Planning Committee – 8 March 2002

MINUTES

PRESENT: – Councillor Ellis in the chair.

Councillors Fordham (vice-chair), Gosling, Holgate, Long, Rocks, Wardle, Whiteley and Wood.

Councillors Appleyard, T Muir, Regan and Smith attended the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38(b).

The committee met at the South Killingholme Community Centre,

162 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTERESTS AND DECLARATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) – Councillor Gosling declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 01/1606 (Minute 168 refers)

163 REQUESTS TO SPEAK – PROCEDURE RULE 36(e) – It was reported that seven 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.

164 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 8 February 2002, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.

165 APPLICATIONS 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.

(80) 01/1603 by Mr J Leake for the erection of an extension to form a snooker room at 1 Thornholme Drive, Bottesford.

Prior to consideration of this matter, an objector and a representative of the applicant addressed the committee under the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).

The objector claimed that the proposed building would be too large for its location and would be out of scale with the surroundings. It would contravene Policy DS5 of the North Lincolnshire Draft Local Plan. As the properties to the east were on a lower level it would exacerbate an existing surface water drainage problem. Also, there would be no space between the building and the objector’s fence to allow for maintenance of the fence.

The applicant’s representative stated that the application site was located within the development limit for Bottesford and therefore there was a presumption in favour of development. The application did not offend against policies DS1 and DS5 of the Draft Plan. There was no indication that there would be any overlooking or loss of privacy.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that, whilst the extension would be quite large, it was on a large plot. The part that would be visible from the neighbouring properties would be the roof. The extension replaced most of an existing conservatory, although it was larger overall. The building would not be out of keeping with its surroundings.

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

166 (81) 01/1047 by Lacoste for Conservation Area Consent to demolish buildings in a Conservation Area at Corner of Queen Street/West Street, Winterton.

Councillor Smith, attending the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38 (b) and with the consent of the committee commented on this application and on 01/1121 (Minute 167 refers).

The Director of Environment and Public Protection informed members that a late letter of representation had been received in respect of this application and 01/1121. This raised points that were covered in the report.

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

167 (82) 01/1121 by Lacoste for erection of ten detached dwellings at Corner of Queen Street/West Street, Winterton.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject to an amendment to Condition 4 to include the word “garaging” as well as parking and turning.

168 (83) 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) 00/0178 by Mr I Stone for excavation of a fishpond and change of use of kennels to a fishermen’s rest room at Marshlands, Pasture Road North, Barton-upon-Humber.

(Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). He claimed that the application was retrospective, as the applicant had already chopped down trees on the site. There was a permissive path on the objector’s land adjacent to the site and walkers would be in danger if the applicant were to carry out shooting on the site as he did on other parts of his land. The works would damage the access road to the objector’s property. There was no provision for parking on the site to accommodate the angler’s cars. The objector also queried where the water would be brought from.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that the points raised by the objector were covered in his report. The site was in the Clay Pits area and the there had been close liaison with English Nature throughout, who were happy with the proposal. There was no application for shooting on the site. The pond would fill naturally over time.

(ii) 01/0804 by North Killingholme Storage Ltd for use of land for the use of inert waste, sorting and recycling prior to re-sale or disposal off site on land on the north side of Lancaster Approach, North Killingholme.

(iii) 01/1378 by A Kokkini for the change of use of store rooms to residential and erection of a first floor bedroom extension and erection of a three bedroomed house at 25 High Street, Barton-upon-Humber.

(iv) 01/1575 by Mrs P Long for outline permission for erection of a dwelling on Plot adjacent to 8 Church Lane, Sheepdyke Lane, Bonby.

(v) 01/104 by Mr R l Gammidge for change of use of a dwelling to a hotel (renewal of 96/1990) at White Lodge, Main Road, Melton Ross.

(vi) 01/1606 by J Wharton Shipping Ltd for erection of a new storage shed and an extension to existing storage shed at grove Wharf, Neap House Road, Gunness.

(vii) 02/0003 by Lamming Construction Ltd for erection of a two-bedroomed detached bungalow and garage on Plot 1, junction of Chancel Road/Cambridge Avenue, Bottesford.

