East Lindsey District Council has dismissed claims that work on a new housing estate in Horncastle is being carried out against building regulations.
The fears of residents were realised two weeks ago when construction started on development of up to 250 new homes at Langton Hill.
ELDC initially refused permission for the development - a decision which supported a lengthy campaign by residents and Horncastle Town Council.
But a Government appointed planning inspector over-turned that decision at appeal.
The inspector did impose a number of conditions - including a ruling that developers - in this case Cyden Homes - would have to pay for improvement to the already notorious junction of Langton Hill with Lincoln Road and West Street.
That junction is at centre of calls for a new bypass.
Town residents Andrew Neal and Richard Barker are both claiming work should not have started - until all the conditions laid down by the inspector have been met.
In emails sent to ELDC planning officer Andy Booth, Mr Barker says he has been asked by residents living in Osborne Way to ‘advise them on the implications’ of the development work starting.
In the email, Mr Barker says he accepts the development does have planning permission.
However, he adds: “By reference to the original appeal conditions, I believe that the commencement of the development is in contravention of the following conditions...”
Mr Barker then lists nine conditions that he believes have not been met.
He is supported by Mr Neal who has also emailed Mr Booth - outlining similar concerns about the planning conditions - ranging from the junction improvements to plans for drainage and tree protection.
Mr Booth answers by stressing that the majority of conditions have either been met or - in the case of the junction’s improvements - are the subject of advanced talks with the county council which is responsible for highways matters.
In an email, Mr Booth says: “In conclusion, I would therefore advise that all relevant conditions have been appropriately discharged and/or details have been prepared and are subject to appropriate considerations.”
He goes on to tell Mr Barker and Mr Neal that when taking any enforcement action, local authorities should act in a ‘proportionate and reasonable way’.
He adds that in this instance, there is’ no expediency currently’ in enforcing against what may be considered a ‘technical breach.’