Home   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Decision on Colsterworth earth-sheltered house application deferred by South Kesteven District Council over safety issues at entrance to site




An application to build an earth-sheltered two-storey house and three associated commercial buildings near the A1 at Colsterworth has been deferred.

Applicants Mr and Mrs K Russell want to relocate a forestry business from North Witham to a new site west of Bridge End, Colsterworth, with access close to the turn-off from the northbound carriageway of the A1.

Planning officers recommend the application is refused because the applicant has not demonstrated that large HGVs will be able to use the access safely. They also say that there is not an essential need for a house in that location and that the design of the house is not of 'exceptional quality, truly outstanding or innovative'.

An artist's impression of the proposed earth-sheltered home at Colsterworth. (48648500)
An artist's impression of the proposed earth-sheltered home at Colsterworth. (48648500)

John Dickie, agent for the applicant, spoke at a meeting of the planning committee of South Kesteven District Council where he said that further information had recently been provided by a consultancy company on the access arrangements but this was missing and could be provided later.

Mr Dickie said: "The feedback I have from Stirling Maynard is that all these issues are resolvable. They are technical and they are to do with the access geometry at the point of entry into the site and routing arrangements thereafter."

Mr Dickie said his client's vehicles were referred to as road trains - large tractors that pull a trailer - and these have to travel to Colsterworth before they can access the A1. The applicant has been told that vehicles would have to make large detours in order to enter the site safely.

Councillor Robert Reid (Con) proposed that the application be deferred so that the applicant could negotiate further with Lincolnshire County Council highways on the entrance to the proposed site.

Seven committee members voted in favour of the deferral and five against.



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More