Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 17 April 2024 be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a true record.

An update sheet was circulated with reference to planning applications to be considered this evening, which included additional information for Members attention, received after the original agenda documents had been published.

RESOLVED that the update sheet be received by Planning Committee.

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.

Councillor Callum Roper declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'White Hart Hotel, Bailgate, Lincoln'.

Reason: He was known to one of the objectors to the planning application.

He left the room during the consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined.

Councillor Emily Wood declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'White Hart Hotel, Bailgate, Lincoln'.

Reason: She was known to one of the objectors to the planning application.

She left the room during the consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined.

Councillor Emily Wood declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'White Hart Hotel, Bailgate, Lincoln (Listed Building Consent)'.

Reason: She was known to one of the objectors to the planning application.

She left the room during the consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined.

Councillor Rebecca Longbottom declared a Personal and Pecuniary Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'White Hart Hotel, Bailgate, Lincoln'. Reason: She was known to one of the objectors to the planning application.

She left the room during the consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined.

Dave Walker, Arboricultural Officer:

a)    advised Planning Committee of the main purpose of his report being the reasons for proposed works to trees predominantly in the City Council's ownership, although it may include other trees at times where special circumstances applied and officers were both able to do so and thought it was helpful

b)    sought consent to progress the works identified, as detailed at Appendix A of his report

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

d)    explained that ward councillors had been notified of the proposed works.

Members thanked the Arboricultural Officer for the introduction of further guidance notes within his report to Planning Committee, which gave a fuller picture of the importance as a local authority we placed on trees.

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

The Planning Team Leader:

1. advised members of the reasons why a temporary tree preservation order made under delegated powers by the Assistant Director for Planning 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 making of any Tree Preservation Order was likely to result in further demands on staff time to deal with any applications submitted for consent to carry out tree work and to provide advice and assistance to owners and others regarding protected trees, however, this was contained within existing staffing resources

4. reported that the initial 6 months of protection would come to an end for the Tree Preservation Order on 15 October 2024

5. confirmed that the provisional Tree Preservation Order was made following a request to carry out extensive canopy reduction work, amounting to approximately 50% of the canopy; on inspection of the tree by the Council’s Arboricultural Officer using the ‘Helliwell System’ of Visual Amenity of Trees and Woodland, he considered it to be of high amenity value

6. added that the tree appeared to form part of an aerodynamic canopy with an adjoining Beech and this added to the aesthetic appearance of the Castle and Cathedral skyline when viewed from the south

7. reported that the agent, on behalf of the applicant, suggested that several large limbs had fallen from the tree in the past, however, the species was prone to summer drop

8. advised that following consultations carried out with both the landowner and adjoining properties, no objections had been received to the order

9. advised that confirmation of Tree Preservation Order 185 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 185 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:

a.    referred to the application site called the Judges Lodgings, together with adjacent land to the north, east and west and also 2 Bailgate

b.    reported that planning permission was sought for the application site as follows:

·       To demolish an existing extension to the rear of the Judges Lodgings to be replaced with a three-storey extension to provide apart-hotel style bedrooms on the upper floors with undercroft car parking and services at ground floor.

·       Internal and external works to Judges Lodgings to facilitate the conversion and provision of a café and restaurant space at ground floor level.

·       Alterations to an outbuilding to the west of Judges Lodgings to provide a retail/café kiosk.

·       Erection of a 1½ and 2½ storey building to the north of the site with retail commercial floorspace, undercroft parking on the ground floor and long-stay serviced accommodation to the upper floors (referred to as Block C within the officer’s report.)

·       Erection of timber glazed shopfronts to create retail kiosks under the arch from Bailgate and to the west.

·       Reinstatement of the shopfront to 2 Bailgate.

·       Reconfiguration of the entrance door to 2A Bailgate.

·       Associated works including erection of buildings/structures to provide plant/infrastructure.

·       Hard and soft landscaping works to create a publicly accessible open space with external seating areas.

c.     described the aspirations of the Design and Access Statement to redevelop the area to create a vibrant mixed-use development incorporating food and beverage establishments, boutique, retail and apart-style accommodation to compliment accommodation currently available at the White Hart Hotel, also with the applicant’s ownership

d.    advised that the development proposed to enhance the public realm, reinstate public routes through the sites to St Paul’s Lane and creation of new public routes from St Paul’s Lane to Bailgate and St Paul’s Lane and Castle Hill

e.    described the Judges Lodgings, a grade II* building which sat to the north of Castle Hill and to the east of Lincoln Castle, also a scheduled monument grade I listed

f.      referred to the land to the north, east and west of the building also the subject of this planning application, and described the location of the application site in relation to surrounding buildings, a number being either grade II* or II listed as detailed within the officer’s report

g.    reported that the application site was also within the Cathedral and City Centre Conservation Area

h.    described in detail two additional applications submitted requesting listed building consent which would consider the proposals in relation to the impact on the buildings as designated heritage assets, whereas the full application considered the proposals with regard to the acceptability of the proposed uses, impact on visual amenity, residential amenity and highways, amongst other issues

i.      advised that as the number of objections received for the two listed building consent applications did not meet the threshold for referral to Committee, they would be dealt with under delegated powers, however a decision would not be taken until Planning Committee had determined this full planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

