated external alterations at Cemetery Lodge, 30 Wrawby Road, Brigg, DN20 8DT.


Resolved – That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained within the officer’s report.


(iii)          PA/2020/2050 by Mr L Kirkland for planning permission to erect a two storey and single storey extension to the rear of Rotherlea, A161 between Epworth and Haxey, Low Burnham, DN19 1DA.


Resolved – That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained within the officer’s report.


(iv)          PA/2021/20 by Mr and Mrs S Watson for planning permission to erect a dwelling at Lavenham House, Fields Road, East Lound, DN9 2LR.


Prior to consideration of this item, an objector addressed the committee and stated that she had been a resident of East Lound for over 20 years.  In her opinion, infill applications were not appropriate for the village.  Allowing this application would set a precedent for the development of any other infill plot in the village.  Flash flooding was a real concern in East Lound that had affected many properties on the village, resulting in flooded gardens and properties.  The proposed application would also face directly into her kitchen window, resulting in a loss of amenity.  The application was outside of the development boundary and had previously been refused on appeal.  Access to the application site was also very narrow.


The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application.  He commented that the planning officers report and recommendation supported the proposal.  The application was not in a conservation area and the council’s archaeologists had not objected to the proposal.  The proposed development was a modern style building with a contemporary feel.  The site was within flood zone 1 which was preferable.  There were no objections to this planning application from the council’s drainage engineers.  The development was designed as a two-storey house as it was for an older gentleman with a medical condition to assist him in meeting his future needs.


Councillor Rose, local ward member stated that he had serious concerns for this development.  The main issues raised were drainage and flooding as there was a history of flooding on the site.  The ditch was said to be inadequate for heavy rainfall and would not be suitable for future development due to surface water flooding.  The development site was in a special historical landscape and planning decisions needed to be kept consistent. Councillor Rose said that in 2005 the application was refused on appeal and should be refused again.


Councillor J Davison stated that he would like to look at the site.  In addition, he wanted clarification on a number of drainage issues from the council’s drainage team.


Councillor N Sherwood said he too would like to have a site visit before voting on this planning application. 


It was then moved by Councillor J Davison and seconded by Councillor N Sherwood -


That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site.


Motion Carried

Supporting documents: