northlincs.gov.uk

Councillors Todd (vice-chair), Holgate, Long, Rocks, Mrs Simpson, Whiteley, Wardle and Wood.

Councillor Metcalfe attended the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 40 (b).

The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

362 COUNCILLOR ELLIS – Councillor Rocks referred to the fact that this was the chair’s final meeting. He was not standing for re-election and would retire as a councillor on 5 May. Councillor Rocks and other members paid tribute to Councillor Ellis. Councillor Ellis responded appropriately thanking members and officers for their support during his term of office.

363 DECLARATIONS OF PREJUDICIAL AND NON-PREJUDICIAL PERSONAL INTERESTS AND DECLARATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) –

The following member declared a non – prejudicial personal interest as set out below.

Mr A Broome (Business Manager – Development Control declared a non -pecuniary interest in Minute 369, (Application 2003/0198)

364 REQUESTS TO SPEAK – PROCEDURE RULE 36(e) – It was reported that eight 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.

365 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 4 April, 2003, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.366 (80) 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.

367 Resolved – That the following applications be approved in accordance with the recommendations contained in the reports.

(i) 02/1435 by Mr D Revis for the erection of three timber poultry sheds at Approach Farm, Sandtoft Road, Epworth.

(ii) 02/1806 by Hugh Bourn Homes for the erection of 3 detached houses, 8 detached bungalows and 2 pairs of semi – detached houses on Plots 91, 93 – 102, 105, The Willows, Hopfield, Hibaldstow.

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

(iii) 02/1877 by Mrs A Roulstone for the extension of the existing caravan storage area onto adjoining pastureland at Cedar Farm, Stone Lane, Burringham.

(Prior to consideration of this application, a representative of the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). He stated that the site had been operating successfully for three years. The site was well run and met local and national needs).

(iv) 03/0310 by Airwave MMO2 for erection of a 20m high telecommunications monopole and associated equipment within fenced compound at M R S Transport Services Unit, 19/20 Hoylake Road, South Park Industrial Estate, Bottesford.

(Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). She stated that she was concerned that the proposed pole was close to residential properties. She believed that that masts should be shared. Concerns were expressed regarding future levels of radiation.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that the site was in an industrial site, some distance from residential properties. The other masts in the vicinity were not designed to cope with additional equipment. The application had been accompanied by the appropriate certificate in respect of emissions.)

368 Resolved – That the following applications be refused in accordance with the recommendations contained in the reports.

(i) 03/0079 by Mr S Woollas for the erection of a detached house and garages (substitution of house type previously approved under 2/95/0740) on land at Belton Road, Sandtoft.

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

The objector stated that he and his fellow objectors had no objection in principle to a dwelling on the site. However the proposed building would be of such a scale that it would be totally out of character with its surroundings and would spoil the rural landscape. Some windows would overlook the objector’s property causing a loss of privacy. The proposed garages were also of an excessive size.

The applicant stated that the site was a large plot of land which he had purchased in order to build a large house. The plans could be amended to reduce the number of windows and resite the garages.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that the recommendation for refusal was based on the scale, form and design of the house).

(ii) 03/0256 by Mrs R King for the erection of a two-bedroom bungalow (demolition of existing terrace and outbuildings) at 34 Chapel Lane, Keadby.

Councillor Metcalfe, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of provisions of Procedure Rule 40 (b) spoke against the application. She stated that the proposed bungalow was inappropriate in this location. It would cause a loss of light and privacy to the neighbouring property.

369 02/1134 by Mr K Clarke – Biffa Waste Services ltd for variation of conditions 2 and 3 of permission 7/140/96 dated 10/06/1997 to allow revision of restoration contours and an increase in waste input etc. at Roxby Landfill Site, Winterton Road, Roxby.

The Director of Environment and Public Protection reported receipt of a late petition of objection from residents of Dragonby. He stated that he considered the scheme to be acceptable The outcome for local people would be an improvement on the scheme for which permission had been given in 1996.

