northlincs.gov.uk

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 August 2004 as a correct record and authorise the chairman to sign.

4. Matters deferred from previous meeting for site visit –

(i) 04/1047 by Mrs A Dawson for the erection of a detached bungalow with integral garage (resubmission of 2003/0904) on land adjacent to 8 Palmer Lane, Barrow on Humber.

(ii) 03/1666 by Macltoob Ahmed for the redevelopment of a site by erecting 9 flats (one and two bedroom units) into blocks with central courtyard at 24 and 24a Gurnell Street, Scunthorpe.

(iii) 04/1093 for the erection of a replacement double garage at Bylands Cottage, Graizelound Fields Road, Haxey.

(iv) Public Path Diversion Order 92, Haxey.

5. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.

6. Applications for approval of Reserved Matters.

7. Appeals.

8. Enforcement Update.

9. Tree Preservation (Roman Way, Burringham Road, Scunthorpe) Order 2004.

10. Any other items, which the chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances which must be specified.

Notes: Reports are by the Head of Planning and Regeneration unless otherwise stated.

Minutes

PRESENT: – Councillor Long (Vice-Chairman in the chair).

Councillors Bunyan, Eckhardt, England, Fordham, Grant, Holgate, Kirk, Mrs Simpson ,Whiteley and Wood.

Councillors Mrs Sidell and Stewart attended the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b).

The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

601 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: –

The following members declared that they had been lobbied –

602 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 11 August 2004, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chairman.

603 (33) MATTERS 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) 04/1047 by Mrs A Dawson for the erection of a detached bungalow with integral garage (resubmission of 2003/0904) on land adjacent to 8 Palmer Lane, Barrow – upon – Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).

She stated that the existing garage on the site was an eyesore and would be demolished and replaced by a garage more in keeping with its surroundings. There would also be parking space within the site. The bungalow would not be within the Conservation Area. The site was currently waste ground which was difficult to maintain. The bungalow would have the appearance of a barn conversion. Only one fruit tree would have to be removed Further planting would be carried out and the hawthorn hedge on the site would be retained. The development was proposed to raise money for the maintenance of the applicant’s property, a Listed Building. The proposal would enhance the street scene.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration pointed out that the issue was whether or not the proposal accorded with Policy H7 relating to backland development

Moved by Councillor Eckhardt and seconded by Councillor Holgate –

That permission be granted

Motion Lost

Moved by Councillor Kirk and seconded by Councillor Whiteley

– That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

Motion Carried

(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 and 24(a), Gurnell Street, Scunthorpe.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(iii) 04/1093 by Mr M Pinney for the erection of a replacement double garage incorporating a games room in the roof space at Bylands Cottage, Graizelound Fields Road, Haxey

Prior to consideration of this application, a representative of the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e). She stated that the development would have no adverse impact on the neighbouring property as it would be similar in scale to that property.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised the committee that the main issue was the potential impact on the neighbouring property. There were two rear facing dormer windows proposed. The proposed building would have the appearance of a dwelling.

The committee, however, considered that the proposal would have no undue impact on the adjacent property as it would be comparable in size .

Resolved – That permission be granted.

(iv) PUBLIC PATH DIVERSION ORDER – PUBLIC FOOTPATH 92, HAXEY

Prior to consideration of this matter, 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 objectors had raised three issues. Firstly, in relation to the issue of ownership of the path the applicant owned the land on either side. According to common law it was therefore assumed that he owned the path up to the mid point from either side. Secondly with regard to the issue of any private rights to vehicular access, these would be unaffected by the diversion of the public right of way. Thirdly with regard to the need for the diversion, damage was being caused to the applicant’s property by farm vehicles passing close to it. Walkers were not currently using the definitive line of the path. There had been no objections from the Rambler’s Association or the Lincolnshire Field Paths Association.

The objector claimed that there was no justification for the diversion. Any damage to the applicant’s property was not being caused by pedestrians. The diversion would set a precedent.

Councillor Stewart, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke against the order. He stated that the applicant would have been aware of the existence of the path when he purchased the house. There was no reason to divert it.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration reminded the committee that the existence of any private rights of access was a separate issue.

Members were of the opinion that, since the existing line of the path was not being adhered to, there was obviously a need to divert.

Resolved – (a) That the order be submitted to the Secretary of State with a recommendation that the order be confirmed, and (b) that, should the order be confirmed, a further order be made under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to modify the definitive map in consequence of the diversion.

604 (34) 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) 04/0782 by Dr S M Ahmed for the variation of conditions 3 (use of building) and 5 (parking) of permission 2002/1213 in order to allow the minister to reside at the premises and to extend the hours of parking provision from 9 pm to 11 pm between the months of May to September at Ahmadiya Mosque,
53 Cliff Closes Road, Scunthorpe .

Prior to consideration of this matter, 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 proposal would minimise inconvenience. Cars would be parked later in the evening in the summer months when daylight lasted longer. In the absence of the permission, cars would park on the road which would cause more inconvenience. Users of the mosque had kept noise to a minimum. Allowing one person to live on the premises would not significantly increase traffic.

