northlincs.gov.uk

Chairman: Councillor Collinson
Venue: International Room, Pittwood House, Scunthorpe
Time: 2 pm

AGENDA

1. Substitutions.
2. Declarations of Personal and Personal and Prejudicial Interests, significant contact with applicants, objectors or third parties (Lobbying) and Whipping Arrangements (if any).
3. To take the minutes of the meetings held on 24 May and 1 June 2007 (Planning Policy) as a correct record and authorise the chairman to sign.

PLANNING MATTERS

4. Applications deferred from previous meeting for site visit.
5. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.
6. Enforcement Update.
7. Proposed Changes to the Planning Applications Fees Regulations.
8. Changes to Householder Permitted Development Rights.

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

Note:

1. Reports are by the Service Director Highways and Planning unless otherwise stated.
2. Extracts from the relevant legislation in respect of item 9 are available on request from Colin Wilkinson, Environment Team, Church Square House, Scunthorpe Telephone 297391.

Minutes

PRESENT: Councillor Collinson (Chair).

Councillors Whiteley (vice chair) Armitage, Bainbridge, Barker, B Briggs, Eckhardt, England, Grant, Sidell and Wardle.

Councillors Gosling, O’Sullivan and Regan attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37 (b).

The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

927  DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS, SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) AND WHIPPING ARRANGEMENTS (IF ANY)

The following member declared a personal and prejudicial interest:

Member	Minute	Application	Nature of Interest
Cllr Barker	930 (iii)	2007/0504	Member of Crowle Town Council

The following members declared personal interests : –

Member	Minute	Applications	Nature of Interest
Cllr B Briggs	930 (xi)	2007/0714	Knew applicant
Cllr Sidell	930 (x)	2007/0689	Member of Barton Town Council
Cllr Collinson	930 (iv)	2007/0507	Knew objector

The following members declared that they had been lobbied:

Member	Application
Cllr B Briggs	2007/0714

928  MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 24 May 2007, having been printed and circulated among the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chairman.

929  (13) APPLICATIONS DEFERRED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING –In accordance with the decisions at the previous meeting, members had undertaken site visits on the morning of the meeting. The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted reports and updated them orally.

(i) 07/0337 by Mr and Mrs Stannard for outline planning permission to erect a detached house with integral garage, (means of access and landscaping not reserved for subsequent approval) at land adjacent to Southfield, Stothards Lane, Goxhill.

Discussion took place on the problems with flooding in the area, and whether a two storey dwelling would cause overshadowing for neighbours.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report with the addition of the following conditions:

10. Any dwelling erected on this site shall be single-storey construction only.

Reason
In the interests of visual amenity and to comply with policies DS1 and H5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

11. The existing open dyke along the northern boundary shall be culverted in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the dwelling.

Reason
In the interests of visual amenity and to comply with policies DS1 and H5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

(ii) 07/0387 by Mr J D Oxby for planning permission to retain a single storey extension at 7 Fairfield Road, Scunthorpe.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.

The objector stated that there had been no consultation with neighbours before work had been done, the extension was larger than would be allowed within permitted development rights and caused overshadowing. The materials used were inappropriate.

Councillor O’Sullivan, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke on this application.

The Head of Planning stated that the extension was 5.9 m³ over permitted development rights, but that as the extension was on the north side of the property the overshadowing of the adjacent property was not unacceptable. The issue of the drainage of grey water must however, be addressed and was stipulated in the conditions.

It was proposed that the wall adjacent the neighbouring property’s conservatory be lightened to mitigate its overshadowing effect.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report with the addition of the following condition.

2. Within three months of the date of this permission, the south-facing wall along the party boundary with no. 5 Fairfield Road shall be painted in a light reflecting colour to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason
In the interests of visual amenity and to comply with the provisions of policies DS1 and DS5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

930  (14) PLANNING APPLICATIONS – The Service Director Highways and Planning 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.

(i) 07/0484 by Broughton Parochial Church Council for outline planning permission to erect dwellings, at former Bishop Burton College, Brigg Road, Broughton.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.

