northlincs.gov.uk

PRESENT: Councillor Collinson (Chair).

Councillors B. Briggs, Carlile, Davison, Eckhardt, England, Gosling, Glover, Grant, Regan, N Sherwood, Waltham and Whiteley.

Councillors K Vickers, Mrs Sidell and Smith attended the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b)

The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

1170 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 and prejudicial interests: –

The following member declared personal interests: –

The following members, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) declared personal interests as follows: –

The following members declared that they had been lobbied:-

The following member, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) declared that she had been lobbied:

1171 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 19 August 2009 having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.

1172 (26) 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) 09/0257 by Keigar Homes Ltd for approval of reserved matters pursuant to outline permission PA/2003/1121 dated 22/06/2006 for the erection of 135 dwellings, including formation of access, layout of internal access roads and provision of local play area on land at junction of Barrow Road and Falkland Way, Barton-upon-Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application, two objectors and the applicant addressed the committee.

The objectors were concerned that the density of the proposed development would be too high. Two and a half storey houses would be too high and out of character with their surroundings. and would overlook existing properties.

The applicant stated that the principle of development on the site had been established by the grant of outline permission. Single-storey development would result in only the roofs of the new houses being visible from the road above the existing hedge and this would not be aesthetically pleasing. Gaps would be left in the layout to retain some views of the open countryside for existing residents. The density conformed with both national and local standards. The development would provide 13 affordable homes.

Councillor Mrs Sidell, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) spoke on this application.

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

(ii) 09/0661 by Mr and Mrs J Cook for the erection of a dwelling and integral garage (re-submission of 08/1684) on land adjacent to Chapel House, North End, Goxhill.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred to enable consultation on an amended plan.

1173 (27) PLANNING AND OTHER 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) 09/0325 by Barton Cliff Quarry limited for use of land for the recovery and recycling of materials brought onto the site for landfill at Barton Cliff Quarry, Far Ings Lane, Barton-upon-Humber.

Prior to consideration of this application an objector addressed the committee. He was concerned that the proposal would cause disturbance to residents and to visitors to the nearby nature reserve which had recently been upgraded to a National Nature Reserve. Part of the access road was now part of the Viking Way route after this had been diverted as a result of the Chowder Ness managed coastal retreat project. The track was at the junction of 3 public rights of way. The landfill operation had not been active since 2006.

The Council’s Environment Team were concerned about the potential danger to walkers using the public footpath. The use of a public footpath by vehicles was illegal unless the driver had express consent to do so. Since the Chowder Ness managed retreat project had been carried out there was no alternative route for walkers. The existing permission for the landfill operation had been granted prior to this council coming into existence, since when Footpath 31 had been added to the Definitive Map.

Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred to enable further consideration to be given to the rights of way issue.

Prior to consideration of the following application, 09/0676, Councillor N Sherwood, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the application, left the meeting.

(ii) 09/0676 by Mr P Winship and Mr P Walters for the erection of a garage to serve 41 and 43 St Helens Road and creation of an access with associated works at 41 and 43 St Helens Road, Brigg

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

Councillor N Sherwood returned to the meeting.

(iii) 09/0681 by Overhall Contractors Ltd for change of use of agricultural land to form new vehicular access to serve commercial premises at Overhall Contractors Ltd., rear of 16 Carr Lane, Thealby, Burton-upon-Stather.

Councillor Regan, having declared a personal interest in this application and having taken part in discussions on it at a meeting of Burton-upon-Stather Parish Council, spoke on the application and then left the meeting. He was concerned that there was an inappropriate mix of industrial and residential uses in the locality which had led to complaints regarding noise and dust. There was an existing problem in Thealby with HGVs.

Councillor Smith, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) spoke on this application.

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

Councillor Regan returned to the meeting.

Prior to consideration of the following application, 09/718, Councillor England, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the application, left the meeting.

(iv) 09/0718 by Mr M Rahman for the change of use of a ground floor flat to a restaurant, extension of single-storey and two-storey extensions and amendment of opening hours of the restaurant at 1-7 Wendover Road, Messingham.

Councillor Poole, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.37 (b) spoke on this application.

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

Councillor England returned to the meeting.

(v) 09/0755 by Mr S Cadey and S French for change of use of part of a car park to site a mobile catering unit on car park at the Lidl Supermarket, Springs Parade, Brigg.

Prior to consideration of this application one of the applicants addressed the committee. He stated that they would abide by the proposed conditions. He was aware of concerns regarding litter and would provide bins for both rubbish and recycling.

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

(vi) 09/0776 by Mr M and Mrs H Thompson for change of use of an existing mobile home to a holiday let at Acorn Wood, Derby Road, Burton-upon-Stather.