The objector stated that it was not necessary for the minister to reside on the premises. The permission had been granted on the basis that it was intended that a small number would visit the mosque on foot. The mosque had already led to an increase in traffic and visitors to the property. Most of the occupiers of nearby properties were elderly and some were ill. Therefore they should not be disturbed late in the evening. The applicants had initially accepted the conditions which had been imposed to protect the amenities of the nearby residents.

Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(ii) 04/1002 by Wiltshire Rhodes Ltd. for the erection of 4 terraced town houses on Plots 1 – 4, adjacent to 1 Godnow Road, Crowle

The Head of Planning and Regeneration reported an additional late representation from two objectors who were concerned at the demolition of an existing building on the site and the impact this might have on the party wall at the rear of the building. They had asked if planning permission was required for this. The Head of Service advised that planning permission was not required but the approval of Building Control was required. The Building Control Team was checking whether the wall had been left in a stable condition. In his opinion the site was suitable for this purpose being a “brownfield” site within the development boundary.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject also to an additional condition preventing any additional windows in the north-east or south-west facing gables.

(iii) 04/1027 by Mr P Jackson for the erection of three terraced houses on land opposite 8-12 Chancery Lane, Crowle.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(iv) 04/1034 by Mr A Havercroft (deceased) for outline permission for the erection of one dwelling on land adjoining 99 Victoria Road, Barnetby.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report

(v) 04/1113 by Mr S Whall for the erection of a detached dwelling and a detached dwelling and a detached double garage on land adjacent to Lindum, Horsegate Field Road, Goxhill.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(vi) 04/1146 by Mr R Robinson for outline permission for the erection of two semi-detached houses at 21 Maltkiln Lane, Elsham.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report

(vii) 04/1150 by Mr T Sleight for outline permission for erection of a detached house on Plot 2, Cherry Tree Farm, Johnsons Land, Crowle.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(viii) 04/1165 by Mr and Mrs T Dixon for the removal of condition 2 of permission 2004/0541, requiring the kitchen, bathroom and dressing room openings in the south-facing rear elevation to be fitted with timber sliding sash windows, at 42 North Street, Crowle.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(ix) 04/1178 by Mr and Mrs M Turner for the erection of an extension and making of alterations to a dwelling at 4 Moorwell Road, Bottesford.

Prior to consideration of this matter, a representative of the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e). He stated that the proposal had been designed by a professional architect. The extension would lie mainly over the footprint of an existing building. There would be little loss of light to neighbouring properties and there would actually be fewer rear windows than at present. In response to objector’s claims that the proposal would constitute over-development he stated that modern developments often had smaller gardens then had been the case in the past.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(x) 04/1303 by Mr G Allenby for the erection of a cattle shed at 146 Westgate Road, Belton.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

(xi) 04/1379 by Mr J Myland for the erection of a first floor extension to the front and rear of the property at 21 Blow Row, Epworth.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

605 (35) APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS FOLLOWING THE GRANT OF OUTLINE PERMISSION – 04/0698 by Barton Town Football Club relating to Outline Permission 1999/0070 dated 25/04/2001 for the erection of 12 dwellings on land at Marsh Lane, Barton – upon – Humber – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report informing members about this 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).

Prior to consideration of this application, an objector and a representative of the applicants addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 35 (e).

The representative of the applicants stated that the club was looking to renew an existing approval. The club had existed since 1927 and was seeking a replacement for a 45 year old wooden club house. The proposed development would fund this.

The objector referred to a petition of objection submitted by over 300 residents. The land had been a playing field for over 100 years. The development would involve the removal of a hedgerow and would cause problems through car parking and increase the risk of traffic accidents. The sewerage system in the locality was over capacity.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised the committee that the issues raised by the objectors had been considered when outline permission had been granted. The principle of development on the site had been established.

Resolved – That approval be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

606 (36) APPEALS – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report on the outcome of the following appeals.

607 (37) 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 – That the report be noted.

608(38) TREE PRESERVATION (ROMAN WAY, BURRINGHAM ROAD, SCUNTHORPE) ORDER 2004 – The Head of Planning and Regeneration submitted a report requesting that consideration be given to confirming this order made on 18 March 2004.

A landowner had objected to the order stating that the trees were over mature, damaged and not worthy of preservation. He had also asserted that the trees blocked sunlight.

Having examined the trees the council’s Environment Officer (Trees and Landscape) had confirmed that all were in good health and met the relevant criteria required for a TPO.

Applications to carry out work to the trees had been received from two landowners. Without protection residents might well be inclined to remove trees from this screen. This would be detrimental to local amenity.

Some of the trees could be removed for tree management reasons. Done properly this would benefit the future development and vigour of the remaining trees. It would also go someway toward meeting the objection about loss of sunlight.

Resolved – That the order be confirmed.