(Councillors Longbottom, Roper and Wood left the room during the discussion of this item having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of the planning application to be considered. They took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined)

The Assistant Director of Planning:

a.    referred to the application property, the White Hart Hotel, a grade II listed building located on the corner with Bailgate and Eastgate within the Cathedral and City Centre Conservation Area

b.    detailed the City Council’s Principal Conservation Officer’s description of the history of the premises, being a complicated site comprising four distinct building phases along the street scene

c.     advised that the hotel had recently reopened following extensive renovation works with some alterations still ongoing; there were a number of approved and ongoing current applications, including this planning application

d.    advised that full planning permission was being sought for internal alterations to the application site to create a new leisure pool and spa, including the excavation and construction of the pool, construction of internal partitions to form a sauna, changing facilities and gym together with associated drainage and services

e.    outlined the proposals in further detail as follows:

·       The application works would be located towards the rear of the building, adjacent to Eastgate.

·       A pool was previously proposed in this location as part of original applications for internal and external refurbishment works (2023/0057/FUL and 2023/0058/LBC), however, omitted to allow for the necessary archaeological work and investigations associated with the pool to take place.

·       The vents for the pool would be incorporated within the overall roof mounted plant approved as part of the previous applications. The previous applications also approved alterations to some of the windows on the Eastgate elevation, adjacent to the location of the pool. There were no external alterations proposed as part of this application.

f.      advised that this full application did not consider internal works such as the new internal partitions, however an accompanying listed building consent application had been submitted (2024/0088/LBC) which considered proposals in relation to the impact on buildings as designated heritage assets; whilst this full application considered the proposals in relation to other matters such as archaeology and residential amenity

g.    confirmed that the listed building consent application was also being presented this evening for determination by Members of Planning Committee

h.    reported that a number of objections had been received in relation to both applications, although many of the objections raised within the responses to the listed building consent application could not be considered there as they related to matters other than the impact on the heritage asset; these responses were therefore included within this report and the relevant material planning considerations raised would be taken into account as part of this application

i.      detailed the history to the application site within the officer’s report

j.      provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·       Policy S42: Sustainable Urban Tourism

·       Policy S53: Design and Amenity

·       Policy S57: The Historic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(Councillors Longbottom and Roper rejoined their seats for the remainder of the meeting)

(Councillor Wood remained outside of the meeting having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of the planning application to be considered. She took no part in the discussion or vote on the matter to be determined)

The Assistant Director of Planning:

a.    referred to the application property the White Hart Hotel, a grade II listed building, located on the corner with Bailgate and Eastgate within the Cathedral and City Centre Conservation Area

b.    detailed the City Council’s Principal Conservation Officer’s description of the history of The White Hart Hotel, being a complicated site comprising four distinct building phases along the street scene

c.     advised that the hotel had recently reopened following extensive renovation works with some alterations still ongoing, there were a number of approved and ongoing current applications, including this planning application

d.    advised that the application sought listed building consent for internal alterations to the site to create a new leisure pool and spa, including the excavation and construction of the pool, construction of internal partitions to form a sauna, changing facilities and gym together with associated drainage and services

e.    outlined the proposals in further detail as follows:

·       The proposed application works would be located towards the rear of the building, adjacent to Eastgate.

·       A pool was previously proposed in this location as part of original applications for internal and external refurbishment works (2023/0057/FUL and 2023/0058/LBC), although it was omitted to allow for the necessary archaeological work and investigations associated with the pool to take place.

·       The vents for the pool would be incorporated within the overall roof mounted plant that was approved as part of the previous applications. The previous applications also approved alterations to some of the windows on the Eastgate elevation, adjacent to the location of the pool. There were no external alterations proposed as part of this application.

f.      advised that in addition to this listed building consent application, an accompanying application for full planning permission had been submitted (2024/0087/FUL) and considered by Planning Committee as the previous agenda item this evening

g.    confirmed that listed building consent applications considered proposals in relation to the impact on buildings as designated heritage assets, whereas the full application considered the proposals in relation to other matters; such as archaeology and residential amenity

h.    reported that a number of objections had been received in relation to both applications, although many of the objections raised within the responses to this listed building consent application could not be considered here as they related to matters other than the impact on the heritage asset; these responses were therefore included within the full planning application report and the relevant material planning considerations raised taken into account as part of the consideration of that application

i.      detailed the history to the application site within the officer’s report

j.      provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·       Policy S57: The Historic Environment

·       National Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

(Councillor Wood rejoined her seat for the remainder of the meeting.)