The objector had concerns about the height of the proposed development and the potential impact on neighbouring properties.

Discussion took place on the number of proposed dwellings and also on the access onto Brigg Road.  Concerns were also raised regarding the height of the plot and water run off.

The Head of Planning stated that the application was for outline planning permission and that matters of density would be addressed in the subsequent reserved matters application and would also clarify the type of access required.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject to the amendment of condition 8 and the addition of a further two conditions:

8. (replacement)

No development shall begin until details of the private driveway, including drainage and lighting arrangements, have been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and no dwelling on the site shall be occupied until the private driveway has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Once constructed the private driveway shall be retained.

Reason
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policies T2 and T19 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

12. Any dwelling erected adjacent or close to the western party boundary (adjacent to no. 22 Brigg Road) shall be of single-storey construction only.

Reason
In the interests of visual amenity and to comply with policies DS1 and H5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

13. Any application for approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by a detailed assessment of existing and proposed finished floor levels and ground levels.

Reason
In the interests of visual amenity and to comply with policies DS1 and H5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

(ii) 07/0501 by Advocate Dev. Ltd for planning permission to erect three dwellings, at the Orchard adjacent The Nutshell, Chapel Lane, Scawby.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.

The applicant’s agent stated that every attempt had been made to address villagers’ concerns and a sympathetic design was proposed. Agreement had been reached to protect the village green and the only impact on the dry stone wall would be a 4 m driveway opening. A landscaping scheme was planned in consultation with the Village Design Statement and a grey water drainage system was to be installed.

The objector stated that the residents of Scawby were opposed to the proposals as they would detract from the character of the village, alter the appearance of the village green and cause overlooking for neighbouring properties. There was an alternative preferable access which the applicant had disregarded.

The Head of Planning stated that the proposed access would not impact on the green itself and that three dwellings could be acceptable and even complementary within a conservation area in a minimum growth settlement.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.

Councillor Barker, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest left the meeting for consideration of the following item.

(iii) 07/0504 by Mr P Haigh for planning permission to convert a former Methodist School into three starter homes, at Methodist School Room, Fieldside, Crowle.

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

Councillor Barker returned to the meeting.

(iv) 07/0507 by T-Mobile UK Ltd for planning permission to install a telecommunications mast comprising an 18.0m high monopole (to replace an existing floodlight) supporting three antennas (contained within a shroud) together with ground based equipment cabinets and ancillary development, at south east side of Heslam Park, Ashby Road, Scunthorpe.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.

The objector stated that there was a 230 signature petition against the application, residents were concerned about the health risks, the visual impact and property values. A previous application had been refused.

Councillor Gosling, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke on this application.

The Head of Planning stated that the application met the necessary criteria and a floodlight already existed on the site. Previous applications, whilst being relevant, did not mean any subsequent proposal should be refused and the application had to be determined on its own merits.

Resolved – That the application be refused, because in the opinion of the local planning authority, the erection of the proposed mast with antennas would be visually intrusive within the context of the Heslam Park Rugby Club and would have a detrimental effect upon residential amenity contrary to the provisions of policy DS19 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

(v) 07/0522 by Mrs J Cole for planning permission to retain UPVC windows and doors to rear of property, at 9 Church Farm Mews, Burton Stather.

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

(vi) 07/0561 by Mr and Mrs R Lamb for planning permission to retain a loose box and to erect a single domestic garage, at The Fold, King Street, Goxhill.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant and an objector addressed the committee.

The objector stated that the objection was based on the fact that the property no longer had smallholding status. Pigs and sheep had not been present since 1996, when the objector built a bungalow in the adjacent field.  In 2006 four horses were placed on the land, and the front garden contained chickens, a tractor and children’s play equipment. There was a manure heap 9 m from their living room, and the activities were unsuitable for a village centre.

The applicant stated that he had been registered with Defra as a smallholding for 17 years, and the buildings had always been occupied. The objector had built their bungalow with full knowledge of the activities on the site. The loose box was to comply with animal welfare legislation for an aged pony, all the ponies were for private family activity and consultation had taken place with Environmental Health.

