Planning Committee – 24 May 2007
Chairman: Councillor Collinson
Venue: Council Chamber, Pittwood House, Scunthorpe
Time: 2pm
Agenda
- Substitutions.
- Declarations of Personal and Personal and Prejudicial Interests, significant contact with applicants, objectors or third parties (Lobbying) and Whipping Arrangements (if any).
- To take the minutes of the meeting held on 25 April 2007 as a correct record and authorise the chairman to sign.
Planning matters
- Applications deferred from previous meeting for site visit
- Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.
- Applications for approval of reserved matters.
- Enforcement Update.
Public Rights of Way matters
- Reports for determination by the committee.
- Any other items, which the chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances which must be specified.
Note:
- Reports are by the Service Director Highways and Planning unless otherwise stated.
- Extracts from the relevant legislation in respect of item 8 are available on request from Colin Wilkinson, Environment team, Church Square House, Scunthorpe.
Minutes
PRESENT: Councillor Whiteley (Chair).
Councillors Armitage, Bainbridge, Barker, Briggs, Bunyan, Davison, Eckhardt, England, Grant, and Wardle.
Councillors T Foster, O’Sullivan, Poole, Redfern, Sidell and Smith attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37(b).
The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.
912 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:
| Members | Minute | Applications | Nature of Interest |
| Cllr Barker | 921 | BOAT 21 | Member of Crowle Town Council (applicants) |
| Cllr Briggs | 915 (ix) | 2007/0635 | Object to proposal |
| Cllr England | 914 (iv) | 2007/0188 | Previous declared support for applicant |
The following members declared personal interests:
| Members | Minute | Applications | Nature of Interest |
| Cllr Armitage | 915 (vii) | 2007/0453 | Member of Town Council |
| Cllr Barker | 914 (x) | 2007/0718 | Member of Crowle Town Council and know applicant |
| Cllr Bunyan | 919 | Footpath 229 Broughton | Member of Broughton Town Council |
| Cllr Davison | 915 (ii) | 2007/0235 | Ward Member |
| Cllr Grant | 915(ii) | 2007/0235 | Ward Member |
| Cllr Wardle | 916 (i) | 2007/1534 | Member of Barrow Parish Council and know applicant |
| 916 9(ii) | 2007/0124 | Member of Barrow Parish Council and know applicant |
The following members, attending the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37 (b), declared the following personal interests:
| Members | Minute | Applications | Nature of Interest |
| Cllr Sidell | 914 (i) | 2007/0296 | Member of Barton Town Council |
| Cllr Redfern | 915 (ix) | 2007/0635 | Member of Belton Town Council |
The following members, attending the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37 (b), declared the following personal and prejudicial interests:
| Members | Minute | Applications | Nature of Interest |
| Cllr T Foster | 914 (iv) | 2007/0188 | Supporter of applicant and Ward Member |
| Cllr Poole | 914 (iv) | 2007/0188 | Supported application |
The following members declared that they had been lobbied:
| Member | Application |
| Cllr Grant | 2007/0387 |
913 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 25 April 2007, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chairman.
(914) (1) 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) 07/0296 by Copperfield Developments AP Ltd for planning permission to erect 26 one and two bedroom apartments together with communal facilities, including the demolition of 13 and 15 Pasture Road, outbuildings and sheds at land between and to the rear of 13-19 Pasture Road, Barton upon Humber.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant and an objector addressed the committee.
The applicant advised that the dwellings were specifically for people aged over 55. He believed that people preferred to live locally as they grew older but had to move away because of lack of facilities. He stated that the existing site was run down and the proposal would restore the conservation area. Frontage properties would be sympathetically refurbished. There would be ample parking facilities for residents and no additional traffic hazards created.Neighbouring properties would not be overlooked.
The objector stated that he was speaking on behalf of the residents of Pasture Road. He hoped that the site visit undertaken had highlighted the residents’ concerns regarding traffic hazards in the area. The proposal was not in keeping with the surrounding area.
Councillor Sidell, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b), spoke on this application.
