Meeting documents

Chairman: Councillor N Sherwood
Venue: The Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Scunthorpe
Time: 2 pm
Email address: planningcommittee@northlincs.gov.uk

AGENDA

1. Substitutions.
2. Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and Personal or 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 meeting held on 31 October 2018 as a correct record and authorise the Chairman to sign.
4. Applications deferred from previous meetings for a site visit.
5. Major Planning Applications.
6. Planning and other applications for determination by the committee.
7. Any other items, which the Chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances, which must be specified.

Note: All reports are by the Group Manager - Development Management and building Control unless otherwise stated.

MINUTES

PRESENT: – Councillor N Sherwood (Chair)

Councillors Evison (Vice-Chairman), Bainbridge, Collinson, Glover, Grant, Hannigan, Oldfield, Poole and Wells

Councillor(s) Briggs, J Davison, Mumby-Croft, Rowson, C Sherwood, P Vickers and Waltham MBE attended the meeting in accordance with Procedure Rule 37(b).

The committee met at Civic Centre, Scunthorpe.

1917 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 –

The following members declared a personal interest:-

The following members declared that they had been lobbied:-

1918 MINUTES - Resolved - That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 31 October 2018, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the Chairman.

1919 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 Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted reports and updated them orally.

(i) PA/2017/1216 by Mrs Wilson for outline planning permission to erect 9 dwellings to include demolition of existing cottage and outbuildings with means of access not reserved for subsequent approval at land at The Old Smithy, 6 Barnetby Lane, Elsham, DN20 0RB.

Prior to consideration of this item, an objector addressed the committee. The objector referred to the impact on the village of the application; the large number of objections the application had generated; concerns over the highway infrastructure and accessibility of adequate parking; the application was not in keeping with the village and was partly outside the development boundary. There was also a concern over the loss of trees and wildlife.

The agent exercised her right to reply and addressed the committee. She informed the members that there was already housing situated along the boundary of the application site; that the application was not in the open countryside; there was no detrimental impact on the village; the application did not pose a flood risk and there were no objections from highways. Many properties in the village were priced out of reach for most families, which this application would help to alleviate.

Councillor C Sherwood, local ward councillor expressed his concern that the road was too narrow. There were hazards close by, namely the junction between the two houses. The application would generate too much traffic. The application would result in the over development of the site.

Councillor Waltham MBE addressed the committee as a fellow ward councillor. He agreed with the points raised by Councillor C Sherwood. He acknowledged that the objector spoke on behalf of many concerned local residents. Nine new dwellings would result in a big impact on the street scene. Managing the highway was a real challenge. There were drainage issues at the site and as a result, he could not support the application.

Councillor Evison acknowledged that the application was for outline planning permission. There was a housing requirement in Elsham and, following the site visit, he was satisfied the application should be granted.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(ii) PA/2018/1619 by Mr and Mrs Rowbotham for planning permission to erect a two-storey extension and detached garage including demolition of an attached outbuilding, detached brick outbuilding and detached garage at 61 Main Street, Saxby All Saints, DN20 0PZ.

The applicant's agent addressed the committee. He explained that the family were wanting to move back to the area. The property concerned had been neglected and required a lot of effort to restore it to its former glory. There was planning permission in place for the property. The application had been amended following advice from the council's planning officers. The development would enhance the village scene and was in keeping with the Saxby-All-Saints design guide. There was only one objection to the application.

Councillor C Sherwood, local ward councillor informed members that there were many dwellings either side of the site, which were large in size. A condition could be added to include the outbuildings. The application did not contradict the amenities of the village and the proposed materials were in keeping with the area.

Councillor Evison stated that the proposed development of the site would make it a useful dwelling. The plot was in a poor state of repair and were the application approved, would improve the area and the site. There were also a lot of similar developments in the village.

It was moved by Councillor Evison and seconded by Councillor Wells -

That planning permission be granted, subject to the inclusion of the following conditions –

1.
The development must be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason
To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Garage 142017-04, Proposed Extension and Alterations 142017-01.

