Care home plans refused following concerns it would 'dominate' the area

Members of East Lindsey District Council’s (ELDC) planning committee rejected an application for a care home, vehicular access, car parking, landscaped gardens, refuse and recycling facilities in Tattershall Road Industrial Estate in Woodhall Spa.

Applicant Glenholme Healthcare had applied for permission to build a 54-bed facility – comprising 43 standard bedrooms and 11 suite bedrooms.

The care home would have been up to a maximum of two and half stories in height – with two storey and single storey elements.

The plans included 20 parking spaces – including two disabled parking spaces – and four electric vehicle charging bays. Cycle parking was also proposed.

It was proposed to build a footpath southwards to the existing bus stop in Tattershall Road.

At a meeting on Thursday May 7, Coun Christopher Watts, vice chair and planning lead for Woodhall Spa Parish Council, said that the authority had formally objected to the proposal.

He added: “This is a large, 54-bed institutional development on a site of less than half an acre.

“Its scale, massing and intensity would create a dominant and overbearing form of development entirely out of keeping with neighbouring properties and the character of this part of Woodhall Spa.”

Councillors were told that the original plans have been modified and the overall size and scale of the proposed building has been reduced.

Helen Knott, planning director at nineteen47, representing the applicant, said the concerns of residents have been addressed.

She added: “As a result, the scale and massing of the building has been reduced and bed numbers lowered.

“The design has been refined to better reflect the character of surrounding development.

“Separation distances to existing residential properties has been carefully considered to ensure there is no detrimental impact and parts of the building close to neighbouring homes have been stepped back and reduced to a single storey.

“Parking provision on site is adequate and accords with the required parking standards as set out in the committee report.”

But ELDC leader Craig Leyland (Conservative – Woodhall Spa) was unconvinced that the applicant had done enough to address the concerns of the committee.

He added: “Its mass and dominance on the limited site results in overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of right for neighbours joining the site.

“These issues have only been partially addressed. The bulk and size of the development is still over dominant on such a small development site.

“The issues with adjoining neighbours have only been tinkered with and not substantially changed.

“Neighbours would still be affected by a significant loss of amenity.”

But Kate Marnoch (Labour – Mablethorpe) disagreed.

She said: “I would like to propose that we accept the officer’s recommendations.

“I think looking at the images, I thought it fitted very well in Woodhall Spa. I wish we had such pretty care homes in Mablethorpe.”

Coun Marnoch failed to see why some councillors wanted to refuse the application.

She added: “I think there’s an awful lot of ‘we don’t want this because we don’t want it’, not because of factual planning materials that are considerations that our officer has given really detailed proposals for all the conditions.”

However councillors overwhelmingly voted against the application.