Home for five children at 19 Langwith Drive, Holbeach, Spalding
Summary of planning committee decision
Deferred by South Holland Planning Committee on 2 Apr 2025.
What was proposed
The application sought a lawful use certificate for a home for up to five children or young people as a single household under Use Class C3.
“The application seeks consent for a lawful development certificate for the proposed use of 19 Langwith Drive, Holbeach as a home for up to five children or young people as a single household (Use Class C3). The application is submitted under Section 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) (as amended).”
“The applicant considers that a full planning application to change the use of the site would not be required as the existing use is Use Class C3, and the proposed use would also fall under C3 (specifically C3(b)).”
Officer report
Site and planning history
The site is a detached two-storey home at the end of a cul-de-sac, with an earlier extension and alterations approved in 2017.
“The application site comprises land at 19 Langwith Drive, Holbeach. The site features a two-storey detached dwelling which is located at the end of Langwith Drive, which is a cul-de-sac, located to the south of Spalding Road.”
“H09-0420-17: (Full Application) Proposed first floor extension and alterations - approved 18 September 2017”
Officer report
Officers’ assessment
Officers found insufficient information about occupants and care arrangements, concluding that seven occupants would exceed the six-person C3(b) limit.
“In light of this, including the applicant, the applicant's cousin, and the proposed occupation of up to five young people, this would result in seven occupants. Therefore, this would exceed the maximum number of people that can be allowed to live together as a household under Use Class C3(b) which is six people. The description of development refers to "up to five young people" and this was agreed with the applicant.”
“As set out previously, the local planning authority needs to be submitted with sufficient and precise information to prove that on the balance of probability, the proposed use would be lawful. It is considered that there is a lack of information as to who would be living with the site, how the children would be looked after and the discrepancies as to how many adults there would be within the property. With the predominate evidence before us equating to seven occupants.”
Officer report
Consultation responses
A site notice produced 12 public objections, while children’s services gave no response and the parish council queried its lack of consultation.
“There is no statutory obligation for the Local Authority to publicise an application for a certificate of lawful development. A site notice has however been displayed next to the site for 21 days in the interests of transparency. 12 representations have been received from members of the public, setting out objections to the proposals. A representation from Sir John Hayes (MP) has also been received.”
“A response from Holbeach Parish Council has also been received querying why they were not consulted. The parish council were contacted to explain that the council does not typically consult on lawful development certificate applications as there is no requirement to.”
Officer report
Concerns raised
Residents raised concerns about consultation, disturbance, care, covenants, property values, traffic, checks, ownership and the plans’ preparation.
“-Concerns are raised with the lack of consultation with neighbours - as set out previously there is no requirement to consult neighbours and the local planning authority is not able to take into account third party representations, however, a site notice has been displayed in the interests of transparency. -Concerns are raised with the possibility of anti-social behaviour and noise disturbance - this cannot be taken into account in this case.”
“-The description of development was for a change of use - the description of development has been updated during the determination of the application to clarify that the proposed use would continue to fall under Class C3.”
Officer report
Why consideration was deferred
The senior planning lawyer advised deferral so two clarification points could be obtained before the committee determined the application.
“Prior to the meeting, the Senior Planning Lawyer had identified two points of clarification that needed to be sought and therefore had strongly advised that the case be deferred to allow such clarification to be attained prior to determination of the application by the committee.”
Minutes
Committee decision
The committee agreed to defer the application before determination, on a motion by Councillor Avery seconded by Councillor Beal.
“That the application be deferred to enable the points of clarification to be attained prior to determination.”
“(Moved by Councillor Avery, Seconded by Councillor Beal)”
Minutes
Sources
- South Holland Planning Committee minutes, 2 April 2025
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of South Holland's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- South Holland Planning Committee
- Council
- South Holland
- Date
- Wednesday 2 April 2025
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended refusal
- Committee decided
- Deferred
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- South Holland committee decisions →
This committee's year
9 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.