Councillor Sidell stated that there was a major problem with access, as the proposal was sited on a difficult bend.She felt that emergency services vehicles could have problems with accessing the site. She also expressed concerns over the proposed bin store for the apartments and the height of the development.
The Head of Planning stated that the scheme was appropriate for the area and was in keeping with its surroundings.There had been no objections received from Highways with regard to accessing the site. This was a revised application and he felt that all issues previously highlighted had now been addressed.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(ii) 07/0297 by Copperfield Developments AP Ltd for conservation area consent to demolish 13 and 15 Pasture Road and the outbuildings and sheds to the rear of the building at land between and to the rear of 13-19 Pasture Road, Barton upon Humber.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant addressed the committee.
The objector asked the committee if they would approve the application if they lived opposite the development.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(iii) 07/0269 by Mr and Mrs D Spencer for planning permission to erect a two-storey extension to the rear of an existing detached house and a detached domestic garage with alterations to existing access (resubmission of 2006/1757) at Torridon, Howe Lane, Goxhill.
Councillor Wardle stated that although he had no problem with the proposal for the extension, he did have concerns over the proximity and size of the garage in relation to the neighbouring property.
The Head of Planning advised that the proposal was for a traditional, average sized, brick built garage, which had no adverse impact on the neighbouring property.
There being an equality of voting, the Chairman used his second and casting vote on this matter.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Councillor England, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest, left the meeting for consideration of the following item.
(iv) 07/0188 by Klassic for planning permission to change the use of agricultural land to a sports and recreational facility at land south of Ings Road, Kirton in Lindsey.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the proposed site had very poor access, which was unsuitable for a high volume of traffic and dangerous to pedestrians. There was no appropriate area for dropping off and collecting children. There were also no close links to public transport.
The applicant’s agent stated that the proposal was to the benefit of the community and the site was perfect for recreational facilities and would enhance the life of the local residents.The applicant had, over the past four years, researched possible sites for the development and purchased this site as the most suitable. There would be ample car parking to the site.
Councillor T Foster, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b), spoke on this application.
Councillor Foster stated that he supported the application, the applicant was very dedicated and well organised and there was a demand for such a facility in the area. The proposed site was the only appropriate location available.
Councillor Foster then left the meeting, having previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item.
The Head of Planning stated that he was not against provision of the facility but had concerns over the access to the chosen site and the impact of movement of individuals and traffic.
Councillor Poole, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b), spoke on this application.
Councillor Poole stated that he also supported the application, and felt that the applicant should be applauded for attempting to create facilities for the community. He asked if temporary planning permission could be granted, in order to monitor the effect of access to the site.
Councillor Poole then left the meeting, having previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item.
The Head of Planning advised that temporary permission could be granted where minimum expense would be incurred. Although the requested permission for change of use would be appropriate for temporary permission, he felt that provision of car parking and fencing would have financial implications.
There being an equality of voting, the Chairman used his second and casting vote on this matter.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Councillor England returned to the meeting.
07/0395 by Mr and Mrs M Thompson for planning permission to erect a two-storey domestic dwelling at land off Darby Road, Burton upon Stather.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.
The applicant’s agent stated that the development should be considered to be in the hamlet of Darby and should be maintained for the preservation of the historic connection for the area. As the applicant’s business was nearby, the employer required one or more workers to be available on site at all times. The employer and his family would reside in the dwelling.
Councillor Smith, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b), spoke on this application.
Councillor Smith stated that he supported the application; he felt that although the site was outside development boundary, the application satisfied the financial criteria as it provided three family members with employment. The parish council believed that the development would enhance the entrance to the village and the local economy would benefit from the business.
The Head of Planning stated that this was a new development, as there was very little of the original cottage remaining.The application was outside the development boundary and did not satisfy the criteria for development in open countryside.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
915 (2) 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) 04/1262 by NPW Estates for outline planning permission for residential development at CLS Scunthorpe, Queensway, Scunthorpe.
The Head of Planning requested that this application be deferred in order for further discussion to take place with the applicant.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred.
(ii) 07/0235 by Bottesford with Ashby PCC for outline planning permission to erect 10, two bedroom dwellings and associated car parking with new access from Leven Road (to include demolition of Church Hall) (layout and means of access not reserved for subsequent approval).
