Planning Committee – 8 February 2002
PRESENT: – Councillor Ellis in the chair.
Councillors Fordham (vice-chair), Gosling, Holgate, Long, Rocks, Wardle, Whiteley and Wood.
Councillors Appleyard, Mrs Bromby and Mrs Sidell attended the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38(b).
The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.
146 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTERESTS AND DECLARATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) – There were no declarations of pecuniary or non-pecuniary interest or significant contact with applicants or third parties (lobbying) at this stage.
147 REQUESTS TO SPEAK – PROCEDURE RULE 36(e) – It was reported that nine requests to speak had been received in accordance with Procedure Rule 36(e). The chair stated that the speakers would be able to address the committee prior to consideration of the respective items.
148 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 11 January 2002, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.
149 MATTERS DEFERRED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING – In accordance with the decisions at the previous meeting, members had undertaken site visits earlier in the day. The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report and updated it orally.
(72) Proposal by Landowner to Divert Public Footpath 74, Epworth
Prior to consideration of this matter, an objector to and a supporter of the proposal addressed the committee under the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The objector stated that she and others had attempted to walk the legal line of the path over a number of years but it was illegally obstructed. She claimed that previous authorities had failed to preserve the public right of way. The proposed line of the path would be substantially less convenient to the public than the legal line which was an historic direct route between Epworth and Haxey Turbaries.
The supporter stated that he and others had walked the alternative route for many years. This route took walkers through a wetland nature reserve. The owner of the land on to which the path would be diverted had given his approval in writing to the proposal which now also had the support of the Country Land and Business Association. The applicant had improved the local environment by changes to his farming methods that had been carried out in consultation with DEFRA.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that complaints relating to the obstruction of the footpath dated back to 1977. Whilst the present owner of the land over which the proposed diversion would run had given his agreement to the proposal, the land was currently for sale. Members were reminded of the criteria which diversions had to satisfy and which would be applied by the Secretary of State should objections be made to the order and not subsequently withdrawn.
Recommended to Council – (a) That the diversion application be refused on the ground that for walkers travelling north along Public Footpath 74 and then west along Public Footpath 65, or vice versa, the proposed route is not substantially as convenient to the public (Highways Act 1980, section 119 (2) (b)); and (b) that approval be given to the Director of Environment and Public Protection to take action to enforce the definitive line of Public Footpath 74 through Starcross.
150 (73) 01/1330 by Mr and Mrs D Ecuyer for the erection of a replacement garage with garden room above at The Old Post House, Old Post Office Lane, South Ferriby
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and one of the applicants addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The objector claimed that windows in the proposed extension would overlook his sitting room and lead to the devaluation of his property. He read a letter from one of the other objectors.
The applicant stated that the proposal would be in keeping with its surroundings. Professional advice had been followed in submitting the application.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that the issue of potential overlooking had been assessed on the basis of distance from neighbouring properties and ‘obliqueness’. It was not considered that there would be any significant loss of amenity to the objector’s property.
Councillor Appleyard, attending the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 38(b) and with the consent of the committee spoke in support of the objector. He considered that the proposal would cause distress to the objector and should be amended.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
151 (74) 01/1409 by Mr and Mrs B Reynolds for erection of a detached 4-bedroomed house and garage on land rear of Victoria Cottage, The Square, Goxhill.
Prior to consideration of this application one of the applicants and an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The applicant indicated that as members had now seen the site, he had nothing to add to what he had said at the previous meeting.
The objector stated that, whilst the site was described as being to the rear of Victoria Cottage, the proposed development would not affect that property. It would however overlook many other properties on The Square. Although the land already had the benefit of permission for a bungalow, the development would constitute tandem or backland development and as such would be inappropriate and out of character with its surroundings.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that the objections related to the character of the proposal, privacy and the availability of alternative sites. Full consideration had been given to the objections and there were no substantive reasons for refusal.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
152 (75) PLANNING APPLICATIONS – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report incorporating a schedule containing details of applications for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications. Officers updated the schedule orally in respect of late representations and other significant developments since its preparation.
Resolved – That the following applications be approved in accordance with the recommendations contained in the reports.
(i) 01/1429 by Kimberly Clark Ltd for construction of an extension to an existing building to house production plant for non – woven fabric at Kimberly Clark Ltd, Falkland Way, Barton – upon – Humber
(Prior to consideration of this application an objector and a representative of the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36(e).
The objector stated that vehicular access and infrastructure for the site were inadequate. A relief road should be provided before such development was considered. Juggernauts already caused disturbance to local people at night when travelling to and from nearby factories. The proposal would generate further traffic. He also claimed that consultation on the application had not been carried out correctly.
The applicants’ representative stated that the proposal would lead to no more than one additional vehicle movement every two hours.
Councillor Mrs Sidell, attending the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38(b) and with the consent of the Committee, spoke on this application. She accepted that the development of additional infrastructure in the area, including the construction of a relief road was a matter beyond the scope of this committee and would need to be considered in a wider context than this application).
(ii) 01/1473 by Mrs E Hasselby for erection of a detached 2-bedroomed dormer bungalow with garage on the site known as 5 Tempertons Lane, Owston Ferry.
