Agenda item

Full application for Development for 80 dwellings with access, landscape, drainage, open space and associated infrastructure at Land East of Normanton Road, 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 their 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, with the following comments being raised:

• Members queried whether internal roads would be adopted by the Highway Authority, noting that refuse collection vehicles cannot access private roads.
  • Officers advised that the majority of roads would be constructed to adoptable standards, and it was anticipated that Lincolnshire County Council would adopt them, subject to meeting required specifications. It was acknowledged that a small number of private driveways would remain, with occupiers expected to present wheelie bins at the edge of the adoptable highway.
• Concerns were raised regarding the transition to wheelie bins, bin storage, carrying distances, and the suitability of the refuse strategy in light of the Council’s newly adopted waste policy.
  • Officers confirmed that a refuse strategy had been submitted with the application, including bin storage arrangements and collection distances, and advised that this was acceptable from a planning perspective.
• Members expressed concern about foul water disposal, noting that an earlier objection from Anglian Water had been withdrawn.
  • Officers explained that Anglian Water had reassessed capacity within the wastewater network and confirmed sufficient headroom existed to accommodate the development. Foul water was proposed to connect to the existing system on Normanton Road.
  • Officers also advised that the relevant statutory consultees, including the Lead Local Flood Authority, Internal Drainage Board and Environment Agency, had raised no objection in principle. Further detailed drainage schemes would be secured by condition and would require formal approval prior to development commencing.
• Members expressed concern that the need to raise land levels indicated the site was unsuitable for development, particularly in the context of future climate change.
  • Officers advised that raising site levels was a standard mitigation approach in high flood risk areas across the district.
  • Officers further explained that level changes had been carefully designed, with the smallest increases at site boundaries, additional separation distances, landscaped buffers and wildlife corridors to mitigate visual and amenity impacts. It was advised that, while the development would be visible, officers did not consider the increase in height to result in unacceptable harm through overlooking, loss of light or overbearing impact.
• Members noted that the site was allocated in the adopted Local Plan and queried whether development exceedance elsewhere in Crowland affected its status.
  • Officers confirmed that allocation remained valid, and that the principle of residential development was established. Refusal on the basis that the site allocation had been exceeded elsewhere would be unlikely to be defensible at appeal.
• Members queried why a sequential test had not been carried out for this site.
  • It was confirmed that no sequential test was required as the site formed part of the Local Plan allocations.
• Members raised concerns regarding construction traffic, dust, noise and the suitability of routing works vehicles through existing residential streets.
  • Officers advised that a Construction Management Plan would be required by condition, detailing routes, dust suppression, traffic management and hours of operation. It was indicated that the preferred construction access route was via adjacent land to the north rather than through the estate.
• Suggestions were made regarding permanent alternative access through adjacent land
  • Officers advised this fell outside the application red line boundary and was not before the Committee.
• Some Members considered the scheme to be typical estate housing but acknowledged it reflected comparable developments elsewhere in the district.
  • Officers confirmed that separation distances, landscaping, wildlife corridors and boundary treatments had been designed to mitigate impacts on neighbouring dwellings.
• Requests were made for strong landscaping and long-term management of the wildlife corridor.
  • Officers proposed securing a management plan for the wildlife buffer through additional conditions.
• Members queried when Section 106 contributions would be paid.
  • Officers advised that trigger points would be set within the legal agreement, typically at a 50% occupation thresholds.

Councillor Brewis requested that his vote against the application to be recorded in the minutes.

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 approved for the reasons set out at section 9.0 of the report, including the addition of a condition relating to a management plan for the wildlife corridor (should this not already be covered in existing conditions), and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement securing the necessary financial contributions and affordable housing provision set out within the report above.

(Moved by Councillor Bingham, Seconded by Councillor Tennant)

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: George Wilkinson (Allison Homes) (Applicant)

Objector: John Russell (Resident)