(viii) 02/0021 by Mr B Barraclough for consent to prune four horse Chestnut trees covered by Tree Preservation order (Pigeoncote Lane, Goxhill) at All Saints Churchyard, King Street, Goxhill.

(ix) 02/0043 by A Ruddy and L Oates for erection of extensions to form two bay windows in front elevation at Sunnyside, North End, Goxhill.

(x) 02/0044 by Mr and Mrs R Hopkins for the erection of a two-storey domestic extension at 41 High Street, Burringham.

(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 indicated that he did not object to the extension but had concerns that the applicant was able to construct a hobby workshop/shed in his garden as shown on the plan accompanying the application, as permitted development under the General Development Order. The applicant’s representative indicated that as the workshop/shed was not part of the application under consideration he did not wish to respond).

(xi) 02/0091 by Mr B Green for permission to make alterations and extensions to an existing dwelling at Stoneholme, 17 Main Street, Saxby-all-Saints.

169 01/1495 by Mr P Chappill and Mrs C Chappill-Bright for erection of a detached house with a conservatory and detached garage, demolition of a store building partly built and retention of a small store on plot adjacent to 23 Eastfield Road, Barton-upon-Humber.

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 applicant indicated that the site currently had the benefit of permission for a detached house. An immediate neighbour had no objections to the application. The house would be at the front of the site and would not overshadow or overlook adjoining properties.

The objector claimed that the existing permission was for a 3-bedroomed bungalow. The present proposal was for a house of an unacceptable size and height for its location. Five nearby properties were occupied by elderly persons who would be disturbed by noise from children at the property and who would suffer loss of privacy.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that the plot was an infill plot and therefore there was no objection in principle to development on the site. The proposed building was well designed but was of an unacceptable size being one storey higher than the building the subject of the existing permission and would therefore be out of keeping with its surroundings).

Moved by the Chair and seconded by the Vice-Chair –

That the application be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.

Moved by Councillor Long and seconded by Councillor Wood as an amendment –

That the application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to the meeting.

Amendment Lost
Motion Carried

170 02/0028 by J Wharton (Agriculture) Ltd for outline permission to erect dwellings including the demolition of 34 Stather Road (resubmission of 01/1021) at 32, 34 and 36 Stather Road, Burton-upon-Stather.

(Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36(e). She stated that an earlier proposal had been for seven dwellings whilst the present one was for an unspecified number. Any additional properties would exacerbate a subsidence problem on the escarpment. They would also increase pressure on both drainage systems and roads in the vicinity).

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

171 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 at the request of the applicant in order for him to submit a revised plan.

172 01/1516 by Doncaster and South Humber NHS Trust for erection of buildings to house acute mental health inpatient services to be relocated from Ward 18, Scunthorpe General Hospital.

Resolved – (a) That the council is mindful to grant permission for the development; (b) that the application be referred to the Secretary of State in accordance with statutory procedures to enable him to consider whether or not he wishes to intervene; (c) that in the event of the Secretary of State deciding not to intervene, the decision be delegated to the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning), and (d) that the permission so granted be subject to the conditions contained in the report and to conditions to be advised by the Highways Team in the interests of road safety.

173 01/1607 by ACIS Group Ltd for erection of 10 2-bedroomed bungalows with roadways and services on land opposite Rose Cottage, Belton Road, Epworth.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36(e).

The objector claimed that the road adjacent to the site was an “accident blackspot” situated on a blind bend. The proposal would generate additional traffic thereby adding to the danger especially as there could be a second phase of the development of up to 10 further dwellings. The site had a history of refusals on highway safety grounds. The term “affordable housing” was now meaningless as it was now open to virtually anyone. The proposal would change the appearance of the entrance to the town. There was a footpath running through the site which would need to be diverted. The Planning Obligation was not permanent as the applicant could apply to have it revoked after five years.

The applicants’ representative stated that the applicant company was a non-profit making organisation. The applicants had done a lot of work to ensure that the scheme was acceptable to the Highways Team and had designed it in accordance with the team’s advice. It was possible that a “Phase 2” could be built at a later date but this would consist of no more than four dwellings. There would be no access to the field to the north of the site. The view of the entrance to the town currently consisted of an industrial estate and prefabricated buildings and the proposal would actually improve this. The houses would use local materials and would be built in the vernacular style.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection advised members that the local plan allowed for exceptions to its policies on housing on the basis of provision of affordable housing. There was an identified local need for this type of housing. The footpath would need to be diverted to enable development to take place but that would be done under a separate procedure.