Reason
For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3.
Notwithstanding the approved plans, details of ALL windows, including glazing bars, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The details shall include information on colour and provider as well as detailed drawings at a scale of no greater than 1:20, including cross-sections.

Reason
To protect the area's character in accordance with policies CS5 and CS6 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy, and policy HE2 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

4.
Details of all external facing materials shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

Reason
To protect the area's character in accordance with policies CS5 and CS6 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy, and policy HE2 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

Motion Carried

1920 MAJOR APPLICATIONS - The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report containing details of major applications for determination by the committee, including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.

(i) PA/2017/1975 by Mr A Carruthers for outline planning permission to erect up to 23 dwellings with appearance, landscaping, layout and scale reserved for subsequent approval at land off Westgate Road, Westgate, Belton

Prior to consideration of this item, three objectors addressed the committee. Collectively, they stated that the absence of a five-year housing supply did not mean the application should be granted. The application was not a sustainable development, a viewpoint shared by the council's Spatial Planning department. Belton was ranked 53^rd in the North Lincolnshire table of settlement grounds. The application would have a detrimental effect on the landscape of the area. There were no ponds within the immediate vicinity of the site. There was a lot of wildlife that bred in the garden of the site, with it being a natural habitat for many species. The drainage was totally inadequate to support this development. The application was for family dwellings. The local infrastructure could not support such a large influx of families. There were no economic benefits to the development. Public transport was also not accessible in the area.

The applicant's agent addressed the committee. He stated that the application would assist with providing housing. There was no five-year housing supply in North Lincolnshire. The site was in a sustainable location. It provided access to employment, public transport, schools and shops. There was legal case law that supported the grant of this type of application. There was housing on all sides of the proposed development. The site was located in flood zone 1. This meant it would not flood. Highways had made no representation. An ecology report had been commissioned. It stated there would be no ecological detriment were the application granted. There were no heritage or wildlife issues at the site.

The Chairman read a letter from local ward member Councillor Robinson. The letter advised members to defer the application for a site visit.

It was then moved by Councillor Evison and seconded by Councillor Wells -

That consideration of this application be deferred to a future meeting and that member's visit the site prior to the meeting.

Motion Carried

(ii) PA/2018/1316 by Mr Mark Abbott, Egdon Resources UK Ltd for planning permission for the retention of Wressle-1 wellsite and access track for the production of hydrocarbons, together with an extension of the site by 0.12 ha for the installation of additional security facilities; site reconfiguration to facilitate the installation of a new impermeable membrane. French drain and surface water interceptor; construction of a new bund, tanker loader plinth and internal roadway system; installation of up to two additional groundwater monitoring boreholes and deepening of three existing groundwater monitoring boreholes; well operation; installation of production facilities and equipment; installation of gas engine and electrical grid connection; oil and gas production for a temporary period of 15 years; and restoration of arable land at Wressle-1 Wellsite, Lodge Farm, Clapp Gate, Appleby, DN15 0DB.

Prior to consideration of this item, five objectors addressed the committee. Collectively, they stated the application would generate a million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, as well as greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change was a huge problem internationally, leading to catastrophic weather occurrences. Therefore, applications like this one should be refused and instead renewables encouraged. The application would result in hydraulic acid squeeze, which was totally unacceptable. The application was fracking in their opinion. There was a geo-physical risk to the steel works. High squeeze operation had never been used on-shore before which was a real concern. This application was for the country's first ever acid frack on-shore using hydrfluoric acid. There could not be a 100 per cent fail-safe guarantee. The applicant had again submitted the wrong geo-graphic site plan, which was a concern. This application may affect local drinking water supplies. It would also use thousands of gallons of water a day. This would affect the consumer. Accidental released of acid could occur into the local water supply. Scunthorpe was already the victim of high level fine particle pollution. Refusing the application would assist the clean air strategy. All residents should be able to access good clean water supply. This application could affect that. There was no safe way to contain the fluids or prevent spillages. Internationally, two earthquakes were caused by this type of application. The application proposed a real risk to the health of local residents. Were the application to be granted, what reassurances could the applicant give as to risk mitigation. Local residents were deeply concerned about the application. The committee had refused this application on numerous occasions. Nothing had changed.

