Six dwellings at Land north of Peploe Lane, New Holland

The site and its setting

The overgrown site lies between existing houses, is partly within New Holland’s settlement boundary, and is in flood zone 3.

“Three responses have also been received supporting the proposal on the following grounds: • shortage of housing in the area • the location seems suitable and is not used for any other purpose • it is not a large housebuilder proposing the development • it would give an opportunity for the supporter’s daughter to move into the area • there isn’t enough housing in the village • support the housing design • the road is quiet and can accommodate additional traffic • pressing…”

“ASSESSMENT Site The application site consists of an area of overgrown land on the northern side of Peploe Lane, between existing houses. The site extends to 0.19 hectares (1,900 square metres) and is partly within the settlement boundary for New Holland (approximately 400 square metres), the remainder of the site (1,500 square metres) adjoining the boundary on three sides.”

Officer report

Consultation and public views

The parish council and five objectors raised flooding, drainage, wildlife, access, highway safety, construction and character concerns, while three people supported the homes.

“The potential for the presence of as yet unrecorded archaeological remains of more than local significance is judged to be low. No further recommendations for archaeology. PARISH COUNCIL Object on the following grounds: • concerns over flooding which haven’t been addressed • drainage issues experienced locally every winter • impact on residential and visual amenity from the erection of three-storey dwellings • a detailed wildlife survey needs to be undertaken.”

“The village is in the red zone for flooding and any development which takes away green space will exacerbate flooding • Peploe Lane is unadopted in part and the responsibility of residents to maintain • noise pollution during construction • increased traffic and highway safety issues • inadequate parking provision and potential obstructions within the public highway • impact on pedestrian safety • impact on peace and quiet.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

The applicant’s agent supported the proposal, while the local ward member opposed it because of character, flooding and its position outside the boundary.

Members’ debate

Members disagreed about whether the site was countryside or an infill plot and raised concerns about character, drainage and flooding.

“Councillor D Wells disagreed with the highways assessment contained in the report. The application was not, in his opinion, in the open countryside and was not it keeping with the area. There were also drainage concerns and the risk of flooding at the site.”

“Councillor M Grant pointed out there was a housing development opposite the application site, which was not in the open countryside. The site was an infill plot, with no objection from the Environment Agency.”

Minutes

The committee vote

A motion to refuse permission was proposed, seconded and carried.

“It was then proposed by Councillor D Wells and seconded by Councillor C Ross –”

“That planning permission be refused for the following reasons –”

Minutes

The decision and reasons

Permission was refused because most of the site was outside the settlement boundary in open countryside and no special need for the homes was shown.

“The proposed development is considered contrary to policies RD2 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan, and CS2, CS3 and CS8 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy in that the majority of the site lies outside a defined settlement boundary, in the open countryside. In addition, no evidence has been provided to justify a special need for new dwellings in this location.”

Minutes