Planning Committee – 11 August 2004
Chairman: Councillor Wardle
Venue: Council Chamber, Pittwood House, Scunthorpe
Time: 2pm
AGENDA
1. Substitutions.
2. Declarations of prejudicial or non-prejudicial personal Interests, and significant contact with applicants, objectors or third parties (lobbying), if any.
3. To take the minutes of the meetings held on 11 June, Policy Meeting 14 July, and Special Meeting held on 14 July 2004 as a correct record and authorise the chairman to sign.
PLANNING MATTERS
4. Applications deferred from previous meeting for site visit –
(i) 04/0473 by Mr and Mrs J Cook for the erection of extensions to a bungalow to form a detached house and a detached garage at Horseshoe Cottage, North End, Goxhill.
(ii) 04/0873 by Mr Amin Mohammed Uddin for a single storey and a two storey extension at 9 Exeter Road Scunthorpe.
(iii) 04/0859 by Mr and Mrs N Schofield for the erection of a detached bungalow on land adjacent to 39 & 41 Nethergate, Westwoodside, Haxey.
(iv) 04/0950 by Mr T Astle for the erection of one dwelling on land to the rear of 21 Newbigg, Westwoodside, Haxey.
5. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.
6. Appeals.
7. Enforcement Update.
8. Statistics of Planning Applications : October – December 2003.
PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY MATTERS
9. Green Lane, Barton – upon – Humber.
10. Public Footpath No.51, Goxhill.
11. Proposed diversion of Public Footpath 134, Elsham.
12. Public Path Diversion Order – Footpath No. 92, Haxey.
13. Public Footpath 260 Barnetby – le – Wold – Modification of Definitive Map and Statement.
14. Countryside and Rights Of Way Act 2000 – Provisional Map issue In Eastern England (Area Eight).
15. Any other items, which the chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances which must be specified.
The public are likely to be excluded from the meeting for consideration of the following item on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 12 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.
16. Breaches of Planning Control.
Notes: (i) Reports are by the Head of Planning and Regeneration unless otherwise stated.
(ii) Extracts from the relevant legislation in respect of Items 9 – 14 are attached as an appendix.
Minutes
PRESENT: – Councillor Wardle in the chair.
Councillors Bunyan, Carlile, Clark, Eckhardt, Fordham, Grant, Holgate, Kirk, Mrs Sidell and Whiteley.
Councillors Barkworth, Osborne, Smith, Stewart and Wells attended the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b).
The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.
586 DECLARATIONS OF PREJUDICIAL AND NON-PREJUDICIAL PERSONAL INTERESTS AND DECLARATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) –The following members declared a non –prejudicial personal interest as follows: –
|
Member
|
Minute/Item
|
Nature of Interest
|
|---|---|---|
| Councillor Clark | Application 04/1047 | Knew Applicants |
| Councillor Clark | Application 04/0941 | Knew Applicants |
| Councillor Wardle | Application 04/1047 | Knew Applicants |
| Councillor Wardle | Application 04/0941 | Knew Applicants |
The following members declared that they had been lobbied –
|
Member
|
Application/Item
|
Lobbied By
|
|---|---|---|
| Councillor Bunyan | 04/0473 | Objectors |
| Councillor Bunyan | Footpath No. 92, Haxey | Objector |
| Councillor Clark | 04/0703 | Objector |
| Councillor Clark | 04/1047 | Agent |
| Councillor Clark | 04/0950 | Applicant |
| Councillor Holgate | 04/0859 | Applicant |
| Councillor Holgate | 04/0950 | Applicant |
| Councillor Wardle | 04/0473 | Objectors |
| Councillor Wardle | 04/1047 | Applicant |
| Councillor Wardle | 04/0473 | Objector |
| Councillor Whiteley | 04/0473 | Objectors |
Mr W J Hill (Principal Planning Officer) declared a non–pecuniary interest in application 04/1047 (Minute ) as he knew the applicant.
587 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meetings held on 11 June, and 14 July 2004, and the Special Meeting held on 14 July, 2004 having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chairman.
588 (21) APPLICATIONS DEFERRED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING – In accordance with the decision at the previous meeting, members had undertaken a site visit the day prior to the meeting. The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted reports and updated them orally.