The applicant's agent, as well as two representatives of the applicant addressed the committee. They stated that the Planning Officers report addressed all the material planning considerations and the application was in accordance with national planning policy. The Independent Planning Inspectorate had considered two previous appeals by the applicant. This application addressed all the comments made by the Inspector. The proposed planning conditions would address all concerns of local residents. The proposed conditions were robust, appropriate and proportionate. The application was in accordance with the council's planning policies. Any potential risks would be contained through a new design and membrane. There were no problems with the quality assurance plan. The application would not result in an adverse impact in the locality. All drilling methods had been discussed in great detail at the Planning Enquiry. There would be no harm to the environment and no contamination risk to local water supplies. There was no objection from Public Health or the Environment Agency. There would be no acid fracking at the site. The Planning Inspector had considered in great detail the application. The use of oil and gas was fundamental to everyday life. This application would use materials that were contained within oil and gas. The industry supports thousands of jobs. There were almost 100 representations from members of the public. However, there were no objections from statutory authorities. The council's own Environmental Health officers had no objection to the application. British Steel had no objection to the application. Lincolnshire already had many similar wells in operation, with no impact. The application was back before the committee for the third time. The council's own Planning Officer had again recommended the application be approved. The company was very proud of its safety record. There would be no detrimental impact from the site. No concerns had been raised following the site test. The company had engaged with local residents in a positive manner. Were the application to be approved, the company would establish a Community Liaison Group for consultation and establish a community fund for local community and voluntary groups to bid for funding for local projects. There were no planning grounds on which to refuse the application. The application would contribute to the country's energy supply. The application would not contribute to climate change. The site had been tested and independently assessed with no issues raised. There was effective protection in place for the membrane. The quality assurance plan had been approved.

Councillor Mumby-Croft, local ward member stated that many constituents had been in contact with her to express their concern over the application. The application should be refused in accordance with policy M23.

Councillor Briggs addressed the committee. He was concerned about the number of times the application had been resubmitted when the committee had previously refused all the applications. There was a huge strength of feeling against the application. The risks associated with type of application were high. The applicant had failed to maintain the site. The application should therefore be refused.

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control provided a verbal update on the planning application, as well as informing members of an additional representation.

Councillor Evison complimented the Planning Officer on a very technical report. He was concerned that the applicant had not provided sufficient reassurances that the application was safe. Preventing any contamination of the water supply was of paramount importance, as well as protecting the amenities of local residents. The application was, in his opinion, contrary to policy DS13 and DS15, as well as CS18.

Councillor Glover agreed with his fellow ward member and, following a significant number of local representations made against the application, could not support the application.

Councillor Bainbridge acknowledged that members were not experts, despite this being the third time the application had been considered. Unfortunately, it appeared that experts had all reached different conclusions on the suitability of this application. Therefore, members would have to rely on their own judgement. The committee had a responsibility to listen to the representations of local people.

Councillor Grant was disappointed that the applicant had still not proved the application was not a form of fracking.

Councillor Hannigan suggested that the committee could only make a decision on the evidence it had presented before it. Therefore, he could not support the application.

Councillor Wells was deeply concerned about the risks associated with the application.

It was then moved by Councillor Evison and seconded by Councillor Glover -That planning permission be refused for the following reasons

The additional information submitted by the applicant, in support of the proposal, fails to allay the concerns of the local planning authority with regard to ground contamination from both water run-off and the infiltration of water used in the development into water courses.

The proposal would therefore have an unacceptable impact on local residents, the community and the local economy. The proposed development is therefore considered to be contrary to saved policies M23, DS13 and DS15 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan (2003) and policy CS18 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy (2011).

