northlincs.gov.uk

PRESENT:  Councillor Collinson (Chair).

Councillors Armitage, Bainbridge, Barker, Carlile, B Briggs, Bunyan, England, Glover, Grant, C Sherwood, Wardle and Whiteley.

Councillors Cawsey and Smith attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 1.37(b).

The committee met at The Angel Suite, Market Place, Brigg

1099  DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS, SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) AND WHIPPING ARRANGEMENTS (IF ANY)

The following members declared personal interests: –

The following members declared that they had been lobbied:

1100  MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 3 December 2008 having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.

1101  (48) 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 Head of Planning submitted reports and updated them orally.

(i) 08/0364 by Keigar Homes Ltd for the erection of 14 dwellings with associated garaging, parking and access road on land at and to the rear of 59 West Street, Winterton.

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

The objector stated that the report ignored advice from English Heritage and the council’s Environment Team. To grant permission would make a mockery of the conservation area designation. The application had no regard to the character or amenity of the area. The density of the propose development would be too high. The development would form a cul-de-sac which was contrary to policy. Apart from three dwellings on the entrance to the site, the remainder of the dwellings would be of a typical modern appearance. There were other sites available in Winterton, outside the conservation area. The site was near a dangerous bend in the road, which was heavily congested at peak times.

The applicant’s representative stated that three of the dwellings would have the character of estate cottages in a nineteenth century North Lincolnshire  vernacular. Reclaimed stone would be used and the cottages would have chimney stacks and clay pantiles. The street scene would be enhanced by the development. The bungalows to be demolished dated from the 1970’s and added no value to the conservation area. The development would be a short distance from the centre of the town and on a bus route. The were no objections from the Highways team. There was adequate car parking provision within the site. Conservation areas were not exempt from development and the site was within the development limit for Winterton.

Councillors Cawsey and Smith, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) addressed the committee on this application.

Members were concerned about the traffic situation, the density of the proposed development and the impact on the Conservation Area.

Resolved – That permission be refused for reasons relating to density, road safety and the effect on the conservation area.

(ii) 08/0365 by Keigar Homes Ltd for conservation areas consent to demolish an existing dwelling and outbuilding at 59 West Street, Winterton.

Councillor Smith, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) addressed the committee on this application.

Resolved – That consent be refused on the grounds that the demolition of this bungalow is unjustified and fails to meet the provisions of policy HE3 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

(iii ) 08/1413 by Mr R Neish for the erection of 2 detached dwellings with detached garages and associated access/turning and parking facilities on land adjacent to 30 High Street, Burton-upon-Stather.

Prior to consideration of this application a representative of objectors addressed the committee. He was concerned that there was a difference of land levels between the site and neighbouring properties which would lead to overlooking and loss of light to neighbouring properties.

Councillors Cawsey and Smith, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) addressed the committee on this application.

Members were concerned that the development would constitute over development, that the access was inadequate and the potential impact on neighbouring properties.

Resolved – That permission be refused for reasons relating to over-development, the impact on adjoining properties, and access.

(iv) 08/1150 by Ms L Anderson-Smith for a change of use to site 15 touring caravan pitches with associated access road, erection of a single-storey toilet/shower block and creation of a nature pond on land at The Grange, Brigg Road, Howsham, Cadney.

Prior to consideration of this application a representative of objectors addressed the committee. He was concerned that the proposal would lead to a road safety hazard and would overload the sewage disposal system causing an odour nuisance and health hazard.

The Head of Planning reported that the Highways Team had now indicated that they would wish to see an additional condition requiring the hedgerow adjacent to the site frontage to be reduced in height to aid visibility. He also recommended a further additional condition requiring details of the foul water disposal arrangements to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject also to  additional conditions relating to highway safety and disposal of foul water.

1102  (49) PLANNING APPLICATIONS – The Head of 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) 08/0977 by Mr and Mrs M Firth for the erection of a replacement dwelling and detached domestic garage (including demolition of existing dwelling and outbuildings) at Poplar View, Soff Lane, Goxhill.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee. He was concerned at the potential mix of residential and business uses in the area. Previous applications on the site had been refused.

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

(ii) 08/1464 by Criterion Asset Management for outline permission for two detached dwellings (appearance and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval) on land rear of 18 Low Street, Haxey.

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

(iii) 08/1465 by Mr I Fisher for the erection of an extension to an existing garage and construction of a new access off Northfield Road, including blocking up the existing access at 44 Northfield Road, Messingham.

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

(iv) 08/1472 by Mrs Bloomfield for the erection of single-storey extensions to front and rear, raising of roof height and installation of dormer windows to front and rear at 28 Commonside, Westwoodside.

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

(v) 08/1670 by Mrs C Muscroft for the variation of condition 9 of permission 04/0616 to allow permanent occupation of a mobile home to be then tied to the existing equestrian enterprise on the site, at Battlefield Stud, Woodhouse, Belton.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent addressed the committee. He stated that the financial viability of the business had already been proven in relation to previous applications.

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

1103  (50) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Head of 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.

1104  (51) THE TOWN AND CCOUNTRY PLANNING (TREES) (AMENDMENT) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2008 AND AMENDED GUIDANCE ON TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS –The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report informing members of changes to the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) regulations (the regulations), and amended guidance concerning TPOs issued by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

The main changes were the formalisation of electronic submission of TPO applications through the Planning Portal and a new legal requirement for submission of applications for tree work by a standard statutory application form.

In addition, the Regulations now required the submission of specific arboricultural reports for trees considered by applicants to be unsafe and, where trees were alleged to be causing subsidence; structural engineers reports, level monitoring and/or crack monitoring, costs of repair and identification of trees by root identification and/or DNA testing.

The way in which councils determined applications was also prescribed.  To the extent that applications must now be determined on an evidential basis this prescription followed best practice and should be supported. Additional procedures would however, be necessary because of this prescription. For example if additional information was deemed necessary following a site inspection this must be requested within a reasonable time, or if necessary information was not available upon the submission of an application or was not provided upon request, then an application should be returned or (following validation) refused.

The Planning Inspectorate (PINs) would now deal with appeals through the Fast Track system as currently used for High Hedges and householder developments. The new model form of order would not contain information about appeals for anyone served with an order and it was for councils to provide that information.

The report set out the full implications of the Regulations and Guidance for the council in respect of dealing with applications for and appeals in respect of Tree Preservation Orders.

Resolved – (a) That the changes to the TPO procedures introduced by the new regulations be noted, and (b) that the new procedures to meet with these and with publicity matters as described in Section 4 of the report be endorsed and agreed.