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation in the report.
(iii) 07/0337 by Mr and Mrs P 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.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.
The objector stated that she was speaking on behalf of her son, who was the neighbour of the applicant. The proposed measurements of the dwelling were incorrect, light would be blocked to her son’s property, as well as his garden and conservatory being overlooked. She was also concerned about possible subsidence of a drainage dyke when the driveway to the property was constructed.
The Head of Planning stated that the dimensions of the building were correct and although the drainage ditch did make the site tighter, the dwelling was to be sited as far away as possible from the neighbour’s property.
Councillor Wardle suggested that a site visit would be useful.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.
(iv) 07/0363 by Mr A Cheffings for planning permission to erect two, two storey flats (resubmission of 2006/1778) at rear of 1a Queen Street, Barton upon Humber.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(v) 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 the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.
The applicant’s agent stated that her client did not apply for planning permission as he intended that the extension would be built within his permitted development rights. However, there had been a communication breakdown between his builder and the building control department, which had resulted in the extension being larger than originally anticipated.
The objector stated that the applicant did not discuss the proposal with his neighbours.The builders had removed the boundary fence without his permission.He had concerns over a drain that had been built on his property and the fact that the bricks used for the extension were not in keeping with the rest of the property. The extension devalued his property.
The Head of Planning stated that the impact on the neighbour’s property was to be considered, all other criteria had been satisfied. The drain cover had been built on the neighbour’s land and if permission were granted, it would be on condition that all facilities were in the applicant’s control within two months.
Councillor O’Sullivan, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b) spoke on this application.
Councillor O’Sullivan stated that the extension was overbearing and overshadowed the neighbour’s property.
Councillor Grant suggested that a site visit would be useful.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.
(vi) 07/0390 by G & W Developments for planning permission to erect one block of 111 apartments at 44-54 Dunstall Street, Scunthorpe.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the original application was for 55 units on the site, which was acceptable; the proposal now doubled the number of units.Although she had no objections to the development of the site, she had concerns over high density living, and lack of security to the site. The number of proposed car parking spaces would also cause major problems.
The applicant’s agent stated that a marketing exercise had been carried out and there had been insufficient interest in the proposals in the previous application submitted. This application was a re-organisation of the floor space; the appearance of the building would be unchanged. The proposal was for quality, affordable units.
Resolved – That permission be refused, due to lack of car parking and inadequate security system.
(vii) 07/0453 by Mr S Williamson for outline planning permission to erect three detached dwellings and detached garage block (layout and access not reserved for subsequent approval) at plot adjacent to Greenacres, High Street and Stone Lane, Burringham.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(viii) 07/0490 by Mr R Barratt for planning permission to erect a block of four flats at rear of Ferry Road Club, Ferry Road, Scunthorpe.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.
The applicant’s agent stated that the proposal comprised four good quality flats on a previously developed brown field site. Environmental health had investigated the potential problems with sound and had no objections. Access to the flats could be gained via Ajax Court. The scheme was in keeping with the surrounding area.
The objector stated that he was representing Ferry Road Club and had concerns over the lack of vehicular access; right of way was only suitable for pedestrians. He stated that a site visit would be useful.
The Head of Planning stated that highways had no objections to the proposed site. The right of way dispute was a legal issue to be resolved by the two parties in question.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Councillor Briggs, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest left the meeting for consideration of the following item.
(ix) 07/0635 by T Mobile (UK) Ltd for an application for determination concerning the prior approval for the siting and appearance of a telecommunications installation comprising a 12.0 m high replica telegraph pole supporting three antennas together with ground-based equipment cabinets and ancillary development at Belton Playing Fields, off High Street, Belton.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the applicant had carried out minimum consultation with the local community, and that the proposal had received astounding objection from the village. The landowner had now withdrawn permission for the installation. She stated that 470 signatures had been gathered for a petition.
Councillor Mrs Redfern, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (b) spoke on this application.
Councillor Mrs Redfern stated that the proposal had caused great concern to the village; the landowner had withdrawn permission for the installation.The intended location was inappropriate, Belton Parish Council objected to the proposal. Health issues could be a material consideration.
