Agenda and minutes

The Senior Planning Lawyer reported that notification had been received of the following substitutions for this meeting only:

• Councillor A Casson was replacing Councillor J Whitbourn

In accordance with the Constitution the Chairman’s Panel currently comprises 3 members, following as closely as possible the political balance of the Committee, and must include the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee.  Substitute members are permitted (including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee) for individual meetings, so long as the substitute is a member of the Planning Committee and the political balance is retained.

The terms of reference of the Panel are that where a planning application would normally be delegated to the Head of Planning, such application must first be submitted to the Chairman’s Panel for consultation where:

-     The Ward member or parish council has requested determination by the Planning Committee and the request clearly relates to material planning considerations; or

-     There are irresolvable objections which clearly relate to material planning considerations.

Members are invited to consider (i) whether the Panel should be re-established for the period 2023-2027, (ii) whether any amendment should be made to the terms of reference or composition of the Panel (any amendment will require Council approval as it will necessitate an amendment to the Constitution); and (iii) the appointment of the third member of the Panel for the period 2023-2027.

In accordance with the Constitution the Chairman’s Panel currently comprised 3 members, following as closely as possible the political balance of the Committee, and had to include the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee. Members were invited to consider (i) whether the Panel should be re-established for the period 2023-2027; (ii) whether any amendment should be made to the terms of reference or composition of the Panel (any amendment would require Council approval as it would necessitate an amendment to the Constitution); and (iii) the appointment of a third member of the Panel for the period 2023-2027.

AGREED:

1. That the Chairman’s Panel be re-established for the period 2023-2027.
2. That no amendment be made to the terms of reference or composition of the panel; and
3. That Councillor Alcock be appointed as the third member of the Chairman’s Panel for the year 2023-2027.

To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 8 March 2023 (copy enclosed). 

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 8 March 2023.

AGREED:

That the minutes be signed as a correct record.

(Where a Councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest the Councillor must declare the interest to the meeting and leave the room without participating in any discussion or making a statement on the item, except where a Councillor is permitted to remain as a result of a grant of dispensation.)

Councillor Redgate declared an interest in relation to item 6 as he had expressed his support for the application and was pre-determined. Therefore, he would leave the room for the whole discussion of the item.

Councillor Bingham declared an interest in item 7 and would leave the room for the whole discussion of that item.

Councillor Alcock declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 8 and would leave the room for the whole discussion of that item.

There were none.

Full application for Proposed Use of Land for the Stationing of Accommodation for Armed Forces Veterans to create a reintegration facility at Teremok, Station Road, Gedney Hill (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance, The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed on South Holland District Council’s Facebook page for a limited period of time, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

AGREED:

That permission be granted subject to the conditions set out at Section 9.0 of the report.

(Moved by Councillor Brewis, Seconded by Councillor Woolf)

Oral representations were received in respect of the above application in line with the Council’s scheme of public speaking at Planning Committee meetings:

Supporter: John Murray (Applicant)

Full application for Residential development comprising 56 dwellings at Land to rear of 36 Lime Walk, Long Sutton, Spalding (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance, The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed on South Holland District Council’s Facebook page for a limited period of time, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

AGREED:

That the application be refused due the design, layout and density of the development not being in keeping with the surrounding rural area of Long Sutton resulting in an unacceptable impact on its character and appearance and delegation be given to officers to draft these reasons for refusal including relevant Policy references before returning the application to Chairman’s Panel for final sign off before a decision notice is issued.

(Moved by Councillor Tyrrell, Seconded by Councillor T Sneath)

Full application for Change of use of dwelling to include the use for dog breeding – retrospective at 67 North Street, Crowland (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance, The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed on South Holland District Council’s Facebook page for a limited period of time, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

location. 

AGREED:

That permission be refused due to concerns that the proposed change of use would cause a harmful and unacceptable impact within a residential area and the resultant noise and activity levels on the site would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of residents and the local environment and delegation be given to officers to draft these reasons for refusal including relevant Policy references before returning the application to Chairman’s Panel for final sign off before a decision notice is issued.

(Moved by Councillor Redgate, Seconded by Councillor Brewis)

Full application for Change of use of a residential property (C3) to a HMO (C4 or Sui Generis) – re-submission of H16-0737-22 at 5 Stonegate, Spalding (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including his recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance, The debate was not repeated here as Planning Committee meetings were webcast and could be viewed on South Holland District Council’s Facebook page for a limited period of time, in line with the Democratic Services Privacy Notice.

Councillor M Le Sage was in attendance to speak as a ward member on this item.

AGREED:

That permission be refused due to inadequate accommodation and parking arrangements along with additional noise and disturbance that would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of local residents and delegation be given to officers to draft these reasons for refusal including relevant Policy references before returning the application to Chairman’s Panel for final sign off before a decision notice is issued.

(Moved by Councillor Redgate, Seconded by Councillor Tennant)

To provide an update on recent Appeal Decisions (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager which provided an update on recent appeals decisions.

Members were pleased to see that there were many appeal decisions dismissed, particularly in relation to an application in Sutton Bridge, and thanked the Officers for their work.

AGREED:

That the report be noted.

For the Planning Committee to note the Planning Protocol for use by Officers and Members (report of the Senior Planning Lawyer enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Senior Planning Lawyer which asked the Planning Committee to note the updated Planning Protocol for use by Officers and Members.

AGREED:

That the updated Planning Protocol be noted.

There were none.