Planning Committee – 27 July 2011
Chair: Councillor Bunyan
Venue: The 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 24 June (Special Meeting) and 29 June 2011 as a correct record and authorise the chair to sign
- Application deferred from previous meeting for site visits
- Planning and other applications for determination by the committee
- Enforcement update
- Planning Statistics: April to June 2011
- Public Footpath 248 Kirton-in-Lindsey – Report of the Director of Infrastructure Services
- Access to Manton Warren – Report of the Director of Infrastructure Services
- Any other items, which the chair decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances, which must be specified.
Note: All reports are by the Head of Planning unless otherwise stated.
MINUTES
PRESENT: Councillor Bunyan (in the chair).
Councillors Wardle (Vice-Chairman), Ali, Allcock, Bainbridge, Collinson, Grant, England, Rowson and N Sherwood.
Councillors Barker, Briggs, Glover, Waltham and Whiteley attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule1.36 (b).
The committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.
1359 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:-
| Member | Minute | Application | Nature of Interest |
| Cllr N Sherwood | 1361 | 11/0554 | Family member was objector |
The following members declared a personal interest:-
| Members | Minute | Applications/ Item |
Nature of Interest |
| Cllr Allcock | 1362 (xii) | 11/0663 | Member of the Isle of Axholme and North Notts Water Level Management Board which had offices in the Gables owned by the developer. |
| Cllr England | 1366 | Manton Warren | Knew the landowner |
| Cllr Grant | 1362 (iii) | 11/0362 | Had worked with the agent. |
| Cllr N Sherwood | 1362 (iii) | 11/0362 | Site was behind his business premises. |
| Cllr Wardle | 1362 (iv) | 11/0513 | Knew the applicant |
| Cllr Wardle | 1362 (xi) | 11/0630 | Knew the applicant |
The following members, attending the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 1.36 (b) declared a personal interest: –
| Members | Minute | Applications/ Item |
Nature of Interest |
| Cllr Barker | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 | Knew objectors |
| Cllr Barker | 1362 (x) | 11/0583 | Knew applicant and objectors |
| Cllr Briggs | 1362 (xii) | 11/0663 | Member of the Isle of Axholme Water Management Board |
The following members declared that they had been lobbied: –
| Members | Minute | Application/Item |
| Cllr Ali | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr Ali | 1362 (x) | 11/0583 |
| Cllr Allcock | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr Bainbridge | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr Bunyan | 1362 (ii) | 11/0315 |
| Cllr Bunyan | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr England | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr N Sherwood | 1362 (i) | 11/003 |
The following members, attending the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 1.36 (b) declared that they had been lobbied: –
| Members | Minute | Application/Item |
| Cllr Briggs | 1362 (i) | 11/0003 |
| Cllr Briggs | 1362 (x) | 11/0583 |
| Cllr Waltham | 1361 | 11/0554 |
| Cllr Glover | 1362 (ii) | 11/0315 |
Mr W Hill (Acting Head of Planning) declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 11/0630 (Minute 1362 (xi) refers) as he knew the applicant.
1360 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meetings held on 24 June (Special Meeting) and 29 June 2011, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.
1361 (11) APPLICATION DEFERRED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING – In accordance with the decision at a previous meeting, members had undertaken a site visit on the morning of the meeting. The Acting Head of Planning submitted a report and updated it orally.
Prior to consideration of the following application, Minute 1361 (i) refers, Councillor N Sherwood, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest, left the meeting.
(i) 11/0554 by Mr K and Mrs J Hastings for erection of a replacement dwelling at Nicol Lodge, Nicolgate Lane, Brigg.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and a representative of the applicants addressed the committee.
The objector stated that the proposed dwelling would be a large two-storey building. The design was modern and out of keeping with its setting. It would have an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours and lead to a loss of privacy. She was concerned that a hedge next to the adjacent graveyard had been removed and replaced by a wall. The development would also cause drainage and traffic problems.