The Head of Planning stated that two issues should be considered, siting and design of the installation.A decision had to be made by the committee within the appropriate timescale, 8 June 2007, otherwise the application would be approved.
Resolved – That permission be refused, due to inappropriate siting of the installation.
Councillor Briggs returned to the meeting.
(x) 07/0651 by Mr P Hill for planning permission to erect a two-storey extension at 86 Rectory Street, Epworth.
Prior to consideration, the Head of Planning informed members that this item had been withdrawn.
(xi) 07/0718 by Mr R Shaw for outline planning permission to erect a new bungalow (means of access not reserved for subsequent approval) at land to the rear of 21 Wharf Road, Crowle.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.
The applicant’s agent stated that although the proposal was outside the development boundary the site was surrounded by buildings and did not appear to be open countryside. The proposal would not result in any overlooking, as there would be a rear landscaped garden between it and neighbouring properties.
Resolved – That permission be refused in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
916 (3) APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS FOLLOWING THE GRANT OF OUTLINE PERMISSION – The Head of Planning submitted reports informing members about applications for approval of reserved matters which were ready for determination. Outline planning permission had already been granted and the developments 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 developments (excluding any of these matters which were expressly approved at the time outline permission had been granted).
(i) 05/1534 by D J Prescott Builders Ltd for approval of reserved matters following outline planning permission reference 2004/2074 dated 10/01/2005 for the erection of a detached house and garage – amendment to show ground level of the new house as built at High Chimneys, 4 Park View Close, Barrow upon Humber.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the house had been built in excess of the approved level. After the removal of the boundary hedge, the builder had proposed that a fence be erected in its place. This was not acceptable, the objector proposed that the application be modified to include the building of a wall rather than a fence.
The Head of Planning stated that the same visual impact would be achieved with either a wall or a fence, although a wall would be more durable.
Resolved – That proposed amendment be agreed, subject to a wall being substituted for a fence.
(ii) 07/0124 by Mr D Dent for approval of reserved matters pursuant to outline planning permission 2005/2049 dated 26/04/2006 for the erection of eight dwellings at land off Maltby Lane, Barton upon Humber.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
917 (4) 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.
918 (5) FOOTPATH 297A BARNETBY-LE-WOLD – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking approval to make an order to modify the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement” by adding them to a public footpath in Barnetby-le-Wold.
On 26 January 2006 Mr Michael Wilson of Railway Street, Barnetby, served an application under section 53(5) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 on the council to add a 38 metre public footpath to the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement” which ran between Railway Street and Station Approach, Barnetby.
Part of the claimed route crossed the approach road to Barnetby Railway Station, which was owned by Network Rail. Section 57 of the British Transport Commission Act 1949 stated that:
“no right of way against the Commission shall be acquired by prescription or user, over any road, footpath, thoroughfare or place, now or hereafter the property of the Commission and forming an access or approach to any station, goods yard, wharf, garage or depot or any dock or harbour premises of the Commission.”
Therefore, it was suggested that this part of the claim could not succeed.
The report detailed evidence in support of the remaining part of the claim.
Resolved – (a) That the determination of the Section 53(5) application in favour of the applicant, as indicated between points A and B, at Appendix 1 attached to the report, be approved (b) that the making of an order under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to add the route shown at Appendix 1 to the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement” as a public footpath, be approved and confirmed, subject to no objections being lodged, (c) that the matter be referred back to members if objections to the order are received, and (d) that the claim in respect of the way shown at Appendix 1, points C to D, across Station Approach due to the applicable legislation, be declined.
919 (6) PROPOSED DIVERSION OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH 229 BROUGHTON – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking approval to divert a section of Public Footpath 229, Broughton.
A proposal to divert a section of Public Footpath 229 was agreed by Planning Committee on 13 September 2006 (minute 847 refers). The eastern 18 metres of the diversion were owned by the adjacent landowner and written consent was awaited from the said landowner. This had not been received. A fifth letter had been sent to the landowner on 6 February 2007, requesting interest in the strip of land and any objections to the proposed diversion be registered with the council by 28 February 2007.No objection had been received.