Moved by the Chair and seconded by the Vice-Chair –

(a) That the committee is mindful to grant permission for the development subject to the completion of a formal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring the dwellings hereby approved to be retained in perpetuity for occupation by persons local to Epworth or the surrounding area as low cost affordable homes; (b) that the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning) be authorised to grant permission upon completion of the obligation subject to the conditions contained in the report, and (c) that if the obligation is not completed the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning) be authorised to refuse the application on the grounds that the requirements of policy H.13 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan Revised Deposit Draft have not been fulfilled.

Moved by Councillor Holgate and seconded by Councillor Wardle as an amendment –

That the application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to the meeting.

Amendment Lost
Motion Carried

174 02/0027 by Voyager Pub Group Ltd for outline permission for residential development consisting of three dwellings on site adjacent to Mayflower Close, The Cross Keys Inn, Top Road, South Killingholme.

Moved by Councillor Wardle and seconded by Councillor Wood –

That the application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to the meeting.

Motion Lost

Moved by the Chair and seconded by the Vice -Chair –

That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report

Motion Carried

(Councillor Wardle wished to be recorded as dissenting from the above decision (Minute 173 refers)).

175 02/0034 by Voyager Pub Group Ltd for outline permission for residential development consisting of three dwellings on land north side of The Cross Keys Inn, Top Road, South Killingholme.

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

(Councillor Wardle wished to be recorded as dissenting from the above decision (Minute 174)).

176 02/0098 by Orange Personal Communications Ltd for determination concerning prior approval of the siting and appearance of a telecommunications mast with associated equipment at Copse 170m south of Dorset Close East, Burton – upon – Stather.

Councillors T Muir and Regan, attending the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38(b) and with the consent of the committee spoke against this application.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection reminded members that the matter had initially been considered at the December 2001 meeting (Minute 121 refers) at which it had been determined that prior approval was necessary and this had been refused until alternative locations had been investigated. The applicant company had subsequently investigated alternative sites and had found them to be unacceptable. The proposal was in accordance with all relevant Local Plan policies and National Guidance.

Resolved – That prior approval is not required.

177 (84) APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS FOLLOWING THE GRANT OF OUTLINE PERMISSION – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members about two applications for approval of reserved matters which were 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 – That approval be granted for the following applications in accordance with the recommendations contained in the reports.

(i) 01/1162 by Axgro Foods Ltd in respect of outline permission 98/1295 for 33 dwellings etc. on land off West street, West Butterwick

(Note: the Committee was advised that an objector had requested to speak on this application but being unable to attend this meeting had requested that the application be deferred. The Director of Environment and Public Protection informed members that the points raised by the objector were addressed in his report).

(ii) 02/0064 by Mr J Hastings in respect of outline permission 01/1011 for erection of a detached bungalow.

178 (85) APPEALS – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members of the outcome of the following appeals: –

(i) Against the refusal of outline permission for the erection of a single dwelling at The Old Orchard, Main Street, Gunthorpe – Application 01/0267 – Appeal Dismissed.

(ii) Against the refusal of outline permission for the erection of a detached dwelling on land adjacent to Glebe Farm, High Street, Wroot – Application 01/0688 – Appeal Dismissed.

(iii) Against the refusal of outline permission for the erection of two detached houses on land to the rear of 12 Vicarage Gardens (fronting Church Lane), Scunthorpe – Application 01/0803 – Appeal Dismissed.

(iv) Against an Enforcement Notice in respect of Boundary Wall, 30 West End, Winteringham – Appeal Upheld, Enforcement Notice quashed, Scheme for rendering and colourwashing the eastern face of blockwork to be submitted within one month, work to be carried out within two months of agreement to the scheme.

179 (86) PLANNING GREEN PAPER – “DELIVERING A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE” – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members about the Government Green Paper and inviting the committee to agree a response to the document.

Resolved – That the report be noted and submitted, with any necessary additional information, to Council for consideration.