Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2021 be confirmed.

Please note that, in accordance with the Members' Code of Conduct, when declaring interests members must disclose the existence and nature of the interest, and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) or personal and/or pecuniary.

No declarations of interest were received.

An update sheet was tabled at the meeting, which included an additional objection received in relation to Minute 12(a) – The Moorland Centre, 3 Moorland Way, Lincoln.

The Planning Team Leader:

1. advised members of the reasons why a temporary tree preservation order made by the Assistant Director for Planning under delegated powers should be confirmed at the following site:

2. provided details of the individual trees to be covered by the order and the contribution they made to the area

3. reported that the initial 6 months of protection would come to an end for the Tree Preservation Order on 14 October 2021

4. confirmed that the reason for making a Tree Preservation Order on this site was at the request of the occupants of the property

5. added that the Arboricultural Officer following a site visit with the occupier of the property had identified the trees to be suitable for protection under a Tree Preservation Order, stating that the trees were of a high amenity value and that their removal would have a significant effect on the aesthetic appearance of the area

6. advised that following an extended 11-week period of consultation, no objections had been received to the making of the order

7. reported that confirmation of the tree preservation order here would ensure that the trees could not be removed or worked on without the express permission of the council which would be considered detrimental to visual amenity and as such the protection of the trees would contribute to one of the Councils priorities of enhancing our remarkable place.

Members asked/commented as follows:

·         How much more work was involved in protection of trees under a Tree Preservation Order in comparison to trees situated in a Conservation Area?

·         It seemed unusual for the owners of the property to request the imposition of a Tree Preservation Order on their land as it may affect the future sale of their property.

Simon Cousins, Planning Team Leader advised that protection of a tree under a Tree Preservation Order fell under different legislation to that of a tree in a Conservation Area. A Tree Preservation Order protected the specimen indefinitely and identified the tree as being of extra significance. A tree needed to be of sufficient special interest, of good health, be to public benefit and sufficient in size to be protected in this way.

RESOLVED that Tree Preservation Order No 160 be confirmed without modification and that delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning to carry out the requisite procedures for confirmation.

The Planning Team Leader:

1. advised members of the reasons why a temporary tree preservation order made by the Assistant Director for Planning under delegated powers should be confirmed at the following site:

2. provided details of the individual tree to be covered by the order and the contribution it made to the area

3. reported that the initial 6 months of protection would come to an end for the Tree Preservation Order on 14 November 2021

4. confirmed the reason for making a Tree Preservation Order on this site due to the tree providing a contribution to the visual amenity of the area and that the unauthorised removal of the tree would be detrimental to visual amenity

5. added that the Arboricultural Officer having received a request to impose the Tree Preservation Order, located within Conservation Area No 1-Cathedral and City Centre, had identified the tree to be of extremely high amenity value (using the Helliwell System) and therefore considered to be suitable for protection under a Tree Preservation Order and that its removal would have a significant effect on the aesthetic appearance of the area

6. advised that following an extended 55-day period of consultation, no objections had been received to the making of the order

7. reported that confirmation of the tree preservation order here would ensure that the tree could not be removed or worked on without the express permission of the council which would be considered detrimental to visual amenity and as such the protection of the tree would contribute to one of the Councils priorities of enhancing our remarkable place.

RESOLVED that Tree Preservation Order No 161 be confirmed without modification and that delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning to carry out the requisite procedures for confirmation.

The Planning Team Leader:

1. advised members of the reasons why a temporary tree preservation order made by the Assistant Director for Planning under delegated powers should be confirmed at the following site:

2. provided details of the individual trees to be covered by the order and the contribution they made to the area

3. reported that the initial 6 months of protection would come to an end for the Tree Preservation Order on 10 November 2021

4. confirmed the reason for making a Tree Preservation Order on this site due to the tree providing a contribution to the visual amenity of the area and that the unauthorised removal of the tree would be detrimental to visual amenity

5. added that the Arboricultural Officer had received a request to impose the Tree Preservation Order, located within Conservation Area No 1-Cathedral and City Centre; following a site visit with the occupier of 3 Greestone Place he had identified both trees to be of high amenity value and therefore considered to be suitable for protection under a Tree Preservation Order and that their removal would have a significant effect on the aesthetic appearance of the area

6. advised that following an extended 51-day period of consultation, no objections had been received to the making of the order

7. reported that confirmation of the tree preservation order here would ensure that the trees could not be removed or worked on without the express permission of the council which would be considered detrimental to visual amenity and as such the protection of the trees would contribute to one of the Councils priorities of enhancing our remarkable place.

In response to a question, the Committee was advised that members could individually request that a tree be given a Tree Preservation Order if approached by a member of the public on their behalf.

RESOLVED that Tree Preservation Order No 162 be confirmed without modification and that delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning to carry out the requisite procedures for confirmation.

The Planning Team Leader:

1. described the details of the application for the demolition of the existing Moorland Centre to provide a foodstore, two retail units, and a drive-thru restaurant (all Use Class E), together with alterations to the existing car park, creation of a new car park and associated external works, including landscaping

2. advised that this application was almost identical to the previous application approved by Members of Planning Committee on 27 January 2021 (2020/0662/FUL)

3. confirmed that the application had been resubmitted as the Council had received a legal challenge against the previous application, by way of a Judicial Review, brought by Asda Stores Limited (Asda), which held in abeyance the previously approved application

4. reported that whilst respectful of the Judicial Review and not wanting to pre-empt the outcome, the applicant had chosen to resubmit this application for re-consideration by the Local Planning Authority to address some of the concerns raised by this challenge, namely that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) screening opinion had not been undertaken and that the previous committee report did not refer to the Swanholme Lakes Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), as detailed later in this report

5. advised that the submitted plans were almost identical to the previous application save some minor changes outlined in the report, namely revised block and site plans received during the process of the application to illustrate the proposed barriers to the car park

6. added that all of the supporting technical documents were as per the previous submission with the exception of the Planning and Retail Statement and Transport Assessment which included updated data, and the addition of an Archaeological Desk Based Assessment//Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment, however, the conclusions of both reports remained the same

7. described the existing Moorland Centre building as vacant, formerly occupied by Downtown, which sat at the north corner of the application site with the existing car park to the south; the proposed foodstore, Aldi would sit towards the north corner of the site , together with the two adjoining retail units, however with a significantly smaller footprint than the existing building

8. stated that a new car park would be created to the front, south east of the building and an additional access point from Moorland Way to the north east, with the proposed drive-thru restaurant located beyond the car park, adjacent to the existing access

9. advised that the site was located to the north west of Tritton Road, accessed via Moorland Way; the ‘entry only’ access off Moorland Way to the north east of the site also served the Elite Fish and Chip Shop restaurant to the south east of the application site as well as the M &S Foodhall and Co-operative Travel to the west, with the exit from the main car park, which also could be used as an access was located to the north west of the site, which returned customers onto Moorland Way

10. advised that this was an acceptable proposal, very similar to the previous application, however, it must be considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12a