(i) 04/0473 by Mr and Mrs J Cook for the erection of extensions to a bungalow to form a detached house and detached garage at Horseshoe Cottage, North End, Goxhill.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector and the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
The objector was concerned that the proposal could lead to overlooking of his own property. The extensions were out of scale and not in keeping with the surroundings. The extensions would be close to the objector’s property, making it difficult to maintain the external walls.
The applicant stated that, following discussions with officers, he had removed the proposed first floor windows at the rear of the extension. Therefore there would not be any overlooking of the objector’s property. The construction materials would be chosen to avoid the need for maintenance.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(ii) 04/0859 by Mr and Mrs N Schofield for the erection of a detached bungalow on land adjacent to 39 & 41 Nethergate, Westwoodside, Haxey.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
He informed the committee that his wife and an uncle who lived with them had serious medical conditions which meant that they needed to live in single – storey accommodation. If permission were granted, it would be possible to address the objections raised by a neighbour.
The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised the committee, that, as pointed out at the site visit, there was an additional dwelling to the east of the access to the application site which was not shown on the location plan appended to the report.
Moved by Councillor Holgate and seconded by Councillor Eckhardt –
That permission be granted
Motion Lost
Moved by Councillor Kirk and seconded by Councillor Fordham
– That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Motion Carried
(iii) 04/0873 by Mr Amin Mohammed Uddin for erection of a single – storey and a two – storey extension at 9 Exeter Road, Scunthorpe.
Councillor Barkworth, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke against this application. He was concerned that the access to the site was not adequate for the number of vehicles likely to be using it.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(iv) 04/0950 by Mr T Astle for outline permission for the erection of one dwelling on land to the rear of 21 Newbigg, Westwoodside, Haxey.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant’s agent addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
She claimed that the site was in the centre of the village . It was currently in use as the garden of a public house. It was therefore a “brownfield” site.
Moved by Councillor Holgate and seconded by Councillor Eckhardt –
That permission be granted
Motion Lost
Moved by Councillor Kirk and seconded by Councillor Grant
– That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Motion Carried
589 (22) PLANNING APPLICATIONS – The Head of Planning and Regeneration 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.
(i) 02/1640 by Parkway Entertainment Co. Ltd for the change of use of a cinema(D2) to a public house (A3) at Majestic Cinema, Oswald Road, Scunthorpe.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector and the applicant’s agent addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
The agent stated that the building had been empty for two years. The proposed development complied with all relevant national and local policies. It would be a suitable re-use of the building which was currently subject to vandalism. The proposal had public support.
The objector, was concerned that the proposal would encourage disorder. There was a “ten foot” nearby which in which litter was deposited.
Councillor Barkworth, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke against this application. He stated that Scunthorpe town centre had reached saturation point in relation to the number of public houses and bars.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(ii) 03/1666 by Macltoob Ahmed for the redevelopment of a site to erect 9 flats (one and two bedroom units) into blocks with central courtyard at 24 & 24a Gunnell Street, Scunthorpe.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting.
(iii) 03/1896 by Mr M Degnan for the erection of an extension at 8 Reapers Rise, Epworth.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(iv) 04/0903 by Mr N Grounds & Miss A Sherwood for the erection of a two – storey extension, conservatory and garage to the front of the dwelling at 8 Main Street, Worlaby.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(v) 04/0941 by Mr and Mrs J Raby for the erection of two detached dwellings and garages and the construction of new accesses to “Sunny Bank” (means of access not reserved for subsequent approval) at Sunnybank, North End, Goxhill.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
The objector stated that the nearest of the proposed dwellings would be only 4 metres from her boundary. The proposed access was only currently used by two properties. The development would therefore lead to a significant increase in traffic and a safety risk. Emergency vehicles would be unable to use the access. The development would be overbearing .
The Head of Planning and Regeneration reminded the committee that the Highways Team had no objection to the development subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(vi) 04/0943 by Mr and Mrs J W Johnson for the erction of two wooden stables and one tack room at Cartref (rear of) 76 Butterwick Road, Messingham.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e). She stated that the applicants had other stables in the area which were in an untidy condition. She was concerned that there could be a proliferation of such buildings.