The applicant stated that permission had been granted earlier in the year for a dwelling on the site. Subsequently he had sought to improve the design to make it more sympathetic to its surroundings and more “eco-friendly”. The height of the roof ridge had been reduced from that of the previously approved design. The dwelling would be built to a high standard of energy efficiency.
Councillor Waltham, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.36 (b) spoke on this application.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation subject to additional conditions relating to landscaping and requiring the retention of the existing hedge on the boundary of the site.
Councillor N Sherwood returned to the meeting.
1362 (12) PLANNING AND OTHER APPLICATIONS – The Head of Regeneration and 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. The Head of Regeneration and Planning updated the reports orally where appropriate. Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.
(i) 11/0003 by Rotary Engineering for the erection of a wind turbine at College Farm, West End, Garthorpe.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.
The objector lived less than 450 metres from the proposed turbine. He considered that the turbine would be too close to the nearest dwelling, which would be less then 300 metres away. It would create a noise nuisance. He considered that the information put forward by the applicants in terms of noise was inadequate. No information had been submitted regarding shadow flicker.
The agent referred to national policies and the Renewable Energy Obligation. He stated that there would be no significant impact on the village arising from the proposal. The turbine was smaller than most current models. There was no evidence that shadow flicker would have any adverse effect. The proposal had been evaluated by the council’s professional experts in the relevant fields and was considered by them to be acceptable.
Councillors Barker and Briggs, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.36 (b) spoke on this application.
Resolved – That permission be refused as the proposal would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the open countryside and contrary to policies contained in the North Lincolnshire Local Plan and the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy.
(ii) 11/0315 by Locate Developments Ltd for the erection of a building for A1 retail use together with associated parking, servicing and landscaping at The Dog and Rat, 128 High Street, Broughton.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.
The applicant’s agent stated that the application had been the subject of discussion with officers who had indicated that it would be acceptable. The store would utilise unused car parking space to the public house, create jobs for local people and provide a necessary facility.
The objector was concerned that the proposal would reduce the quality of life for residents of Burnside and Appleby Lane. The building, being a steel clad glass shed would be out of character with its surroundings. There was to be an Automated Teller Machine included in the building which would be in use 24 hours a day causing disturbance to neighbours.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until a future meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting. The reason for the site visit is the significant public interest in this application.
(iii) 11/0362 by QK Honeycomb Products Ltd for the erection of 10 semi-detached dwellings on land off Engine Street, Brigg.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent addressed the committee. He stated that the Environment Agency had now withdrawn its objection to this application. There was no objection from the Ancholme Internal Drainage Board or the Highways Team. The development would lead to the creation of more open land than at present. It was in line with national and local planning policies.
Resolved – (a) That the committee is mindful to grant permission for the development; (b) that the Acting Head of Planning be authorised to grant permission subject to the completion of a formal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 providing for a commuted sum of £5,318.65 to put towards upgrading existing and placing additional provisions at the Almond Grove children’s playground and public open space area in accordance with SPG 10; (c) that if the obligation is not completed by 27 October 2011 the Acting Head of Planning be authorised to refuse the application on the grounds the development being contrary to Policy H10 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan because of the inadequate provision of open space in the vicinity of the site, and (d) that the permission so granted be subject to the conditions contained in the report.
(iv) 11/0513 by JFD Hargreaves Ltd for erection of an agricultural building at East Hann Farm, Budforth Lane, Barrow-upon-Humber.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and the applicant addressed the committee.
The objector was concerned that the proposal would lead to an increase in the size of HGVs using Budforth Lane, the access to the site. There were no passing places.
The applicant stated that the proposal would lead to an increase in the number of people employed on site. The storage was required to improve the efficiency of the operation which supplied potatoes to supermarkets all year round. There would be less traffic on Budforth Lane than there had been in the past.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(v) 11/0539 by Mr Ayman Sabi for the erection of a temporary dwelling at Sabi’s Farm, Eastoft Road, Crowle.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report subject to extra conditions relating to access, parking and turning and making the permission personal to the applicant.
