Chair: Councillor Collinson
Venue: Council Chamber, Pittwood House, Scunthorpe
Time: 2pm

AGENDA

1. Substitutions.
2. Declarations of Personal and Personal and Prejudicial Interests, significant contact with applicants, objectors or third parties (Lobbying) and Whipping Arrangements (if any).
3. To take the minutes of the meetings held on 2 May (Policy Meeting) and 21 May 2008 as a correct record and authorise the chair to sign.
4. Applications deferred from previous meeting for site visit.
5. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.
6. Enforcement Update.

• Residential Development in Goxhill
• National Planning Statement 25 – Development and Flood Risk: Application of the sequential and exception tests.

Note: Reports are by the Head of Planning unless otherwise stated.

Minutes

PRESENT:  Councillor Collinson (Chair).

Councillors Armitage, Bainbridge, Barker, B Briggs, Carlile, Eckhardt, Grant, C Sherwood, N Sherwood, Mrs Sidell, Wardle and Whiteley.

Councillors Appleyard and Vickers attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37(b).

The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

1044 (5) 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, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37(b) declared personal interests

The following member declared that he had been lobbied: –

The following officer declared a clear and substantial non–pecuniary interest

1045  MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meetings held on 2 May (Policy Meeting) and 21 May, 2008 having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.

1046  (6) 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) 08/0412 by Mr H Patel for the erection of a replacement dwelling (re-submission of PA/2007/2016) at 12  Greenhill, Broughton.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee. He was concerned at the potential effect of the proposed dwelling on his property in terms of loss of light. He considered that the scale of the proposed building would be inappropriate.

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

(ii) 08/0552 by Mr T Drayton for the erection of a detached two-storey dwelling on land at King Edward Street, Belton.

Prior to consideration of this application a representative of an objector addressed the committee. He raised issues regarding access and parking. He stated that the frontage of the proposed dwelling was reduced from an earlier proposal for which permission had been refused but that the design was similar in size to that previous proposal.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report. subject to an additional condition removing permitted development rights.

(iii) 08/0424 by 7 Lakes Country Park for the provision (and retention of an existing number of) verandas and decking adjacent to existing static caravans.

Prior to consideration of this application a representative of the applicants addressed the committee. He stated that many other local planning authorities considered that such development was permitted development. When the company had taken over the site in 2003 there were already 4 verandas on site. The company would be happy to agree to a landscaping scheme and had started work on a protected species survey.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report subject the amendment of condition 2 condition to provide for landscaping to include screening.

1047  (7) 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.

Mr S Whittemore, having declared a clear and substantial non-pecuniary interest in the following applications, 08/0348 and 08/0349 left the meeting during the consideration thereof.

(i) 08/0348 by North Lincolnshire Council for outline permission to construct a tennis hall and create car parking provision with associated vehicular access and landscaping on Land at Central Park, Ashby Road, Scunthorpe.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee. She stated that the objectors felt that a better site should have been chosen to avoid losing a valuable green space. The objectors were concerned about the loss of a large number of mature trees, some of which were the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, and the loss of habitat for a number of protected species including three types of bat, orchids, tawny owls and roe deer, arising form this application, the associated application 08/0349 and proposed works to be carried out as permitted development in the adjoining park as part of the overall scheme. There was also concern about light and noise pollution.

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

(ii) 08/0349 by North Lincolnshire Council for construction of a sports academy and ancillary works including car parking, vehicular access and highway infrastructure, associated landscaping, and erection of maintenance depot, café pavilion and play equipment on land at central Park, Ashby Road, Scunthorpe.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee. She stated that the objectors felt that a better site should have been chosen to avoid losing a valuable green space. The objectors were concerned about the loss of a large number of mature trees, some of which were the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, and the loss of habitat for a number of protected species including three types of bat, orchids, tawny owls and roe deer, arising form this application, the associated application 08/0348 and proposed works to be carried out as permitted development in the adjoining park as part of the overall scheme. The proposal would also result in light and noise pollution. There was also concern about the effect on the setting of the listed buildings at Pittwood House and Brumby Hall.

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

Mr S Whittemore returned to the meeting.

(iii) 08/0392 by Mr Nathan Whall for the erection of a detached two-storey dwelling with access and erection of two detached domestic double garages to serve existing and proposed dwellings at The Laurels, Front Street, Ulceby.

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

(iv) 08/0395 by Mr M Bennett for the erection of three two-storey apartments at 1c Dam Road, Barton-upon-Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant and an objector addressed the committee. The applicant stated that the premises were surplus to requirements. The proposal would give the site a new lease of life. At the time the application was made the Environment Agency had regarded an application across the road from the site positively. Subsequently the agency had reassessed the flood risk for the area. The plot was a brown field site. The proposal was for three small units only. The council had the authority to approve the application contrary to the Environment Agency’s advice.

The objector owned a property which had a right of way across the application site. He was concerned that the access would be reduced in width and height as  a consequence of the proposed development.

Councillor Vickers, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 37 (e) spoke on the application.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.

(v) 08/0404 by Keith Ready and Co for the erection of four link dwellings to rear of 3 to 4 Market Place, Barton–upon–Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent addressed the committee. He stated that the application followed the refusal of an earlier application on the same site. The current proposal had received the support of planning officers, the highways team and the conservation officer. Some local residents had objected on the basis of increased vehicle movements on The Butchery and pedestrian safety, car parking, refuge storage and potential criminal activity at the site.