Motion Carried

(iii) PA/2018/1612 by Mr I Ball for planning permission to add new lake at existing site at Fourways Fishery, Gunthorpe Road, Owston Ferry, DN9 1BG.

Prior to consideration of this application, an objector addressed the committee. He was in agreement with the Planning Officers report and the recommendation. The site was adjacent to agricultural land. There was no evidence that there was a demand for the lake. The landscape would be adversely affected by the addition of a new lake. The lake would not be in keeping with the area. Access to the site was via a narrow road.

The applicant's agent addressed the committee. She stated that carp fishing was very popular. Locally anglers were faced with long waiting lists before they could go fishing. Anglers only wanted to fish for large carp. This required a large lake. Anglers had previously left as the carp were not large enough. The applicant wanted to supply larger fish. A smaller lake would be counter productive as the applicant already had two. A flood risk had been submitted. It stated that the site was in flood zone 3. The Environment Agency had no objections to the application. Were the application to be granted, the applicant would accept any conditions stipulated by the Ecology Officer.

Councillor Evison acknowledged that he could not envisage any issues associated with this application. The application would bring enjoyment to many local people.

Councillor Collinson was concerned that the lake was out of character with the local area.

Councillor Grant supported the application, and agreed that conditions should be attached following consultation with the Ecology Officer.

It was then moved by Councillor Evison and seconded by Councillor Grant -That planning permission be granted, subject to the inclusion of the following conditions -

1.
The development must be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason
To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: NLGU009 and NLGU010.

Reason
For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3.
The fishing lake hereby permitted shall not be used for any motorised sport/activity at any time.

Reason
To safeguard residential amenity in accordance with policy CS23 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy, and policies RD2 and DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

4.
No development shall take place until an ecological survey has been carried out on the site, and submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This ecological survey shall include recommendations to safeguard wildlife on the site during and after the development hereby permitted. Thereafter only the approved ecological survey shall be implemented on site in accordance with the approved details and recommendations.

Reason
To conserve and enhance wildlife and biodiversity in accordance with policies CS5 and CS17 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy.

Motion Carried

(iv) PA/2018/1768 by Mr M Cartwright, Cartwright Properties Ltd for planning permission for part demolition, refurbishment and extension of existing buildings for use as B2 (General Industrial) with ancillary B8 (storage and distribution), B1a (offices) and vehicle showroom, together with landscaping, car parking, access and ancillary works, remediation and reprofiling of land (including removal of bunds) at Belton Business Park, A161 between Belton and Epworth, Belton, DN9 1NY.

Prior to consideration of this item, the Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control verbally updated the committee on the conditions to be attached to the application, were it to be approved.

It was then moved by Councillor Evison and seconded by Councillor Hannigan -

That planning permission be granted, subject to the inclusion of the following conditions -

1.
Issuing of permission delegated to Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control once conditions finalised.

Motion Carried

1921 PLANNING AND OTHER APPLICATIONS - The Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control 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 Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control updated the reports orally where appropriate. Other officers attending gave advice and answered members' questions as requested.

(i) PA/2017/1765 by Mr I Ball for planning permission to erect two detached houses with detached garages at land to the rear of 30 Doncaster Road, Westwoodside, Haxey, DN9 2EA.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(ii) PA/2018/1120 by Mr Wayne Stead for planning permission to erect a detached triple garage with loft storage above at Surrey Lodge Farm, Sandtoft Road, Epworth, DN9 1EW.

Prior to consideration of the item, the applicant's agent addressed the committee. She endorsed the Planning Officers recommendation and reiterated that the application was essential for the vehicles on site.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(iii) PA/2018/1177 by Miss Madison Withers for planning permission to erect a side extension, raise the roof height and carry out other alterations to facilitate a loft conversion, and erect a new boundary wall adjacent to the highway at 44 Knightsbridge Road, Messingham, DN17 3RA.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(iv) PA/2018/1384 by Euro Garages Ltd for planning permission to erect a petrol filling station with ancillary convenience store and sandwich shop concession, three jet washes, ATM facilities, underground tanks, drive-thru coffee shop plus associated access, car parking, landscaping and other enabling works at land off Ferriby Road, Barton upon Humber.