The Head of Planning stated that although the location of the smallholding was unusual in the centre of the village, there was a large garden and the property was set well back. The issue of manure was addressed within the conditions.

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

(vii) 07/0583 by Ms J Dibdin for planning permission to erect a new detached dwelling with attached garage, at land adjacent 23 Hillcrest Drive, Burton upon Stather.

Prior to consideration of this application a supporter and an objector addressed the committee.

The objector stated that many residents were opposed to the application, the public parking for the viewing area would be lost, and there would be an infringement on footpath 170. The proposal went against North Lincolnshire Local Plan policies DS5, DS1 and LC13. Residents did not object to some form of development but felt that the present application was not in keeping with the area.

The applicant’s representative stated that the application met all the design standards criteria and had been designed in consultation with neighbours and an architect. Most of the objections were about the loss of view but that was not a material consideration, the same view was available from the public viewing area and there would be no loss of amenity.

Councillor Regan, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke on this application.

The Head of Planning confirmed that the loss of a view was not a material consideration, and Highways did not have a problem with access. The committee had to determine the application in terms of its impact on the street scene.

Resolved – That the application be refused because the proposed scheme would result in a cramped form of development that would be detrimental to the appearance of the overall street scene contrary to the provisions of policies H5 and DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan. Furthermore, the proposed development would not enhance the street scene, being forward of the building frontage along the north side of Hillcrest Drive.

(viii) 07/0585 by Mr D Houchin for planning permission to demolish a two storey dwelling, garage block and pole barn and erect a new detached dwelling with attached stable block and detached garage block, at Eastfield Farm, Ulceby Road, Wootton.

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

(ix) 07/0641 by J Bartley for planning permission to erect a domestic workshop, at 1 Oak Grove, Barnetby le Wold.

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

(x) 07/0689 by Keith Ready & Co for planning permission to erect four linked dwellings at rear of 3-4 Market Place, Barton on Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.

The objector stated that he was speaking in the public interest, the land in question was a public highway and a previous application had been withdrawn because ownership was in dispute. Documents could be produced recording a Deed of Gift in 1967 and there was evidence that the land had been maintained by Barton Urban District Council.

Discussion took place on the site and its narrow access.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.

(xi) 07/0714 by North Lincs Property Holdings Ltd for planning permission to erect a detached house and detached double domestic garage (resubmission of 07/0226), at Plot 14, The Adway, Battle Green, Epworth.

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

(xii) 07/0820 by T-Mobile (UK) Ltd for determination concerning the prior approval for the siting and appearance of a telecommunications installation comprising a 15m high timer monopole tower supporting two antennas (contained within GRP shroud) together with ground based equipment cabinets and ancillary development (resubmission of application 07/0420), at Main Street, Bonby.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.

The objected stated that there was a 387 signature petition against the proposal. The proposed site was too close to houses and the school and more suitable sites were available. Health issues were paramount and it would be an intrusion on the landscape.

Councillor Cawsey, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke on this application.

Discussion took place on the appropriateness of the site and the proposal’s impact on the visual amenity.

Resolved – That the application be refused because the erection of the proposed mast would be visually intrusive within the landscape of this part of Bonby. The mast would therefore be contrary to the provisions of policies DS19 and LC10 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

931  (15) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a schedule giving details of progress in respect of matters on which he had taken enforcement action under delegated authority.

Resolved – That the report be noted.

932  (16) PROPOSED CHANGES TO PLANNING APPLICATIONS FEES REGULATIONS – The Head of Planning submitted a report informing members of proposed changes announced by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government about alterations to the fees regulations relating to planning applications.

Central Government had undertaken a review of the planning fees that had to be paid by a developer upon submission of an application for planning permission to the local authority.The Government had employed consultants to investigate the existing arrangements and had now issued a white paper as a consultation document asking for opinions and views on proposed changes.

Representations about the consultation should be received by 17 August 2007.