Resolved – (a) That after considering the application and the environmental information submitted with it, the committee is minded 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 covering the means of transporting waste to the site, annual rates of filling, restoration and aftercare, employing or funding the employment of a warden for the country park, building a visitor centre and securing long term public access; (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, subject to (i) the amendment of condition 3 to read ” The infilling of Roxby Gullet hereby permitted shall be by non – putrescible, non -hazardous industrial by-product wastes and domestic, commercial and industrial wastes only” and (ii) the insertion of the drawing number BIF/ROX/PAB/02RevisionA in condition 5, and (c) that if the obligation is not completed by 31 July 2003 the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning) be development on the local road network, the lack of adequate proposals for restoration, after-use, management of and long-term access to the site.

03/0198 by North Lincolnshire Council for the erection of a school kitchen/dining room with associated car parking facilities at Sir John Nelthorpe School, Grammar School Road, Brigg.

Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). He stated that he had no objection in principle to the development. However, he objected to the location and structure of the proposed building. It had originally been proposed to build on the site of the old refectory and cricket ground.. This would have been acceptable. The building would be very close to the objector’s property. The roof pitch was too high and would cause a loss of visual amenity to the objector. None of the proposed conditions would address his concerns.

The Director reminded members that they needed to consider the application as submitted rather than the earlier proposals. The loss of recreational land concerned was not sufficient to warrant refusal The proposed building was sufficiently far enough away from residential properties.

Resolved – (a) That the committee is minded to grant permission for the development; (b) that the application be referred to The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in accordance with statutory procedures to enable him to consider whether or not he wishes to intervene, and (c) that in the event of the ODPM deciding not to intervene the decision be delegated to the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning) be given delegated authority to grant permission, subject to the conditions contained in the report.

370 03/0203 by North Lincolnshire Council for the erection of a single -storey building for use as an adult learning centre and associated car parking at Grange Lane North, Scunthorpe.

Resolved – (a) That the committee is minded to grant permission for the development; (b) that the application be referred to The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in accordance with statutory procedures to enable him to consider whether or not he wishes to intervene, and (c) that in the event of the ODPM deciding not to intervene the Assistant Director (Regeneration and Planning) be given delegated authority to grant permission, subject to the conditions contained in the report.

371 03/0171 by Mr P J Brumpton for the erection of a commercial workshop at 46 South View, Broughton

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting.

372 (81) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Director of Environment and Public Protection 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.

373 (82) SURVEY OF PARISH AND TOWN COUNCILS – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing the committee of the results of a survey undertaken in early 2003.

As part of the pilot Best Value Review of Development Control in 1999 parish and town councils had been surveyed for their views on how the consultation process on planning applications was operating. Subsequently, one of the performance indicators in the team’s service plan had related to the overall level of satisfaction with the service. A survey was undertaken every other year to enable comparisons to be made.

A questionnaire had been issued to every parish or town council or meeting and a very good response level had been achieved. A schedule of the results and appropriate responses was appended to the report.

Resolved – (a) that copies of the survey results be circulated to all parish and town councils, with thanks for the high response rate, and (b) that the responses contained in Appendix B to the report be approved..

374 (83) THE TREE PRESERVATION – 3 WHITECROSS STREET (BARTON UPON HUMBER) ORDER – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report inviting members to confirm this order. The order had been made to protect an Ash tree in the garden of 3 Whitecross Street. The owners had objected. However the council’s Environment Officer (Trees and Landscape) had re-examined the tree and confirmed the health of the tree and that it met the relevant criteria required for an order to be confirmed.

Resolved – That the order be confirmed.

375 (84) CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISALS AND SUPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report seeking the adoption of the appraisals and guidance as interim policy statements for use in assessing planning applications affecting conservation areas. A review had been undertaken of the character of the Council’s Conservation Areas. The review had produced statements of each area’s character and draft Supplementary Planning Guidance for each.

External consultants had reviewed the Council’s seventeen conservation areas. They had produced Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance for each area made up of two documents for each.

Recommended to Council – (a) That the draft Supplementary Guidance for each conservation area be adopted as an interim policy statement; (b) that the additions to conservation areas recommended in the documents be regarded as land affecting the setting of existing areas; (c) that the documents be used as character statements.