(vi) 11/0560 by Mr R Olivant for the retention of a detached double garage at Elm Cottage, West End Road, Ulceby.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.
The agent stated that the applicant had not realised that the garage required permission. It was in keeping with the cottage.
The objector considered that the garage would be out of place with its surroundings.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(vii) 11/0566 by Mr G Cook for the change of use of a Baptist chapel to a residential dwelling, erection of a single-storey extension and a new boundary wall and railings at Baptist Chapel Lane, South Killingholme.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(viii) 11/0567 by Mr P Friskney for the demolition of an existing dwelling and associated buildings and erection of a replacement dwelling with an integral granny annex at Millhouse Farm, Brackenhill Road, Haxey.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(ix) 11/0574 by Mr G Cook for listed building consent for the erection of a single-storey extension and carrying out of alterations in connection with the conversion into dwelling at Baptist Chapel Lane, South Killingholme.
Resolved – That consent be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
(x) 11/0583 by Keadby Wind Farm Ltd for the construction of new sections of internal permanent access tracks and track widening at Keadby Wind Farm site, Keadby.
Prior to consideration of this application, the applicant’s agent and an objector addressed the committee.
The agent stated that various access solutions had been considered. The applicants accepted the importance of engaging with local stakeholders. The proposal was considered to be the best option. It would improve efficiency of the traffic managements for the site.
The objector stated that the proposal could result in the loss of jobs at a nearby mushroom farm. The ancient manorial boundary of Crowle was a public right of way. The proposed access road was of a higher status than a footpath. Eastoft moors road was a carriage road shown on the “Red Flag returns”.
Councillor Briggs, attending the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 1.36 (b) spoke on this application.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report.
Prior to consideration of the following application, 11/0360, Mr Hill, having declared a non-pecuniary interest in the application, left the meeting.
(xi) 11/0630 by Mr and Mrs D Cutts for the carrying out of alterations and amendment of design and layout of dwelling previously approved under PA/2006/0149 dated 26/04/2006 (resubmission of PA/2010/1320) at Mill Farm House, Barrow Road, Goxhill.
Prior to consideration of this application the applicant addressed the committee. He stated that he had had informal meetings with officers. There was only one aspect of the application that they were not happy with. The design remained within the footprint of the existing building. It was proposed to change the roof material to Goxhill pantiles to fit in with its surroundings. Raising the roof height by 1.5 metres would not significantly change the character of the building. He had commissioned a bat and bird survey.
Resolved – That consideration of this application be deferred until a future meeting and that members visit the site prior to that meeting. The reason for the site visit is to assess the impact of the proposed development on its surroundings.
Mr Hill returned to the meeting.
(xii) 11/0663 by Cadworx for the erection of a boundary wall at The Gables, Belton Road, Epworth.
Prior to consideration of this application an objector and the applicant addressed the committee.
The objector was concerned at the extent of the vertical drop from the highway and risk to pedestrians. She stated that excavation had already begun.
The applicant stated that the works carried out did not contravene planning conditions.
Resolved – That permission be granted in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report
1363 (13) ENFORCEMENT UPDATE – The Acting Head of Planning submitted a schedule giving details of progress in respect of matters on which he had taken enforcement action under delegated authority. He also gave an update on another matter in response to a question from a member.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
1364 (14) PLANNING STATISTICS: APRIL TO JUNE 2011 – The Acting Head of Planning submitted a report containing details of the numbers of applications received and determined, broken down by category, in the period April to June 2011.
Resolved – That the report be noted.
1365 (15) PUBLIC FOOTPATH (FP) 248, KIRTON IN LINDSEY – The Director of Infrastructure Services submitted a report regarding the proposed diversion of part of this footpath. The path ran through a building site. The next phase of the development had planning permission but this could not go ahead unless the footpath was diverted.
Planning permission for house building had been granted on 31 March 2000 (PA/1999/0920). How development affected a public footpath was a material consideration and therefore the permission would have taken FP248 into account.