The Head of Planning and Regeneration stated that whilst the cumulative impact of development in the countryside was a valid consideration, any further developments would require applications
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(vii) 04/0978 by Mrs G Williams for the erection of a single – storey extension and conservatory at 4 Mowbray Street, Epworth.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(viii) 04/1000 by Mr K Stephenson for outline permission for the erection of a detached dwelling on land to the rear of 19 Church Street, Haxey.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
He stated that the development limit for the village ran through the middle of the garden of the nearby public house. He questioned why his own garden was not included within the limit.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(viii) 04/1047 by Mr and Mrs Dawson for the erection of a detached bungalow with integral garage (resubmission of 03/0904) on land adjacent to 8 Palmer Lane, Barrow–upon-Humber.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector and the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
The objector referred to a previous refusal of permission for residential development on the site and stated that there had been no changes in circumstances to justify granting permission. The application was contrary to various policies in the adopted local plan.
The applicant stated the she lived in a Grade II Listed Building which was in need of substantial repairs. The sale of the proposed bungalow would fund those repairs. She claimed that the site was not in a conservation area.
The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised the committee that the application was virtually a resubmission of the previous application for the site which had been refused on policy grounds. The site was “brownfield” but half of it was within a conservation area.
Resolved – (a) That consideration of this application be deferred to enable officers to hold further discussions with the applicant, and (b) that members visit the site prior to that meeting.
(ix) 04/1066 by Mr and Mrs T Watson for the change of use of land to provide holiday parking in conjunction with Humberside Airport on land at Blink Bonny and Joreteli, Grimsby Road, Kirmington.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
He stated that the application site had been used in the past by two haulage companies. The access road could cope with heavy traffic. There was adequate car parking provision. The proposal would reduce the amount of car journeys made by visitors to the airport. The site could barely been seen from the public highway. The parish council had no objection. The business would create jobs.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(x) 04/1067 by Mr and Mrs T Watson for the continued use of land to provide holiday parking in conjunction with Humberside Airport on land at Blink Bonny and Joreteli, Grimsby Road, Kirmington.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e). He stated that the business had been operating since September 2003. The applicant had been unaware that the use was unauthorised. There was only one objection. No cars were parked at the rear of the site. The application was supported by neighbours.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(xi) 04/1073 by Mr and Mrs P Hughes for the erection of a two – storey extension at 11 Grammar School, Brigg .
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(xii) 04/1083 by beneficiaries of the estate of Ms Joan Prescott for outline permission to erect three dwellings at Sandhill Farm, High Street, Wroot.
Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
He stated that there were some inaccuracies in the report.
The Head of Planning and Regeneration made some corrections to the report. He also advised that the Environment Agency had now accepted the flood risk assessment provided by the applicants and had no objections subject to an appropriate condition.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject to the amendment of condition 5 to require the parking and tuning facilities to be provided prior to commencement of development.
(xiii) 04/1093 by Mr Mark Pinney for the erection of a replacement double garage at Bylands Cottage, Graizelound Fields Road, Haxey.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant’s agent addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
She stated that the garage would replace an existing double garage. The first floor would accommodate a games room. The garage would be overshadowed by the neighbours development.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting.
(xiv) 04/1102 by Mr P Greenwood to construct an access way (resubmission of 2004/0158) on land adjacent to 109 High Street, Belton.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(xv) 04/1106 by Higgins Builders Ltd. for the erection of 3 dwellings, including parking and means of access on land south of Hawthorn House, Townside, East Halton.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(xvi) 04/1116 by Miss L Alvarez for the retention of the use of part of the building as a café to include office space, storage and WC at Oakley , Godnow Road, Crowle.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
590 (23) APPEALS – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report on the outcome of the following appeals.
|
Reference
|
Details
|
Decision
|
|---|---|---|
| 2003/1190 | Outline planning permission for residential development at Leys Lane, Winterton | Dismissed |
| 2003/1379 | Planning permission to retain a conservatory type lean-to at 49 Station Road, Keadby | Dismissed |
| 2003/1426 | Outline planning permission for residential development on land to the rear of 1-3 Green Lane, Barton | Dismissed |
| 2003/1446 | Certificate of lawfulness that works constructed on the site are material operations as defined in section 56 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and constitute lawful commencement of permission no. 97/1400 dated 09/03/98 at Glebe Farm, Barrow Road, Barton | Allowed, and partial award of costs |
| 2003/1445 | Certificate of lawfulness that proposed works to construct a car park and means of access thereto will, if constructed before 23/07/2004, constitute material operations as defined in Section 56 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and constitute lawful commencement of permission no. 1999/0241 dated 23/07/1999 at Glebe Farm, Barrow Road, Barton | Allowed, and partial award of costs |
Resolved – That the report be noted.
