Planning Committee – 26 July 2002
PRESENT: – Councillor Ellis in the chair.
Councillors Todd (vice-chair), Holgate, Long, Rocks, Mrs Sidell, Mrs Simpson, Wardle and Whiteley.
Councillors Appleyard, Mrs Bromby, Clark, Mrs Metcalfe and Smith attended the meeting under the provisions of Procedure Rule 38(b).
The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.
227 DECLARATIONS OF PREJUDICIAL AND NON-PREJUDICIAL PERSONAL INTERESTS AND DECLARATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) – The following members declared non-prejudicial interests in the matters listed below:
Member Minute No Subject and Nature of
Councillor Rocks 232 (x) Application 02/0677
Councillor Ellis 232 (x) Application 02/0677
Councillor Rocks 232 (xii) Application 02/0777
Councillor Whiteley 231 Application 02/0367 (Member of Bottesford
Councillor Mrs Sidell declared that she had been lobbied in respect of application 02/0643 (Minute 232 (viii) refers).
228 REQUESTS TO SPEAK – PROCEDURE RULE 36(e) – It was reported that five 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.
229 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 28 June 2002, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.
230 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 reports and updated them orally.
(14) 02/0244 by Mrs J Chand for the erection of a ground floor extension to form a bedroom and shower facility for a disabled person at 6 Hilltop Avenue, Scunthorpe.
Prior to consideration of the application a representative of the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e). She argued that the personal needs of the applicant should outweigh the policy objections to the proposal.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that the proposal would normally be refused on the basis that the length of the proposed extension would be excessive and would restrict daylight to the neighbouring property. However the proposal was for use by a disabled person and there were no objections from neighbours.
Resolved – That permission be granted.
231 (15) 02/0367 by Mr and Mrs North for alterations and erection of extensions to a dwelling to provide larger bedrooms and kitchen and erection of a double garage at 26 Holme Lane, Bottesford.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that, whilst there had been no objections to the alterations to the bungalow, there had been an objection to the garage element of the application on the basis that, as the garage would be on a raised front garden area, it would be visually intrusive and would restrict light to the objector’s property. The Director stated the proposed garage would be some 10 metres from the nearest window of the adjoining property, a distance considered adequate for single storey proposals. Whilst there could be some overshadowing of the front garden later in the day, this would not justify refusing permission. However, members considered that the proposed garage would be visually intrusive and would have an adverse effect on the neighbouring property.
Resolved – That permission be refused on the grounds that the garage would be out of character with its immediate surroundings and would have an adverse effect on the living conditions of the adjoining property to the east, because of its elevated and prominent position in front of the dwelling.
232 (16) 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) 01/0947 by Mrs A Vora for the retention of the use of an existing domestic garage as two en suite bedrooms.
(subject to an amendment to Condition 1 to read “Occupation of the two bedrooms the subject of this permission shall cease after three months unless the parking spaces at 34 Victoria Road, approved under permission 02/0700 on 9 July 2002, have been constructed and, once completed, these spaces shall be kept available at all times for use by guests or staff.”)
(ii) 01/1582 by Merryvale Development for residential development including the
demolition of 20 Earlsgate (amended scheme) on land to the rear of Earlsgate/Northlands Road South, Winterton.
(Prior to consideration of this application an objector and a representative of the applicants addressed the committee in accordance with Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The objector was concerned that vehicular access would be via a busy road and the resultant increase in traffic would create congestion and an increased risk of accidents. He was also concerned that the development would lead to a loss of privacy for his property.
The applicants’ representative stated that the access arrangements had been changed at the request of the council’s Highways Team which was happy with the proposed arrangements. Screening to ensure the privacy of neighbouring properties could be considered at the Reserved Matters stage.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection confirmed that the proposed access arrangements had been changed at the instigation of the Highways Team as the original access had been too close to a junction. The question of boundary treatment was covered by the proposed condition 14. Whilst security was a valid consideration, in his opinion the development would actually improve it).
(iii) 02/0077 by Mr R Jebb for retention of 2 log cabins; one to be used as holiday accommodation and the other as staff accommodation at Orchard House Farm, Mill Lane, Brigg.
(iv) 02/0531 by Mr and Mrs Bennett for variation of Condition 2 of permission 98/0374 to allow an increase in the number of caravans stored from 20 to 45 at Roxton, West Marsh Lane, Barrow Haven.
(v) 02/0563 by North Lincolnshire Council for the erection of an extension to an existing family centre at Family Resource Centre, West Street, Scunthorpe.
(vi) 02/0619 by Keigar Homes Ltd for the removal of Condition 5 of permission 01/0318 and the construction of a 1.8 m high brick wall to the east of Plot 1, Park Street, Winterton.
(subject to an additional condition relating to the provision of access and parking)
(vii) 02/0636 by Mr A Rastrick for the erection of a detached dormer bungalow and garage (amended dwelling type to that approved under permission 00/0294) on Plot 3, The Hill, Worlaby.
(viii) 02/0643 by Sunshine Fine Art Ltd for the erection of an extension to an existing factory at Sunshine Fine Art Ltd., Humber Road, Barton-upon-Humber.
(subject to an additional condition preventing obstruction of the loading and unloading area)
(ix) 02/0666 by Credential Lincolnshire Ltd. for variation 18 of planning permission 98/0426 dated 18/01/99 in relation to the submission of surface water drainage details by replacing the words “within 12 months of the date of decision” with “prior to the commencement of development” at Kirton-in-Lindsey Quarries, Gainsthorpe Road, Hibaldstow/Kirton -in -Lindsey.
