Plans for 109 homes ‘reluctantly’ passed for Welton, a village ‘busting at the seams’

A sharp planning meeting saw councillors “reluctantly” and “unfortunately” approve plans for more than 100 homes to be constructed.

They will be built in the village of Welton, some two years after plans were first rejected by the council.

At West Lindsey District Council’s planning committee meeting on Wednesday (April 24) the saga of Turley Farms Ltd’s 5.93-hectare site of 109 homes off Eastfield Lane reached its latest chapter.

The proposal was first rejected by councillors in May 2022 over concerns around access, which were addressed by the applicant as plans were adjusted and resubmitted in June of last year.

Some 25% of the development, which is up to 27 homes, will be affordable housing with a tenure split of 60% affordable rent, 25% first homes and 15% shared ownership.

There will also be a contribution of £69,942.50 on completion of 50% of the dwellings for each phase of the development for the extension of existing health facilities, whether it be Welton Family Health Centre, The Ingham Practice and/or Lindum Medical Practice.

That is not to say that the new proposal comes without controversy, though, with as many as 80 local objections, including from the local parish council.

Welton by Lincoln Parish Councillor Mike Powell spoke at the meeting on Wednesday to say the village is “bursting at the seams” with planning approvals and new developments, arguing it “does not have the infrastructure” for projects like this.

Those concerns, however, did not change the outcome, as councillors voted to approve the plans after over an hour of debate and deliberations.

Multiple concerns were raised over the safety of access roads along Eastfield Lane, and frustration could be heard within the committee’s arguments, as a highways officer was not present at the meeting to answer any questions around this.

Coun Sabastian Hague, Liberał Democrat member for Dunholme and Welton, called the road “extremely dangerous” and said “valid concerns” around highways for this project could not be answered, which was “of concern” to the committee.

Indeed, the committee was even warned on numerous occasions by fellow members to “be cautious” in this decision making, with arguments being made that the planning committee “could be seen as being unreasonable.”

Committee chair Coun Matthew Boles, Liberal Democrat member for Gainsborough East, said in response to questions over the absence of a highways officer: “We might want highways here but we’re barking up the wrong tree. I’ve been here eight years and never seen a highways officer at these meetings.”

The county council’s highways team lodged no objections to the plan, which ultimately swayed the final verdict.

Many members of the planning committee referenced a desire to “find reasons” to reject the application, but feared it would only result in defeat and a worse outcome overall if an appeal was lodged to the Planning Inspectorate.

The plans fall on an allocated site as part of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan, and this twinned with no objection being recorded by the county council’s highways team, meant the planning committee felt powerless to resist the proposal any longer.

Coun Tom Smith, Conservative member for Wold View, said the decision was a case of head vs heart.

“My heart says yes, we should absolutely refuse this because that road is not what I would consider suitable, but my head says if we refuse it on highways grounds, we are going to lose any appeal in any case, particularly as it’s an allocated site.

“Because it’s an approved site in Central Lincolnshire Local Plan and highways haven’t objected, as much as I’d love a reason to reject this application, I can’t.”

This was echoed by no less than the committee’s chair, Coun Matthew Boles, who said: “For me Coun Smith, absolutely on the money.

“I would love to find reasons to refuse this, but the harsh reality is there are no reasons I can pin my hat on and think we’d win the appeal.

“As much as I’ve tried to find reasons to refuse it, I will second the proposal to approve.”

Despite the efforts of Coun Hague to push a rejection of this proposal, a seconder did not make themselves heard and ultimately the committee voted to grant outline approval for the development.

Reserved matters relating to this decision must be brought back to the planning committee at a later date.