In relation to the objectors The Butchery was an adopted highway. Highways had directed that there should be no garages or parking provision on the site. The proposed dwellings were small 2 bedroom houses and being in a town centre close to facilities policy was to discourage reliance on cars. The refuse store was the subject of a separate application on the agenda. And would be secure. The proposal would lead to an increase in surveillance of the area.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.

(vi) 08/0467 by SLW Cash and Carry for the removal of condition 2 of permission 03/0708 which states that the premises shall not be open to customers, no deliveries made to the site, no vehicles loaded or unloaded, nor forklifts operated, outside the hours of 7 am-7.30pm Monday to Friday, nor any time on a Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday at SLW Cash and Carry, Hebden Road, Scunthorpe.

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

(vii) 08/0470 by Mr K Haw for outline permission to erect a single-storey dwelling (resubmission of 07/1218) to the rear of 18 Chapel Road, Broughton.

Prior to consideration of this application the applicant addressed the committee. He stated that, whilst the site was back land, the proposal did not constitute tandem development. The new drive would not be shared with a neighbouring property. The dwelling would be screened by a nine foot high hedge. Most of the land would be preserved as LC11 land, as designated in the local plan. The reserved matters application would have to show that suitable access could be provided and appropriate conditions could be imposed at that stage. The development would be on brown field land.

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

(viii) 08/0506 by North Lincs Property Holdings Ltd for the partial removal of former railway embankment and construction of retaining (Gabion) wall at former railway embankment, land west of Harris View, Epworth.

Resolved – That it be noted that this application has been withdrawn.

(ix) 08/0530 by Keith Ready and Co for the erection of a bin store at 3 – 4 Market Place, Barton–upon-Humber.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred and that members undertake a site visit.

(x) 08/0537 by Mr S Hughes for the erection of a store/garage extension (re-submission of 08/0013) at 15 Allison Close, Messingham.

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

(xi) 08/0556 by Annington Property Ltd for the construction of a pumping station, associated sewers, kiosk and fencing on plot off Bircham Crescent, Kirton–in-Lindsey.

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

(xii) 08/0633 by Mrs Victoria Rogers for retention of replacement windows and door with wood-framed, double glazed units at 33 Main Street, Saxby All Saints.

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

1048  (8) 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.

1049  (9) RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN GOXHILL – Further to Minute  1002, the Head of Planning submitted a report updating the committee on issues relating to the granting of new planning permissions for residential development within Goxhill as a result of a temporary moratorium being placed on new development due to sewerage and drainage issues.

Discussions and meetings had been held with Anglian Water to ascertain the extent of the problems within the village and what works needed to be undertaken to improve the sewerage and drainage capacity.

Following that meeting with Anglian Water a number of schemes had now been identified in order to ensure that the sewerage capacity within the village was improved and that the capacity of the remainder of the network was maintained. Anglian Water had confirmed that the identified schemes were not at present in their capital programme and would have to be costed out in benefit terms and detailed design work drawn up before any approved schemes could be implemented.

Following the identification of the locations by Anglian Water where there might well be sewerage capacity problems, an assessment had been carried out to determine whether or not the moratorium on new residential development should remain.

Even though Anglian Water had identified five locations where new infrastructure work was required there was no guarantee that any or all of the schemes would be implemented in the short term because none of the schemes were currently identified within their capital scheme list. Furthermore, even if identified there was no precise time frame within which the works would actually be undertaken. Consideration therefore needed to be given as to whether, in the short term, alternative arrangements could be made for assessing planning applications to ensure that there was no increased likelihood of sewerage or flooding problems as a result of new development within the village.

It was suggested that as the parts of the village that were prone to flooding from either surface or foul water had now been identified and that more was now known of where problems of capacity exist in the drainage and sewerage systems it would be inappropriate to maintain the moratorium. In future planning applications should be carefully assessed by officers of Highways and Planning to confirm the acceptability of the technical requirements for foul and surface water. Where appropriate, Anglian Water should be consulted direct if there was any suggestion that a drainage issue could arise as a result of a favourable decision being given on a planning application.

Anglian Water and Goxhill Parish Council had been sent a copy of the report but no response had yet been received from either.

Resolved – That consideration of this matter be deferred for one month to enable Anglian Water and Goxhill Parish Council the opportunity to comment.

1050 (10) National Planning Policy Statement 25 – Development and Flood Risk: Application of the Sequential and Exception Tests – The Head of Planning submitted a report informing members about the application and implication of applying the sequential and exception tests as laid out in PPS 25.

PPS 25 – Development and Flood Risk had been issued by Government in December 2006 and aimed to steer more vulnerable development away from areas at higher risk of flooding. On most planning applications in flood risk areas the Environment Agency advised the local planning authority to apply the sequential test and, if necessary, the exception test. This was to ensure the proposed development was appropriate, fundamentally in terms of the principle of the development in that location, and also whether the development was safe.

PPS 25 also set out the requirements for sequential and exception tests and the Environment Agency advised the planning department in writing when these should be applied. Every site in the council’s area could be identified on the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the land was categorised as being within zones of varying levels of flood risk, with zone 1 being the land least at risk. The sequential test was designed to steer development into the lowest risk land available. The starting point was to check the designated risk level for the site in question and then check whether there was any land available in a lower risk area in the same settlement (if within a development boundary) or elsewhere if the site was in open countryside.

This report explained in detail the requirements of the sequential and exception tests and the process involved in applying them. and the issues for consideration.

Resolved – (a) That the report be noted; (b) that planning applications be determined in accordance with the provisions of PPS 25 and that with reference to the exceptions test the current application by officers be confirmed, and (c) that the definition of what constitutes ‘wider community benefits’ be the subject of a further investigation and consideration and that a further report on this be submitted at a later date.