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

(vii) 09/0792 by SPI Ltd for the erection of a detached house with integral garage at 3a Bakersfield, Wrawby.

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

(viii) 09/0814 by Mr C Muscroft for the erection of a building for use as a waste transfer and recycling station with associated land and yard (re-submission of PA/2009/0512) on land south of access road to leisure complex and industrial site at Seven Lakes Industrial Estate, Crowle.

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

(ix) 09/0838 by Miss C Mills for the erection of a block of 16 dog kennels for private use only with store, feed and utility area at Foxhills Soff Lane, Goxhill.

Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report, subject to the amendment of Condition 2 to read “The kennels hereby permitted shall not be used for the purpose of any trade, business or profession including the breeding or boarding of dogs without a specific grant of permission in that behalf.”

(x) 09/0899 by Ms K Dyer for outline permission for the erection of one detached dwelling with all matters reserved at rear of Chapel Cottage, Town Street, South Killingholme.

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

1174 (28) 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.

1175 (29) BUILDING FOR LIFE – The Head of Planning submitted a report informing members on the implications of incorporating the Building for Life method of assessing major housing proposals into the planning system. Building for Life promoted design excellence and celebrates best practice in the house building industry. It was led by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) and the Home Builders Federation (HBF) and was backed by the Homes and Communities Agency, Design for Homes and the Civic Trust.

The 20 Building for Life criteria embodied the partners’ vision of what housing developments should be: attractive, functional and sustainable. These three guiding principles were founded on central government policy and on guidance developed by CABE in partnership with Design for Homes. The Building for Life criteria were used to evaluate the quality of schemes at both the pre-planning and post-construction phases.

The 20 criteria were split into four different sections, each concentrating on a particular theme, these being:

(i) Environment & Community;

(ii) Character;

(iii) Streets, Parking & Pedestrianisation; and

(iv) Design & Construction

An appendix to the report set out the criteria.

The Building for Life award was an important tool for local planning authorities to demand better quality and better designed housing developments. CABE research contained within its recent housing quality audit carried out between 2006 and 2008 had found that more than 80% of all housing developments built within the last 10 years were of such poor quality that they should never have been granted planning permission (utilising the BfL criteria). Furthermore CABE research had shown that good, well designed neighbourhoods could gain up to 5% more in price compared to other ‘standard’ housing developments.

Currently 22 local authorities were piloting the Building for Life toolkit so as to demand better quality developments whereby if developments failed to achieve a good or very good rating they would not be granted planning permission. Similarly all local planning authorities were required, as part of the Annual Monitoring Review (AMR), to state how many housing developments had gained a good or very good rating or a Silver or Gold award. It was apparent that local planning authorities were therefore being judged on the quality of the housing developments that they were allowing.

Recommended to Council – that the use of Building for Life assessments be approved as a material consideration in planning applications for major housing developments.

1176 (30) PUBLIC FOOTPATH 77, EAST HALTON AND NORTH KILLINGHOLME – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report inviting members to determine an application to divert a length of Public Footpath 77 (FP77) in the Parishes of East Halton and North Killingholme to enable a glass wool insulation product manufacturing plant to be built.

The council had already granted planning permission under Part Three of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the construction of the plant. Unless the footpath was diverted or stopped up, the plant could not be built. The order to divert the footpath would be made under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 at the applicant’s expense. Orders made under section 257 of the 1990 Act were challengeable when advertised. Therefore the council could agree to make an order, but could not guarantee the outcome.

FP77 ran lengthways through what would be the centre of the plant. Officers believed the requirement for a diversion under section 257 of the 1990 Act was therefore satisfied. Without a diversion, the planning permission to build the plant could not be implemented without the plant being constructed over the footpath, thereby obstructing it.

The proposed glass wool manufacturing plant was: about 430 metres long, up to 80 metres wide and, discounting yet taller stacks, up to 32 metres high. The diversion tried to mitigate the impact of these edifices on walkers by routeing FP77 through peripheral areas earmarked for landscaping and planting. The footpath would be 1.8 metres wide within a landscaped corridor of 6.5 metres. The landscaping would include wildflowers, but also a 0.3-metre-wide grass verge. URSA would be responsible for keeping these green areas adjacent to the footpath in good order. Twenty three metres is the closest the diverted part of FP77 would come to the plant’s northern elevation. A security fence-cum-newly planted hedge on its southern side would provide a modest degree of screening.

The granting of planning permission did not give a developer the right to obstruct a public footpath. If a public footpath ran through a proposed development, the planning permission was effectively subject to the ability of the developer to divert or stop up the footpath prior to implementation. As highway authority the council had to assert and protect the public’s right of way and prevent as far as possible any unauthorised stopping up or encroachment. However the effect on the footpath had been a material consideration in the determination of applications for development.