Prior to consideration of this item, an objector addressed the committee. He was concerned over the increase in traffic the application would generate, particularly from the A15. Large heavy goods vehicles would also be a concern. Noise would also be an issue, particularly through the night. There would be an unacceptable loss of amenity as a result of the application. The applicant had not demonstrated that there was a clear need for the application. Similar facilities were already available in the town. The application did not conform to the council's policies.

A representative of the applicant also addressed the committee. He endorsed the Planning Officers report and the recommendation. He confirmed that the applicant had undertaken market research locally on the need for the application. The response was positive. The applicant had not misled local residents. The application would not be amended or resubmitted. The impact of the application was acceptable. There were no material planning considerations. The applicant was fully aware of local residents concerns. More sympathetic landscaping would be planted were the application granted. The development would generate up to 45 jobs. The application was a sustainable development and no statutory objections had been received.

Councillor P Vickers, local ward member spoke against the application. He informed the committee that local residents would be adversely affected by the application. Local residents would be situated opposite the site. Light from the site would shine directly in to their homes. The site being open 24 hours a day would severely affect the amenities of local residents. Vehicles could access the site 24 hours a day, bringing disruption to local residents. The site would also affect the speed and flow of the traffic. Heavy goods vehicles should also be restricted from accessing the site.

Councillor Collinson believed that the petrol station and coffee shop would be complimentary to the development. There were no highways issues at the site.

Councillor Evison spoke against the application. It was close to a roundabout and would have an impact on traffic movement. Residents believe they had been misled over the change of use of the public house. Traffic would inevitably increase as a result of this application.

Councillor Hannigan expressed his concern over heavy goods vehicles refuelling at the site. Therefore, were the application to be granted, a condition should be added to prevent heavy goods vehicles from refuelling at the site.Councillor Wells agreed with Councillor Hannigan in that the site was not large enough to allow heavy goods vehicles to stop and refuel.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report, subject to the amendments of the following conditions -.

…one year…

8. (additional condition)

There shall, at no time, be any facility for the fuelling of HGVs within the site.

Reason
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy T19 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

9. (additional condition)

Opening hours for the petrol filling station shall be limited to the following:

– 6am to 11pm Monday to Saturday

– 6am to 11pm on Sundays.

Reason
To avoid the unacceptable loss of amenity to local residents through noise, which would be contrary to policy DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

10. (originally 8)

…6am to 11pm.…

12. (originally 10) - replace with:

Electric vehicle charging (EVC) points shall be provided in accordance with the approved Site Layout Plan (Drawing No. 5. The EVC points shall be rapid charge points, and shall be installed prior to the development being brought into use and retained on site thereafter.

14. (originally 12) - replace with:

No stage of the development hereby permitted shall commence until a construction environmental management plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once agreed the CEMP shall be implemented for the duration of construction operations on site.

16. (originally 14) - replace with:

No development shall take place until proposals for landscaping have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The proposals shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the site, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection during the course of development.

(v) PA/2018/1446 by Mr Mark Pilkington for outline planning permission to erect five dwellings, including the demolition of redundant farm buildings at the Farm Yard, Ferry Road, Graizelound, Haxey, DN9 2LY.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report

(vi) PA/2018/1603 by Mr Raymond Carr for planning permission to vary condition 2 of planning permission PA/2016/608 relating to the removal of stone cills, rooflights, alterations to the design of windows and retention of a walk-on balcony with a proposed screen fence at 7 West Halton Lane, Alkborough, DN15 9JY.

Prior to consideration of the application, an objector addressed the committee. He stated that local residents had objected to the original application. The plans show a full escape window and not French doors. The flat roof could also become a balcony. The development would overlook neighbouring properties. The proposed wooden screens would not last forever and could fall into disrepair if not properly maintained. Nearby residents would want the full escape window installed.

Councillor Rowson, local ward member shared her concerns about the application and respectfully requested that permission be refused.