(x) 02/0677 by Mr T Mills for the erection of a rear conservatory at 16 Cliff Drive, Burton-upon-Stather
(xi) 02/0739 by Mr N Ferris for erection of a domestic extension at 47 High Street, Belton.
(xii) 02/0777 by Mr A Ellerby for change of use from agricultural to temporary siting of a Sunday market on Field, Redbourne Mere, Kirton-in-Lindsey.
233 01/1567 for the discharge of a planning obligation requiring that the premises be allocated to persons resident or connected with the parishes of Hibaldstow, Redbourne or Scawby, and excluding the elderly (relating to permission 7/1050/88).
Resolved – That the request be refused.
234 02/0501 by Mr I A Proctor for outline permission to erect a dwelling at Outgate, Ealand, Crowle.
The Director of Environment and Public Protection stated that the proposal was contrary to Policy H3 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan Revised Deposit Draft and whilst, on its own, the development of the site might not be significant, the cumulative effect, if repeated elsewhere, would be to erode the strategy contained in the Plan.
Resolved – (a) That the committee is minded to grant permission, and (b) that a decision be deferred to enable officers (i) to request the applicant to submit a flood risk assessment and (ii) to prepare a report on appropriate conditions.
235 02/0798 by Mr and Mrs Owen for the amendment of dwelling type from a bungalow to a detached house (previous application 02/0140)
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until the next meeting and that members visit the site prior to the meeting.
236 (17) APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS FOLLOWING THE GRANT OF OUTLINE PERMISSION – 02/0672 by Messrs Green and Hawkins in respect of Outline Permission 99/1303 to erect 1 detached 3-bedroomed bungalow with garage and 1 detached 2-bedroomed bungalow with associated access road on site rear of Crowgate and Greystone, New Road, Worlaby – The Director of Environment and Public Protection submitted a report informing members about an 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 an application for reserved matters.
Resolved – That approval be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
237 (18) 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 permission for residential development on land bordered by Low Road, Top Road and Main Street, Worlaby – 98/0124 – Appeal Dismissed and Application for Costs Rejected.
(ii) Against the refusal of permission for a 3 – bedroomed detached bungalow on land east of The Rectory, Church Street, Amcotts – 01/1053 – Appeal Dismissed.
(iii) Against the refusal of consent to fell one Ash and two Sycamore trees protected by a tree preservation order on land at Eagle House Nursing Home, Fleetgate, Barton-upon- Humber – 01/1219 – Appeal Dismissed.
(iv) Against the refusal of permission for the erection of 3 flats and a maisonette to the rear of a property with associated access and 1 flat above an access way (resubmission of 01/0656) – 15/17 Queen Street, Epworth (01/1465) – Appeal Dismissed and Application For Costs Refused.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
238 (19) 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.
239 (20) STATISTICS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS – APRIL – JUNE 2002 – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report informing members of the council’s performance in handling planning applications in the second quarter of 2002.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
240 (21) DEDICATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY – EPWORTH YEALAND FLATS – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report seeking approval to dedicate a new footpath at Yealand Flats, Epworth and to add the route to the definitive map. The Yealand flats agricultural holding was situated on the northern edge of Epworth and was owned by the Council. Approval had been granted for the development of a Social Housing Scheme on the southern part of the site (min 173 refers).
Discussions had been held between the Directorates of Education and Personal Development and Environment and Public Protection with a view to dedicating a new right of way from the A161 in Epworth along the northern edge of the proposed Social Housing site before connecting with Public Footpath 52. It was proposed that the path to be dedicated would be 2.5 metres wide and would significantly contribute to the visitor management strategy being developed around the Isle of Axholme Greenway.
The new route to be created was wholly within the Agricultural Land Holding of North Lincolnshire Council and would not adversely affect the needs of agriculture or forestry in the area.
Recommended to Council – (a) That approval be given to the dedication of a new Public Footpath on its land holding at Yealand Flats, and (b) that the necessary definitive map modification be made adding the route to the definitive map and statement.
241 (22) CHURCH LANE TO CLARKES ROAD, NORTH KILLINGHOLME – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report seeking approval to add a 106 metre long public footpath to the County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement.
The Council, as surveying authority had a statutory duty to keep the definitive map and statement under continuous review.
Evidence had come to light to show that a right of way existed that should be added to the Definitive Map.
Recommended to Council – That a Modification Order be made to add an approximately 106 metre long public footpath to the County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement.
242 (23) SANDY LANE, BARTON -UPON -HUMBER – RESULT OF PUBLIC INQUIRY – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report informing members about the recently received decision letter relating to the local public inquiry into whether a public footpath had been dedicated by the landowner over Sandy Lane at Barton -upon -Humber.
Recommended to Council – (a) That the report be noted, and (b) that the issues referred to in paragraphs 3.3 and 3.4 of the report be the subject of a further report.
243 (24) APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH 74, EPWORTH – The Director of Environment and Publication Protection submitted a report inviting members to consider an application to divert part of this footpath.
Prior to consideration by the committee an objector and the applicant addressed the committee in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 36 (e).
The objector claimed that the applicant had no right to seek the diversion as he did not own the land over which the new line of the path would run. There was no reason to divert the path in the interests of the public as the existing path ran in a straight line.
The applicant stated that, from when he bought the property in 1977 until recently, no-one had used the existing line of the path but the “permissive path” which had been the subject of an earlier application for a diversion (Minute 149 refers) had been widely used. The legal line of the path had now been made available and a bridge constructed at the applicant’s expense. He believed that he did own the land over which the diversion would run but this issue was currently being investigated.
Recommended to Council – (a) That the report be noted, and (b) that a further report be submitted to the committee once the issue of land ownership has been resolved or in six months time, whichever is the earlier.