Informal consultation had been carried out on the proposal and there had been no indication of likely objections.

Resolved – (a) That an order be made under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 diverting about 820 metres of East Halton/North Killingholme FP77 between approximate grid references TA14831970 and TA15381995 via TA15361998 to enable the implementation of planning permission granted under Part III of the 1990 Act for the construction by URSA Insulation SA of a glass wool product manufacturing plant (planning permission reference PA/2008/0988); (b) that the order take effect on certification that the works referred to in paragraph 2.8 of the report have been carried out to North Lincolnshire Council’s satisfaction so as to render the new footpath as being in a condition fit for use by the public; (c) that the order be a combined one incorporating section 53A of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 so as simultaneously to divert the length of FP77 in question and modify the “County of Lincoln, Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg)” definitive map and statement in consequence of that diversion: (d)that URSA’s intention to request of the Service Director Highways and Planning a temporary prohibition of the public’s use of FP77 under section 14 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 rather than wait for a diversion under section 257 of the 1990 Act to take effect be noted, and (e) that if objections and/or representations with respect to the making of an order to divert FP77 as described be duly lodged and not withdrawn, a further report be submitted to the committee to enable it to decide whether to seek confirmation of the order through the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with or without recommended modifications.

1177 (31) LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS ACT 1990 -Town and Country PLANNING (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 – article 4 DIRECTIONS – THE CONTROL OF MATERIALS AND DESIGNS – The Service Director Highways and Planning submitted a report highlighting the need for a robust, open and consistent approach to decision-making on applications submitted for planning permission within conservation areas based upon the findings of recent reviews that had identified which buildings are important in conservation areas and which were not.

Nine of the council’s 17 conservation areas benefitted from Article 4 Directions. In information published to explain conservation areas to the Directions these were referred to as forming Areas of Special Control (ASC). Within these areas the effect of a Direction was to bring certain minor development works on family dwellings (new windows and doors etc.), under planning control.

Most conservation areas had last been increased in extent following the review of conservation areas commenced in 2001. The review had also identified that inappropriate minor works was eroding the character of conservation areas in North Lincolnshire. In particular the use of non-traditional materials and architectural design features had been identified as significant, large amongst which was the installation of plastic (PVCu), windows and doors.

Outcomes from that review had been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) during 2004 and 2005. One important feature of the review was the identification of which buildings contributed in a positive way to the character of the conservation areas and, which buildings did not. New directions requiring planning permission for certain general classes of works could be made under Article 4(2) of The Order. When it adopted the conservation area SPGs the council had also authorised the making of new directions covering the full extent of all 17 conservation areas.

Implementing council resolutions on the making of directions was proving to be a lengthy process. It was anticipated however, that the first new directions covering the full extent of conservation areas would be issued prior to the end of the current year. Old directions (aside from New Frodingham where for technical reasons the existing direction would be retained), would be revoked as the new ones came into place. In the mean time due to recent amendments in the provisions of The Order existing 9 directions were proving increasingly difficult to administer. These old directions however, kept generating planning applications. These were assessed against policy provision the application of which was informed by the guidance in the adopted SPGs. These documents identified three classes of buildings within conservation areas by reason of their contribution that they made to the character of conservation areas – positive (largely traditional buildings of townscape merit), neutral (altered traditional buildings), and; negative (substantially altered buildings of traditional form and/or, buildings not of the idiom contributing toward character).

SPG guidance stated that traditional materials and designs should be used across all building categories – positive, neutral and negative. However, a judgement had always to be made concerning the impact of the proposed changes upon the character and appearance of the conservation area as a whole. This was creating difficulties in assessment by officers and members.

It was increasingly evident however, that where windows and doors were concerned, the prevalence of plastic throughout conservation areas meant that the application of the current policy within the context established by the guidance offered was often at odds with practical assessments in terms of character and appearance. However without an established protocol addressing existing policy/guidance, conflicts between policy and practical considerations would persist. It was suggested therefore, that a protocol be introduced whereby, applications for minor works alterations to non listed buildings in conservation areas were assessed on the basis of the known contribution of that building to the character of the conservation area concerned as defined in the adopted SPG.

Recommended to Council – That with respect to decision making on applications for minor works on family dwellings arising from the current Article 4 Directions and, for the purpose of any new controls as may be designated under Article 4(2) of The Order, guidance relating to material use on buildings identified as having a neutral or negative impact upon character as defined in the various SPG documents, be amended such that the use of traditional materials and designs is no longer specified.