Resolved – That planning permission be refused in accordance with the Planning Officers report.

(vii) PA/2018/1697 by Mr Neil Grantham, Lindholme Lakes for outline planning permission to erect a gatehouse dwelling at Lindholme Lakes, West Carr, Epworth, DN9 1LF.

Prior to consideration of the application, the applicant's agent addressed the committee. She informed members that it was not on the application to have more dwellings on the site, only replacement dwellings. The application would bring prosperity and have a positive impact on the area. All visitors would spend money in the local economy. Low level crime was currently an issue on the site. Installation of cameras would improve security but there were still problems on the site. The gatehouse would act as a visual deterrent. It would also assist with allowing visitors to access the site.

The Chairman read out a letter from Councillor Baroness Redfern, supporting the application.

Councillor Collinson queried the comment made by the agent that it was a replacement dwelling.

Councillor Evison reiterated that every application was considered on its own merits. The fishing centre would enhance the local area.

That the application be granted, subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Legal Agreement for the cessation of the use of the existing residential property on the site in order to regard the proposal as a replacement dwelling and to ensure that the dwelling can be tied to the business in perpetuity and the following conditions -

Condition 1

Approval of the details of the layout, scale, access, landscaping and appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called ‘the reserved matters’) shall be obtained from the local planning authority in writing before any development is commenced.

Reason: The application has been made under Article 5(1) of the Town & Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

Condition 2

Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1 above, relating to the layout, scale, and appearance of any buildings to be erected, the means of access to the site and the landscaping of the site, shall be submitted in writing to the local planning authority and shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: The application has been made under Article 5(1) of the Town & Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

Condition 3

Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Condition 4

The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Condition 5

If, during development, any odorous, discoloured or otherwise visually contaminated material is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until a written method statement detailing how this contamination shall be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other off-site receptors in accordance with policy DS7 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

Condition 6

No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority of the make, type and colour of all external facing materials for the development and only the approved materials shall be used.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to accord with policy DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

Condition 7

No development shall take place until a detailed Flood Risk Statement and drainage strategy is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This should outline all sources of flood risk (including surface water, ground water and ordinary watercourse) and proposals to mitigate this and include preliminary drainage layout plans and ground investigation details to support the feasibility of infiltration for the site. SuDS should be considered. Reference should be made to North Lincolnshire Councils SuDS and Flood Risk Guidance Document. Infiltration tests should comprise full scale tests to demonstrate long term effectiveness and suitability.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding to themselves and others, in accordance with Policy DS16 of the North Lincolnshire Councils Local Plan & Policies CS18 and CS19 of the North Lincolnshire Councils Core Strategy.

Condition 8

The dwelling shall not be occupied until the vehicular access to it and the vehicle parking space(s) serving it have been completed and, once provided, the parking space(s) shall thereafter be so retained.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policies T2 and T19 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

Condition 9

The development herby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Supplementary Flood Risk Assessment submitted by Mark Simmons Planning Services, dated March 2018 and the following mitigation measures detailed therein:

• The ground floor shall be used for garage, storage or utility space only.
• Flood resilient materials and construction techniques shall be incorporated to a level of 4.4mODN as described.

The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and subsequently maintained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants.

Condition 10
Within 3 months of the commencement of development, the applicant or their successor in title shall submit a biodiversity management plan to the local planning authority for approval in writing.

The plan shall include:

(a) Details of bat roosting features to be installed;

(b) Details of nesting sites to be installed to support a variety of farmland and garden birds;

(c) Restrictions on lighting to avoid impacts on bat roosts, bat foraging areas bird nesting sites and sensitive habitats;

(d) Provision for hedgehogs to pass through any fencing installed between gardens and between areas of grassland;

(e) Prescriptions for the planting and aftercare of native trees, shrubs, and hedgerows of high biodiversity value;

(f) Details of wetland habitat to be created/protected as part of sustainable drainage;

(g) Proposed timings for the above works in relation to the completion of the buildings;

Reason: To conserve and enhance biodiversity in accordance with policies CS5 and CS17 of the Core Strategy.'