The latest phase had 12 houses and affected about 108 metres of FP248. Two other lengths of FP248 had been diverted at Windmill Plantation. Future diversions might be needed as the development continued northwards.
Resolved – (a) That a diversion order be made under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert Public Footpath 248, Kirton in Lindsey, in accordance with the report; (b) that the order takes effect on certification that the new footpath has been set out on the ground as set out in the report to the council’s satisfaction that the new footpath is fit for use by the public; (c) that the order be a combined one using section 53A of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 so the “County of Lindsey, Parts of Lindsey (Glanford Brigg)” definitive map and statement are modified as soon as the path is diverted , and (d) that the Director of Infrastructure Services be authorised to confirm the order if it is unopposed.
1366 (16) MANTON WARREN – The Director of Infrastructure Services submitted a report inviting the committee to consider whether the public required reasonable access into Manton Warren, an area of Access Land and if so the extent and location of such access.
Prior to consideration of this matter the landowner’s agent addressed the committee. He indicated that the landowner was happy with the officer’s recommendation.
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (the Act) provided for public access on foot to areas of open space. These included mountain, moor, heath, down and registered common.
A double fence currently protected the boundary of the site with the highway. This was about one metre high and overgrown for much of its length. The Act did not prevent a member of the public from climbing walls, fences, etc, in order to obtain access. If they caused criminal damage however they potentially surrendered rights of access for 72 hours thereafter.
Both landowners and the public found these circumstances unsatisfactory. Walkers were inclined not to admit to causing damage in the absence of witnesses. They understandably were on occasions put off from accessing land that was walled or fenced. They were fearful of trespassing. This was despite the Act providing for their access. Some groups of people, including the elderly and disabled also found physical barriers impossible to overcome. This could infringe their rights under the Equality Act 2010.
The owner of the land in question had some concerns about allowing public access. He was however aware of the legal position on these matters. He was worried about the potential adverse effects on wildlife, particularly lichen and nesting birds.
The Act required that the council tried to reach agreement with the landowner to secure public access. This included who funded any work required to achieve this. The council could contribute to any costs if it sees fit.
If the council was unable to reach a satisfactory agreement it could impose the requirement to provide access. This would involve serving 21 days notice. The council could then put in hand any works required. The council could also seek to recover a contribution to any costs incurred from the landowner. The landowner had a right to appeal to the Secretary of State. The notice needed to include the process for appeals.
Officers had discussed the issue of access with the landowner at some length and had explored a number of options for accessing the land. The landowners preferred option was a single access opposite an old road mid-way between the Northeast and Southeast corners. However this was not considered practicable due to significant road safety issues.
Given the above, the landowner had agreed to a single access from the Northeast corner of the site. This was much safer and much more convenient, particularly for residents of Greetwell. Securing this agreement was conditional on this being the only point of access.
A second point of access toward the Southeast corner of the site would offer some additional advantages. However this was not viewed as essential. As such, the Secretary of State might uphold an appeal on this basis. It was at this time recommended to accept a single point of access at the Northeast corner as a pragmatic way forward to secure an open access to the Warren in accordance with the Act. A second access might prove achievable in the future if all interested parties viewed this favourably.
Resolved – (a) That the council offers to enter into an agreement with the owner of Manton Warren under section 35 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to open up, construct and maintain a formal access point into the Warren. The access to be located at the Northeast corner of the site at Ordnance Survey grid reference SE94360460; (b) that the access comprises a sprung self-closing or kissing gate compliant with BS 5709:2006 erected and maintained thereafter by the council wholly at the council’s expense; (c) that the council provides clear signage drawing the public attention to the offence committed if breeding woodlarks are disturbed and advising them not to damage flora or fauna, not to disturb sheep and to keep dogs on leads.; (d) that the council seeks to impose access, subject to appeal, in accordance with section 36 of the Act if, after entering into an agreement under section 35, the agreement is not complied with, and (e) that the council seeks to impose access, subject to appeal, in accordance with section 37 of the Act if it proves impossible to secure an acceptable agreement with the landowner.