591 (24) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a schedule giving details of progress in respect of matters on which the committee had authorised enforcement action.
Resolved – (a) That the report be noted, and (b) that the committee expresses its thanks to the officers concerned for securing the removal of the tyres from Hibaldstow Airport.
592 (25) STATISTICS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS – OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2003 – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report informing members of the council’s performance in handling planning applications in the final quarter of 2003, compared to regional and national performances, together with figures for North Lincolnshire for the first two quarters of 2004.
There was a continuing high workload, and the correspondingly high work rate required to deal with it and there were signs that the downward trend of recent times in terms of performance was beginning to stabilise.
The last quarter for April-June 2004 had seen a dramatic improvement in figures for all the measured targets of major, minor and other whilst maintaining the high rate of delegated decisions (94%) and an approval rate of 86%. There had been a concerted effort by staff to improve the council’s performance level by making procedural changes and concentrating resources into the decision-making process. This had meant, however, that staff resources had had to be diverted away from other activities such as correspondence relating to informal/preliminary advice.
Overall the council’s ‘8 week performance’ for the last quarter was 75% which had only been matched once before since local government reorganisation in 1996 and that was in April-June 1997.
These high rates of decision turnaround times had been achieved despite a significant increase in the number of applications being received.
Resolved – (a) That the report be noted, and (b) that the staff concerned be congratulated on their performance in the April – June 2004 quarter.
593 (26) GREEN LANE, BARTON–UPON-HUMBER – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report seeking approval for the making of an order to modify the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement” by adding to them a public footpath in Barton-upon-Humber.
Barton-upon-Humber Town Council had served an application under section 53 (5) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 on North Lincolnshire Council to add a 185-metre-long public footpath to the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement”. This ran between Barrow Road and St. Peter’s Church via an unsurfaced street known as Green Lane.
As well as the route put forward by Barton-upon-Humber Town Council, two additional connecting routes through St. Peter’s Churchyard also needed adding to the definitive map and statement.
Each of the routes in question was in frequent daily use by the public on foot. Nobody was known to take issue with the proposition that the routes are public footpaths. On the contrary, there was compelling evidence in support of their public status.
Resolved – (a) That an order be made under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to add the following routes to the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement” as public footpaths: (i) Green Lane; (ii) the footpath between the northern end of Green Lane and St. Peter’s Churchyard; and (iii) the footpaths through St. Peter’s Churchyard to the south and east of the church, and (b) that should irreconcilable objections be duly lodged following the making of an order a further report be submitted to this committee.
594 (27) PUBLIC FOOTPATH 51, GOXHILL – Further to Minute 408, The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report seeking approval to submit a definitive map modification order to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
The committee had previously agreed to the making of two definitive map modification orders with respect this footpath. The first order was needed to add the correct line of the east-to-west section of the path to the definitive map and the second order was needed to delete the incorrect line.
The second order had not yet been made, its being contingent on the first order being made successfully. The first order had been made on 26 February 2004 and on being advertised attracted one objection.
The objection and the response to it were set out in appendices to the report.
It had been hoped that a meeting could be arranged to discuss the objection to the order with either the objector or his representative. Unfortunately, this had not proved possible, with both the objector and his representative choosing not to respond to the request for a meeting.
Resolved – That the “Definitive Map Modification (Public Footpath 51, Goxhill) Order 2004(1)” be sent to the Secretary of State for confirmation without modification.
595 (28) PROPOSED DIVERSION OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH 134, ELSHAM – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report seeking approval to divert a section of this path.
The order to divert a section of Public Footpath 134 would be made in the interest of the landowner. This was to enable him to secure his driveway over which the public footpath presently runs. The public should also benefit, as the proposed route would continue to run through the same wooded area, albeit on a modified line, and would create a direct link to a path within the church grounds.
The present section of Public Footpath commenced on Church Street and proceeded through a wooded area into the grounds of The Old School House before proceeding down the driveway to Front Street.
An appendix to the report showed the existing and proposed lines of the path.
The various interested parties and organisations had been consulted and none had indicated that they would object to the proposal.
Resolved – (a) That an order be made to divert the path in accordance with the report; (b) that if objections are duly made a further report be made to the committee; (c) that the Head of Planning and Regeneration be authorised to confirm the order if it is unopposed; (d) that a further order be made under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The intention would be to modify the County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement, and (e) that further report should be submitted to Members if this order is opposed.
