Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 29 January 2020 be confirmed.

Councillor Biff Bean declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'Application for Development: 86 Wolsey Way, Lincoln'

Reason: He was known to the agent of the proposed development. He left the room during the discussions on this item and took no part in the vote on the matter to be determined.

Councillor Edmund Strengiel declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'Application for Development: 86 Wolsey Way, Lincoln'.

Reason: He was known to the agent of the proposed development. He left the room during the discussions on this item and took no part in the vote on the matter to be determined.

The Arboricultural Officer:

a.    advised members of the reasons for proposed works to trees in the City Council’s ownership and sought consent to progress the works identified, as detailed at Appendix A of his report

b.    highlighted that the list did not represent all the work undertaken to Council trees, it represented all the instances where a tree was either identified for removal, or where a tree enjoyed some element of protection under planning legislation, and thus formal consent was required

c.    explained that Ward Councillors had been notified of the proposed works.

Members requested further clarification on the reference within the schedule of work to trees in Abbey Ward located at the Allenby Road junction with Rookery Lane?

The Arboricultural Officer apologised for quoting the wrong location for the trees, which were actually located close to Wickes Building Supplies on the Allenby Road junction.

Members referred to the reference within the work to trees at Hartsholme Country Park and asked why pollarding works had been requested on a tree with a substantial defect?

The Arboricultural Officer advised that the tree in question was a mature specimen approximately 15 meters tall. The tree had a large open crack 5 metres in length and was starting to degrade. Pollarding would allow the retention of the tree whilst also reducing the risk of catastrophic collapse. It was hopeful the tree may regenerate and be saved.

RESOLVED that tree works set out in the schedules appended to the report be approved.

The Planning Team Leader:

a)    described the application site on land in front of Yarborough Leisure Centre allocated as a site for residential development in the adopted Local Plan, currently owned by the City of Lincoln Council with agreement to sell the land to the applicants

b)    advised that planning permission was sought by Bishop Grosseteste University (BGU) for the erection of a three storey building for new teaching space and erection of five buildings for student accommodation made up of three, four and five storeys, with vehicular access from Riseholme Road and provision of 40 car parking spaces

c)    provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·         National Planning Policy Framework; Chapters

Ø      2: Achieving Sustainable Development

Ø      4: Decision Making

Ø      5: Delivering a Sufficient Supply of Homes

Ø      6: Building a Strong Competitive Economy

Ø      11: Making Effective Use of Land

Ø      12: Achieving Well-Designed Places

·         Central Lincolnshire Local Plan. Policies

Ø      LP1: A Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

Ø      LP10: Meeting Accommodation Needs

Ø      LP26: Design and Amenity

Ø      LP32: Lincoln’s Universities and Colleges

Ø      LP29: Residential Allocations-Lincoln

d)    outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise

e)    advised members of the main issues to be considered as part of the application to assess the proposal with regard to:

·         National and Local Planning Policy

·         Visual Appearance and Impact

·         Impact on Adjacent Residents

·         Traffic and Pedestrian Safety

·         Trees, Open Space and Ecology

·         Drainage, Archaeology, Ground Conditions

f)     concluded that:

·         The application before Planning Committee had been carefully considered and was sensitive to the context of the local area.

·         The site had an allocation for housing in your adopted Local Plan and the use proposed, whilst not conventional housing, provided significant residential accommodation.

·         The proposal allowed BGU to continue to develop and ensured that there was little impact on their neighbours and the wider City.

·         The design of the new buildings, their scale, location and the materials with which they were to be built were appropriate to this part of the City and the use would not cause harm to the amenity of local residents.

·         The tree cover and landscaping of the site had gone through detailed consideration and an acceptable solution could be agreed.

g)    recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions outlined at page 21 of the officer’s report, together with additional conditions requiring the implementation of a surface water drainage scheme and the formation of a new vehicular access.

Mr Jeremy Wright, addressed Planning Committee in objection to the proposed development, covering the following main points:

·         He spoke on behalf of Lincoln Civic Trust which objected most strongly to the planning application and recommended refusal.

·         He also spoke on behalf of 30 other local residents who were all against the planning application.

·         The location of the proposed development on Riseholme Road, represented the former Roman Ermine Street as the entrance to Historic Lincoln with distant views of the cathedral visible between the trees lining both sides of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

(Councillors Bean and Strengiel left the room for the discussion on this item having declared a personal and pecuniary interest in the matter to be discussed. They took no part in the decision making process).

The Planning Manager:

a)    advised that planning permission was sought for a two storey front extension to 86 Wolsey Way, Lincoln, a two storey detached dwelling

b)    added that a single storey side extension was also shown on the drawings although it did not require consent as a permitted development

c)    reported that the application was brought before Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Jackie Kirk

d)    provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·         Policy LP26: Design and Amenity

·         National Planning Policy Framework

e)    outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise

f)     referred to the update sheet which provided a further response from  the neighbour at 92 Wolsey Way, and a response from Councillor Jackie Kirk including images in consideration of the wider impact the construction of this development would have on the two junctions in close proximity to the property

g)    advised members of the main issues to be considered as part of the application to assess the proposal with regard to:

·         Impact on Residential Amenity

·         Impact on Visual Amenity

·         Impact on Highway Safety

h)    concluded that the proposed extension would not cause unacceptable harm to visual amenity, residential amenity or highway safety, in accordance with the relevant policies of the National Planning Policy Framework and Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

Mr Ernie Thompson, local resident, addressed Planning Committee in objection to the proposed development, covering the following main points:

·         He thanked officers for allowing him the opportunity to speak.

·         He settled in the City 20 years ago with his wife due to securing employment here.

·         He purchased his bungalow at that time looking forward to a happy home, garden and amenity in retirement.

·         He had enjoyed unobstructed light at his property for 20 years.

·         He referred to National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and the 2017 Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

·         Loss of light resulting from the proposed extension would affect his ensuite/internal hall/ master bedroom and kitchen.

·         Loss of light would be endured in his mature garden.

·         The drawings within the officer’s report showing indicative shadowing were not to scale.

·         The proposals would result in a 2 storey 35 foot wall being created four feet from his perimeter fence.

·         The development would enclose his family and overshadow his garden and greenhouse.

·         He referred to The Central Lincolnshire Local Plan Paragraph 5.11.3 (and LP26) which in context stated that any development should not impact negatively upon the amenity experienced by neighbours.

·         He referred also to paragraph 5.11.4 which stated that developers would be expected to explain how the policy matters had been addressed within their development proposals (where appropriate) in the Design and Access Statement submitted with their planning application.

·         He was not against this development, in principal, however, there had been no discussion or compromise on an alternative plan.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.