(iii) 01/1560 by Mr and Mrs CR Bowers for erection of 3-detached houses with garages, including demolition of existing workshop, office and stores on land rear of 48 High Street, Broughton.
153 Resolved – That the following applications be refused in accordance with the recommendations contained in the reports.
(i) 01/0269 by KJ and KMS Embleton for removal of condition 3 of permission 00/0482 limiting occupation of the dwelling to those working in agriculture or forestry or their dependants at Far Scawcett Farm, Scawcett Lane, Epworth.
(ii) 01/1218 by Mr R Blain for the erection of an extension to a dwelling to provide an office at 2 Dartmouth Road, Scunthorpe.
(iii) 01/1476 by Mr R Nicholson for removal of condition 2 of 97/1511 for demolition to take place prior to contract for redevelopment being made at 33/35, High Street, Crowle.
(iv) 01/1505 by Mr WWA Staniland for the retention of a blockwork building already erected for mixed domestic/ agricultural use and retention of use of land within domestic curtilage on land rear of Edley Manor, Belton Road, Beltoft.
(Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). He stated that he had not envisaged that the proposal would have any effect on his neighbours. He had discussed the siting of the building with his immediate neighbours).
(iii) 01/1535 by Shahjalal Mosque for alterations and erection of an extension to the mosque at 130 Sheffield street, Scunthorpe.
154 01/1646 by Mr and Mrs D Cutts for change of use of a farm outbuilding and to cover over an existing yard to provide a reception area to form a venue for weddings and solemnisation of marriages at Mill Farm House, Barrow Road, Goxhill.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant and an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The applicant stated that the proposal would provide an alternative to the often austere and functional looking registry offices. It had attracted considerable public support. The recent White Paper on Civil Registration had stated that there was widespread support for relaxation of the present system. As the site was surrounded by brickwork there would be no noise pollution. The proposal would create employment in the area.
The objector was concerned that the proposal would cause unacceptable noise and disturbance to neighbours and would present a danger to highway safety. He argued that the proposal would lead to further development of the site. It would not constitute a diversification of a rural business and would not fulfil a public need.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that the proposal would be contrary to Policy RD 2 of the Revised Deposit Draft Local Plan and recommended that permission should be refused.
Resolved – That permission be granted.
155 Resolved – That consideration of the following applications be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the sites prior to that meeting.
(i) 01/1047 by Lacoste for Conservation Area Consent to demolish buildings in a conservation area at Corner of Queen Street/ West Street, Winterton.
(ii) 01/1121 by Lacoste for erection of 10 detached dwellings on corner of Queen Street and West Street, Winterton.
(iii) 01/1603 by Mr J Leake for erection of an extension to form a snooker room at 1 Thornholme Drive, Bottesford.
156 01/1388 by Mr and Mrs S Booth for conversion of a barn to a 4-bedroomed dwelling at Barn No. 1, North Street, Roxby.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred to the next meeting in order to enable an objector and the applicants or their representative to address the committee.
157 01/1567 by Mr and Mrs JE Leedham for the discharge of a planning obligation requiring that the premises be allocated to persons resident or connected with the parishes of Hibaldstow, Redbourne or Scawby and excluding the elderly (relating to planning permission 7/1050/990 at 1-6 Manton Court, Hibaldstow.
Resolved – That the application be deferred to enable officers to carry out further investigations into the availability of “affordable housing” in the Hibaldstow area.
158 (76) APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS FOLLOWING THE GRANT OF OUTLINE PERMISSION – 01/1467 by Winterton Selling Centre in relation to outline planning permission 00/1120 for erection of a sales building at existing selling and retail centre – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members about an application for approval of reserved matters which was ready for determination. Outline planning permission had already been granted and the development had therefore been agreed in principle. Consideration was now required to the details of the siting, design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping of the development (excluding any of these matters which were expressly approved at the time outline permission had been granted).
Resolved – (a) That approval be granted subject to a condition relating to the colour of the cladding, and (b) that the applicant be reminded of the need to submit a landscaping scheme as soon as possible.
159 (77) APPEALS – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members of the outcome of the following appeals: –
(i) Against the decision to refuse outline permission for the erection of a dwelling house and garage on land west of 31 Margrave Lane, Garthorpe – reference 00/1547 – Appeal dismissed.
(ii) Against the decision to refuse outline permission for the erection of two dwellings on land north of 51 North Street, West Butterwick – reference 01/0370 – Appeal Dismissed.
(iii) Against an Enforcement Notice to cease the use of land for residential purposes and to remove a mobile home from the land at Manor Farm, Coleby – reference PLANCON/2000/367 – Appeal Dismissed and Notice Upheld
160 (78) STATISTICS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS – JULY – SEPTEMBER 2001 – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report informing members of the council’s performance in handling planning applications in the fourth quarter of 2001.
The report showed a continuing improvement in the proportion of applications determined within 8 weeks of receipt, by 1% to 71%.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
161 (79) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a schedule giving details of progress in respect of matters on which the committee had authorised enforcement action.
Resolved – That the report be noted