Agenda item

This application seeks approval for the installation of a brick boundary wall with gates.

The Assistant Director for Planning:

a.    described the location of the application site at land between 1 and 9-11 Greetwell Road, Lincoln, as follows:

·         it was located in the north of the city on Greetwell Gate, a one-way street running from Wragby Road to Eastgate;

·         to the east of the site was a public house whilst to the west was 1 Greetwell Gate, a Grade II listed house;

·         to the south of the site were residential properties accessed from Winnowsty Lane and Mainwell Mews;

·         on the opposite side of the Greetwell Gate was a City Council owned car park and two semi-detached properties on the corner of Greetwell Gate and Langworthgate;

·         the site was located with the Cathedral and City Centre Conservation Area No. 1;

b.    advised that planning permission was sought for the construction of walls and gates to a Council-owned former garage site. The walls would sit at two varying heights with a lower wall to the front boundary with Greetwell Gate and part of the side boundary to the east. A higher wall and gates opening into the site would be positioned with a setback of 6.5 metres from the footpath to Greetwell Gate;

c.    reported that the application was brought before Planning Committee as the proposal was made by the City of Lincoln Council on council-owned land;

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

·         Policy LP25 – The Historic Environment;

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

·         visual amenity and the impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and adjacent listed building;

·         archaeology;

·         highway safety;

f.     outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise;

g.    concluded that the proposed wall and gates would be a visual improvement to the existing site and would therefore enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area in accordance with LP25 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Laura Devaney addressed the Committee in opposition to the proposal. The following points were noted:

·         she was very disappointed that the Civic Trust had insinuated that the walls and gates were valid;

·         the principle of her objection was about use of the site and the proposed walls and gates should not be used to justify the site’s use;

·         it was very obvious from the photographs and video clip shown at the meeting that they had not been taken during conditions she would refer to as normal. Traffic could be very bad along Greetwell Gate which the photographs and video did not reflect;

·         the City Council’s Archaeological Officer had confirmed that the site would be thoroughly assessed. Mrs Devaney would also make contact with the County Council’s Archaeological Officer to seek further reassurances. The required works would hold up building works in respect of the walls and gate;

·         properties in this part of the city sold for up to £1.5 million. It would be much better for the area if the site had been developed for residential purposes;

·         a three foot wall at the front of the site could be dangerous in terms of school children who may climb on it;

·         the conservation area would be enhanced by the walls and gates, but this should not justify the proposed use for the site;

·         the lighting proposed to be used on the wall either side of the gates may be too bright, having a detrimental impact on the area, particularly to the Morning Star public house or the residents of number 1 Greetwell Gate;

·         residents had not been consulted properly on the application, with some people being unable to provide responses until after the deadline had passed;

·         the number of vehicles expected to use the site was concerning.

Matt Hillman addressed the Committee as applicant. The following points were noted:

·         in respect of the boundary wall, advice had been sought from the Council’s Conservation Officer. This had been reflected in the materials proposed for use, including the wall top, brick and mortar finish;

·         the original proposal included a six foot wall on the boundary of the site, however, members of the community had raised their concerns in relation to this so the application had been amended to include a three foot wall enabling visibility to be improved in terms of vehicles leaving the site. Planting works would also take place to soften the landscaping of the area and its impact on the neighbourhood;

·         Mr Hillman had been liaising with the owners and occupants of the Morning Star public house as part of the proposed development;

·         all advice in relation to archaeology and the necessary processes that needed to take place would be followed. A desk based assessment to evaluate the area would be undertaken shortly.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail. The following comments/questions emerged:

·         in relation to the previous application at the same site considered at this meeting and it’s temporary nature, the erection of a wall and gate was a more permanent structure. What would the site be used for if the operation set out in the previous application ceased on 31 March 2021?;

·         the site needed a wall and a protective boundary around it, particularly to prevent anti-social behaviour and ensure that the garages remained secure;

·         this was a sensitive site in very close proximity to the Cathedral so from an archaeological perspective needed to be treated very carefully;

·         the conservation area would be enhanced by the erection of walls and gates on this site, taking into account the design and materials proposed to be used;

·         reassurance was sought following a claim that the public consultation process had been inadequate;

·         the erection of the walls and gates would bring an improvement to the area;

·         the applicant had been working with the Conservation Officer who was confident the walls and gates would be of good quality and in keeping with the area;

·         the desktop archaeological assessment could take some time which would delay the building of the walls and gates;

·         the walls and gates would be a vast visual improvement to the area.

The Assistant Director provided the following comments in response to the points and questions raised by members of the Committee:

·         the two applications in relation to the site at Greetwell Gate had to be considered as two separate, standalone planning applications;

·         whether or not the site continued to be used for the purposes set out in the previous application, this would not impact the specifics of the application before Committee in respect of the erection of walls and gates;

·         with regard to archaeology, officers would ensure that this was dealt with properly;

·         the consultation process went above and beyond what would normally be expected, given the sensitive location of the site. Site notices and press advertisements were put in place, with 60 houses in the surrounding area having been notified of the application.

RESOLVED that the application be granted subject to the following conditions:

·         The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years;

·         The development must proceed in accordance with the approved drawings;

·         Details of the bricks, coping stones, bond and mortar are approved before construction;

·         Standard archaeology conditions.