The proposed changes were:

• the basic fee for a planning application should be increased by either 23 per cent or 40 per cent across all fee increments
• an increase of 7.5 per cent of fees for householder developments
• removal of the maximum fee cap (currently £50,000)
• introduction of a new £25 fee for the discharge of conditions on  householder development
• introduction of a new £85 fee for the discharge of conditions on non-householder development
• introduction of discretionary pre-application fees for Planning Performance Agreements.

Three possible options and the financial implications of the proposals for North Lincolnshire Council were set out in the report. The financial estimates did not, however, take into account the fact that Central Government was also, at the same time, considering amending the General Permitted Development Order which would remove a significant number of householder applications from the planning system.

Concerns were expressed that developers would pass increased costs on to purchasers, and that an increase of 40 per cent was too high.

Resolved – (a)That Central Government be advised (i) that this council supports the increase in planning fees as set out in Option 3 in the report, but does not consider it justified, for financial reasons, for Option 2 to be pursued, (ii) that any increase in planning fees should be introduced as soon as possible and not left until 1 April 2008, and (iii) that in future annual increases in planning fees should be introduced as a matter of course to reflect changes in the national inflation rate.

933  (17) CHANGES TO HOUSEHOLDER PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS – The Head of Planning submitted a report to inform members of the proposed changes to the householders’ permitted development rights and regulations put forward by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in May 2007. The Secretary of State had put the paper out for public consultation for 12 weeks expiring on 17 August 2007.

The consultation paper set out Government’s proposals for changes to the planning system in relation to householder permitted development rights. Permitted development was develop­ment that could be undertaken without the need for a planning application to be submitted for determination by the local planning authority. It was suggested that the revised system would deliver a more permissive regime than existed at present and remove the need for a planning application in many cases.

At present approximately 320,000 householder planning applications were submitted annually within England and this represented a doubling of the number of such applications in the last ten years. Householder applications accounted for up to 50 per cent of all planning applications submitted to authorities for determination.

The rationale behind the government intervening in the process was that some developments that currently required an application for planning permission were deemed to have no significant impact. A considerable amount of staff time and resources were required by the local authority to process such applications, as well as the time taken by the applicant to prepare the paperwork. It was proposed, therefore, to reduce the overall number of developments that required consent by removing those that were deemed to have no, or only minimal impact, from the system. This should reduce the costs in dealing with householder developments and ensure that planning officers focused on much more strategically important, or contentious issues, or those which had a wider public benefit or interest. There would be a loss of fee income to the council from a reduction in the number of planning applications for householder development.

Further details and the financial implications were set out in the report and its appendix.

Discussion took place on potential problems during implementation of the new scheme. No date had been set for commencement.

Resolved – (a) That the contents of the report to be noted, and (b) that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government be advised that in principle the reduction in the number of applications to be submitted for householder developments will enable the local authority to divert scarce staff resources into the determination of planning applications that have a more significant impact on the local and national environment and economy. However the reduction in fees income associated with the reduction in the number of applications must be addressed by the Government in the introduction of a new planning fees regime.

934  (18) PUBLIC FOOTPATH 172 AND NEARBY SNICKETS, BURTON UPON STATHER – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking approval to modify the definitive map and statement in respect of four footpaths in the Hillcrest Drive, Linton Rise and Westover Drive area of Burton upon Stather.

Three footpaths had been identified that it was believed should be added to the definitive map and statement; and one further footpath already on the definitive map (but not the statement) had been identified that it was believed should be omitted.

The four footpaths were located in the same vicinity as shown on Appendix One of the report. Two of the footpaths (those between Hillcrest Drive and Linton Rise, and Linton Rise and Westover Drive) were already recognised by North Lincolnshire Council as being highways maintainable at public expense.

Although the footpath between Hillcrest Drive and Public Footpath 170 was not currently shown in the list of streets, the evidence in support of including the footpath in the definitive map was considered sufficient to warrant an order being made. An order was made by the Secretary of State for Transport under the Town and Country Planning Act 1962 dated 22 September 1967. This order served two purposes: (1) to close Public Footpath 172 to enable the development of Hillcrest Drive, Linton Rise and Westover Drive to proceed; and (2) to create an alternative footpath by way of compensation. The majority of the latter was to follow pavements alongside parts of Hillcrest Drive and Barnston Way. Additionally, though, a snicket was to link Hillcrest Drive with Public Footpath 170. This would pass between 5 Hillcrest Drive and 2 Normanby Road to its east and 7 Hillcrest Drive to its west.