The Assistant Director of Planning:

a.    referred to the application site, a large corner plot with Sewell Road to the north and Lindum Terrace to the east and south, bounded by a high brick wall with mature trees within and around the perimeter of the site

b.    confirmed that this site within the Lindum and Arboretum Conservation Area was currently vacant after the original building, which sat to the west, was demolished on safety grounds after numerous vandalism and arson incidents and had since become overgrown, although, to the east side of the site, lay the fragments of the former Eastcliff House Grotto

c.     reported that the site was previously owned alongside 10-11 Lindum Terrace, located to the west, with both accommodating medical facilities; in 2016 planning permission was granted for the creation of a medical village on the two sites and 30-32 Sewell Road, although this was never implemented

d.    highlighted the City Council’s Principal Conservation Officer’s description of the site within a Victorian suburb characterised by large individually designed and often elaborate properties set behind brick walls, within the setting of the grade II listed St Annes Bedehouses and 27 and 29 Sewell Road; these properties sat to the north of the site with 10-11 Lindum Terrace to the west

e.    advised that planning permission was sought as follows:

·       To erect two, 4 storey buildings accommodating a total of 42 apartments; 21 in each block.

·       There would be 8 one beds and 34 two beds with 35 accompanying parking spaces.

·       Building 1 would be located to the front of the site, facing Lindum Terrace, with Building 2 towards the rear.

·       Associated works included cycle and bin storage, a temporary access within the boundary wall, a new pedestrian access within the boundary wall, tree removal and landscaping.

f.      advised that prior to the submission of the application the proposals were subject to extensive pre-application discussions between the applicant, agent, planning officers and the conservation officer

g.    detailed the history to the application site within the officer’s report

h.    provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·      Policy S1      The Spatial Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy

·      Policy S2      Growth Levels and Distribution

·      Policy S3      Housing in the Lincoln Urban Area, Main Towns and Market Towns

·      Policy S6      Design Principles for Efficient Buildings

·      Policy S7      Reducing Energy Consumption - Residential Development

·      Policy S12     Water Efficiency and Sustainable Water Management

·      Policy NS18  Electric Vehicle Charging

·      Policy S21     Flood Risk and Water Resources

·      Policy S22     Affordable Housing

·      Policy S45     Strategic Infrastructure Requirements

·      Policy S47     Accessibility and Transport

·      Policy S49     Parking Provision

·      Policy S53     Design and Amenity

·      Policy S54     Health and Wellbeing

·      Policy S56     Development on Land Affected by Contamination

·      Policy S57     The Historic Environment

·      Policy S59     Green and Blue Infrastructure Network

·      Policy S60     Protecting Biodiversity and Geodiversity 

·      Policy S61     Biodiversity Opportunity and Delivering Measurable Net Gains

·      Policy S66     Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows

·      Supplementary Planning Document- Central Lincolnshire Developer Contributions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Planning Team Leader:

a.    referred to the application property, the former warden’s house attached to the supported housing provision at Lenton Green

b.    advised that planning permission was sought to convert the six bedroomed property into three self-contained, one-bedroomed residential flats

c.     reported that the property had a small outside space to the front but no access to the rear communal garden which was solely used for the supported tenants of Lenton Green

d.    advised that the application was brought to Planning Committee as the applicant was the City of Lincoln Council, in order with the scheme of delegation

e.    provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

·      Policy S1      The Spatial Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy

·      Policy S3      Housing in the Lincoln Urban Area, Main Towns and Market Towns

·      Policy S6      Design Principles for Efficient Buildings

·      Policy S13     Reducing Energy Consumption in Existing Buildings

·      Policy S25     Sub-Division and Multi-Occupation of Dwellings within Lincoln

·      Policy S49     Parking Provision

·      Policy S53     Design and Amenity

k.     advised of the issues to be assessed in relation to the planning application, as follows:

·      Accordance with National and Local Planning Policy

·      Impact on amenity of neighbouring uses and future occupiers of the premises

·      Impact on visual amenity

·      Energy efficiency

·      Highway safety, access and parking

k.     outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise

l.      concluded that:

·      The development would create additional supported, local authority housing stock, utilising the long vacant warden’s property on site.

·      The proposals would provide a good level of amenity for proposed occupants and would not result in any undue harm to existing residents within the area.

·      The proposals would therefore be in accordance with the requirements of CLLP Policies and the NPPF.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail.

Members asked where designated bin storage would be located.

The Planning Team Leader confirmed there was a bin storage area at the rear of the property.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

·       3 Years for implementation

·       Development to be built in accordance with approved drawings