596 (29) PUBLIC PATH DIVERSION ORDER 92, HAXEY – Further to Minute 389,the Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report seeking approval to the Secretary of State for confirmation.
Prior to consideration of the report, a representative of the applicant and an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).
The applicant’s representative stated that the objections related to three issues. Firstly the ownership of the land was disputed. He stated that the applicant owned the land on both sides. Secondly there was the issue of private rights of way over the track. However this was a separate issue. Thirdly it was alleged that damage had bee caused to a house by vehicles passing on the track. However the applicant had no intention of blocking the path. The correct process had been followed.
The objector stated that the path was not an isolated path but followed an old occupation lane. The Land Registry did not show the applicant to be the landowner and therefore the requirements of Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 had not been met. The public need for the path remained.
The committee, had in May 2003, authorised the making of an order to divert part of this footpath. The order had subsequently been advertised and had attracted six letters of objection before the objection period expired.
Of the six letters received, essentially three basic reasons to object to the proposed diversion emerged and these were summarised in the report.
Each of these points had been answered and each objector given the option of withdrawing their objection. None however had decided to do so.
Resolved – That consideration of this matter be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting.
597 (30)PUBLIC FOOTPATH 260, BARNETBY LE WOLD –MODIFICATION OF DEFINITIVE MAP AND STATEMENT – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report seeking approval to make two definitive map modification orders in respect of this path.
It had become apparent that there was an anomaly on the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way in that the line of the route depicted on the map was shown to pass through a number of properties along the northern length of South Street, Barnetby.
All affected landowners had been consulted and have expressed a desire to correct the anomaly.
Upon investigation evidence had been found which indicated the accepted route of the path for a significant amount of time prior to the relevant date of the Definitive Map of 1953.
Resolved – (a) That an order be made under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to modify the definitive map and statement by adding a public footpath along the line that corresponds to that which was possible to walk at the relevant date of the Definitive Map in respect of the north-west section of Public Footpath 260 Barnetby Le Wold; (b) that a further order be made under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to modify the definitive map and statement to delete the existing north section of Public Footpath 260 Barnetby Le Wold that is obstructed by buildings, and (c) that if duly served objections prevent the confirming of either order by North Lincolnshire Council, a further report be submitted to the committee.
598 (31) COUNTRYSIDE AND RIGHTS OF WAY ACT 2000 – PROVISIONAL MAP ISSUE IN EASTERN ENGLAND (AREA EIGHT) – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report advising the committee of the issue of the Provisional Maps of Open Country and Registered Common for North Lincolnshire.
Under the Act, the public was to enjoy a statutory right of access on foot to all land recorded as areas of open country or registered common. What constituted open country and registered common was subject to an appeal process carried out on an area-by-area basis. North Lincolnshire lay within Area Eight (Eastern England), the appeal process in respect of which was currently underway.
The Provisional Map of Open country for this area had been issued by the Countryside Agency on 7 June 2004.
Any appeals had to be registered with The Planning Inspectorate before midnight on 7 September 2004. In order to make an appeal at the provisional stage, the person making the appeal must have a legal interest in the land to which the appeal referred.
The provisional map stage was the second of three. The first stage was the issue of the draft map. Thirty one parcels of land within North Lincolnshire had failed to survive the draft stage. These had been omitted from the provisional map, therefore, because “The Countryside Agency had concluded that the land indicated is not open country”.
The North Lincolnshire parts of the provisional map were on display for inspection by the public throughout the appeal period.
All the public would enjoy a statutory right of access on foot to areas of open country and registered common. The right would take effect on publication of the third and final map. This would be known as the Conclusive Map.
North Lincolnshire Council would need to consider access to the areas of open country and registered common and how these areas might complement the existing public-rights-of-way network.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
599 EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC – Resolved – That the public be excluded from the meeting for consideration of the following item (minute 600 refers) on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph12 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
600 (32) BREACHES OF PLANNING CONTROL – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted reports asking members to consider the next steps in relation to two breaches of planning control. Each report set out the background and history in relation to each site and the options open to the committee.
(i) Land at West Butterwick
Resolved – That a prosecution be brought in the Magistrates’ Court.
(ii) Land at Owston Ferry
Resolved – (a) That the occupants of the site be encouraged to submit an application for the continued use of the site, and (b) that if no such application has been received within 6 months a prosecution be brought in the Magistrates’ Court.