The terms of the 1967 order were such that Public Footpath 172 would not be stopped up till the new footpath had come into being. In turn, the new footpath would only come into being once Lindsey County Council had certified that the developer had provided to their reasonable satisfaction a new highway over the course indicated on the order plan by a hatched black line. The footpath physically existed to this day and had a well-maintained tarmacked surface.

Resolved – (a) That approval be given to make under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 four orders modifying the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement”: (1) three orders adding footpaths, these being: i) between Hillcrest Drive and Linton Rise, ii) between Linton Rise and Westover Drive and iii) between Hillcrest Drive and Public Footpath 170 (i.e. routes A, B and C in Appendix One); and (2) one order deleting Public Footpath 172 in its entirety (i.e. route D in Appendix One), (b) that orders that do not attract objections or representations duly made be confirmed by North Lincolnshire Council, and (c) that orders that do attract objections or representations duly made, unless withdrawn in writing beforehand, be the subject of a further report to Planning Committee to clarify North Lincolnshire Council’s stance in the light of those objections or representations.

935  (19) CLOSURE OF PART OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH 1, ALKBOROUGH – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking approval to close a section of Public Footpath1, Alkborough.

Planning permission (PA/2004/1955) was granted on 7 July 2005 for the managed realignment of tidal defences consisting of various elements including a 20 metre breach in the existing tidal defence; an overspill weir; and a one kilometre length of new tidal defence.

The Environment Agency had indicated that during certain times, a stretch of Public Footpath 1, Alkborough could flood and become dangerous. The footpath was currently subject to a temporary closure order. This expired on 30 October 2007.

An order made under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 could not be confirmed unless it was considered expedient to do so having regard to the extent, if any, to which it appeared that the path would, apart from the order, be likely to be used by the public. Also having regard to the effect which the extinguishment would have as respects land served by the path, account being taken of the provisions as to compensation contained in section 28 of the Highways Act 1980.

Public Footpath 1 was approximately 3,000 metres long, of which only 750 metres are being considered for extinguishment, as shown in Appendix 1 of the report. The small loss of public footpath would be compensated by the creation of approximately 5,440 metres of new footpath. This was in addition to improvements to be carried out to other footpaths in the immediate area.

Resolved – (a) That an extinguishment order be made under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980, (b) that should no objections or representations be duly made, or any so received are withdrawn, authority be granted to confirm as an unopposed order, (c) that if objections or representations are received and not withdrawn, a further report be submitted to Planning Committee to establish North Lincolnshire Council’s stance in the light of those objections or representations, and (d) that if the order is confirmed, then authority be granted to make a further order under section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 modifying the definitive map by deleting the relevant section of Public Footpath 1, Alkborough.

936  (20) CREATION OF PUBLIC FOOTPATHS AT ALKBOROUGH – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking approval to enter into a creation agreement, under section 25 of the Highways Act 1980, with the Environment Agency and Natural England to add approximately 5,440 metres of public footpath to the definitive map.

Planning permission (PA/2004/1955) was granted on 7 July 2005 for the managed realignment of tidal defences consisting of various elements including a 20 metre breach in the existing tidal defence; an overspill weir; and a one kilometre length of new tidal defence. The planning permission included an Environmental Impact Assessment, which included the provision of new public footpaths, which were shown on Appendix One of the report.

The creation of the new paths was in line with the North Lincolnshire Local Plan: “Policy R5 seeks to secure better access to the open countryside, which will significantly enhance informal recreation opportunities”.

Resolved – (a) That a creation agreement be entered into with both the Environment Agency and Natural England under section 25 of the Highways Act 1980, and (b) that following the creation of the paths, a further order be made to modify the definitive map by adding the relevant footpaths to it.