It was proposed that an order be made as the land was unregistered and no objection had been received. Details of the proposed order were set out in the report.
Resolved – (a) That an order be made in accordance with the report; (b) that the Service Director Highways and Planning be authorised to confirm the order if it is unopposed; (c) that if the order is confirmed, a further order be made, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to modify the County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg) Definitive Map and Statement, and (d) that should objections be received a further report be submitted to the committee.
920 (7) PUBLIC FOOTPATH 252A, KIRTON IN LINDSEY – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking to determine the council’s position on submitting “Definitive Map Modification (Public Footpath 252A, Kirton in Lindsey) Order 2006 (1)” to the Secretary of State for confirmation, following the lodging of a duly-served objection.
On 13 September 2006 (minute 848 refers), planning committee approved the modification of the Definitive Map and Statement for the addition of the route, shown at Appendix 1 to the report. Following the expiration of the statutory objection period, one objector lodged written opposition to the making of the order.
The order could not be withdrawn, although only the Secretary of State could confirm an order with outstanding objections. The committee must decide whether or not to support confirmation of the order, or whether to take a neutral stance.
Resolved – (a) That submission of the order to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with a recommendation that the order be confirmed, be approved, (b) that the intention to dedicate be kept under review if new evidence be submitted be approved, and (c) that supporting confirmation through written representations, hearing or inquiry, as the Secretary of State dictates, whilst officers continue to believe presumed dedication had occurred, be approved.
Councillor Barker, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest left the meeting for consideration of the following item.
921 (8) BYWAY OPEN TO ALL TRAFFIC 21, CROWLE “COUNTY OF LINCOLN – PARTS OF LINDSEY (ISLE OF AXHOLME) DEFINITIVE STATEMENT” – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report seeking to determine an application made by Crowle Town Council to modify the Definitive Map and Statement as respects the northern half of Byway Open to All Traffic 21 in the parish of Crowle.
On 21 April 2005 the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs confirmed an order which added to the Definitive Map and Statement a byway open to all traffic (BOAT) over Yorkshire Moors Bottom Road between Dole Road and Crook o’ Moor Road.
Crowle Town Council had submitted a formal objection when the order was made; they subsequently made an application under Section 53(5) of the Act 1981 which requested that the council make an order to increase the width of BOAT21.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the width of the section of footpath on the Yorkshire Moors Bottom Road should be 66 feet, as expressed in the Crowle Inclosure Award.Farmers’ fields had encroached onto the footpath. North Lincolnshire Council had applied to reduce the width to 24 feet. Crowle Town Council had engaged a third party expert who believed that the reduction of the width was wrong in law.
Resolved – (a) That the application by Crowle Town Council to make an order to modify the “County of Lincoln – Parts of Lindsey (Isle of Axholme) Definitive Statement” in respect of the width of Yorkshire Moors Bottom Road be refused, on the grounds that the evidence presented failed to show that modification was required, and (b) that further approval be given to defend the decision should an appeal to the Secretary of State be lodged.
Councillor Barker returned to the meeting.
922 (9) DRAFT RIGHTS OF WAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report updating the committee on the Rights of Way Improvement Plan and seeking endorsement to advertise the draft plan for publication in accordance with statutory schedules.
Section 60 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 placed a duty on local highway authorities to publish a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (ROWIP).The ROWIP had to cover the whole of a highway authority’s area. It also had to: assess the extent to which local rights of way meet the present and likely future needs of the public; the opportunities provided by local rights of way (and, in particular, by footpaths, cycle tracks, bridleways and restricted byways) for exercise and other forms of open-air recreation and the enjoyment of their area; the accessibility of local rights of way to blind or partially-sighted persons and others with mobility problems; and such other matters relating to local rights of way as the Secretary of State may direct.
The ROWIP had to be published no later than November 2007 and must be reviewed at least every ten years.
Resolved – (a) That the publishing of the Rights of Way Improvement Plan before November 2007 be endorsed, and that in the meantime, the draft Plan be advertised and circulated amongst known interested parties, and (b) that the report be referred to the Highways and Planning Cabinet Member for decision.