Motion Carried

(viii) PA/2018/1702 by Mr and Mrs Jubb for planning permission to erect a conservatory at 7 Willow Grove, Keadby, DN17 3ET.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(ix) PA/2018/1725 by Mr Simon Wheeler, Enso Energy Ltd for planning permission for works required to develop a gas powered standby generation plant, including associated works at land off Stather Road, Flixborough.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(x) PA/2018/1771 by Mr K Scott for planning application to remove condition 5 of PA/2003/1260 (in order to remove occupancy condition) at West End Grange, Epworth Water Gardens, West End Road, Epworth, DN9 1LA.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(xi) PA/2018/1774 by Mr and Mrs J Colby for planning permission to erect a detached bungalow with attached garage at land adjacent to 7 Burton Road, Flixborough, DN15 8RW.

The applicant's agent addressed the committee. He referred to the two objections, namely loss of light at the bungalow and highways related issues. The development was 22 metres away from the nearest bungalow. The council's own Highways department had not objected to the application.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(xii) PA/2018/1847 by Michelle Slimm, Riverside Surgery for planning permission to change the use of domestic garden to form extension and additional car parking to existing doctor's surgery, and erect a single-storey rear extension (including part demolition of existing building), with associated external works at 27 Brooklands Avenue, Broughton, DN20 0DY.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(xiii) PA/2018/1862 by Mr and Mrs Heighington for planning permission to erect a rear single-storey extension, install render to part of front and rear elevations, and erect a detached garage at former Fieldside Residential Childcare Home, Fieldside, Epworth, DN9 1DR.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.

(xiv) PA/2018/1929 by Miss Jessica Bone for planning permission for change of use from A2 (retail) to A5 (hot food takeaway) at former Florist's Cambridge Avenue, Bottesford, DN16 3LG.

Councillor J Davison, local ward member addressed the committee. He stated that residents were against this application. A petition against the application had been started. The application was contrary to a number of policies. The site was situated along a narrow estate road. Policy DS1 referred to loss of amenity. Rubbish from the takeaway was a real concern, as well as the number of car movements that the application would generate.

Councillor Poole acknowledged that the local ward member had made a number of valid points. The council had a responsibility to keep the area tidy. He too had concerns over the access to the site and parking.

It was then moved by Councillor Poole and seconded by Councillor Glover -

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons -

The proposal was considered to have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of the area through the effects of litter generation, odour and general disturbance. It was also considered that the access to the site and parking provision would be unduly impacted upon by virtue of the proposal. Accordingly, the development was considered to be contrary to policies S9, T2 and DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

(Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest, Councillor N Sherwood left the meeting for consideration of the following item, minute 1921 (xv) refers. Councillor Evison thereupon took the Chair).

(xv) PA/2018/1704 by Mr Kettyle for planning permission to erect a replacement dwelling with detached garage (including demolition of existing dwelling) at Park Lea, Barton Road, Wrawby, DN20 8SH.

Prior to consideration of the item, the applicant's agent addressed the committee. She reminded members that a previous application for a larger development at the site had been refused by the committee, on the grounds of its appearance, scale and drainage issues. Following that decision, the application had been amended. There was now ample room around the dwelling, which was referred to by members during consideration of the previous application. The applicant had listened to comments made by neighbours. Consequently the design and appearance of the dwelling had been amended. The balcony had also been removed. The applicant had also met with the council's drainage officers to ensure the committee's previous concerns were addressed. There were no issues with flooding. To conclude, the applicant had proactively acted upon the reasons for refusal previously stated by this committee.

Councillor Waltham MBE, local ward member acknowledged that this application was very different to the previous application. However, some local residents still had reservations about the application. There was concern locally that the drainage issues had still not been resolved. The planting of trees was welcomed and would act as a screen. The applicant had listened to the concerns of local residents and this committee and as a result the application had been amended, resulting in some of those objections being withdrawn.

Resolved - That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report.