Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Councillors Ashby and Tennant.

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

• Councillor M Geaney was replacing Councillor A Woolf

To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 8 January 2025 (copy enclosed). 

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting hold on 8 January 2025.

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.)

There were none.

There were none.

Full application for Residential Development – Erection of 2 Dwellings at Rear of The Rising Sun, Pit Lane, Gedney Drove End (report of the Development Manager (Interim) enclosed).

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

Councillor J Reynolds attended the meeting to speak as the ward member for this application, covering the following areas:

• Overdevelopment with small amenity for residents of the proposed development.
• No turning points available creating access problems.
• Contrary to Policies 2 and 3 of the Local Plan.
• Loss of green space and no improvement to street scene.
• Environment Agency had lodged an objection to the proposal.

Members debated the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance, with the following comments being raised:

• Concerns around drainage on the site, given that the treatment plant was located on another site.
• Access to the site was limited, with no turning points available.
• The proposal seemed to conflict with Policy 2 of the Local Plan as the amenity for the proposed properties was very small.
• Appeared to be overdevelopment on a small site.
• Proposal would not enhance the street scene and would be detrimental to the amenity of the residents surrounding the site.
• The sequential test for flood risk had not been performed adequately.
• Out of character development, unfitting for the surrounding area.
• Unsustainable development on this site.

The full debate was not repeated here as a livestream of this Planning Committee Meeting 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 to concerns around overdevelopment, negative impact on surrounding residential amenity, design, and lack of amenity space for proposed properties. That delegation be given to officers to draft these reasons for refusal before returning these reasons to Chairman’s Panel for final sign off prior to the decision notice being issued.

(Moved by Councillor Bingham, Seconded by Councillor Taylor)

To provide an update on recent appeal decisions (report of the Development Manager (Interim) enclosed).

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

AGREED:

That the report be noted.

There were none.

There were none.