Agenda and minutes

Venue: Church Square House, High Street, Scunthorpe

Contact: Tanya Davies  Email: tanya.davies@northlincs.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

2114.

Substitutions

Minutes:

Councillor C Sherwood substituted for Councillor C Ross.

2115.

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). pdf icon PDF 83 KB

Minutes:

The following member declared personal interests –

 

Councillor D Wells

Application: 2021/169 (Minute: 2119iv)

Reason: Member of Parish Council

 

Application 2021/170 (Minute 2119iii)

Reason: Member of Parish Council

 

The following members declared that they had been lobbied –

 

Councillor J Davison

Application: PA/2020/1949 (Minute: 2117ii)

 

Councillor M Grant

Application: PA/2020/1949 (Minute: 2117ii)

 

Councillor R Hannigan

Application: PA/2021/170 (Minute: 2119iii)

 

Councillor N Poole

Application: PA/2021/22 (Minute: 2117iii)

Application: PA/2021/727 (Minute: 2119x)

 

Councillor N Sherwood

Application: PA/2020/1949 (Minute: 2117ii)

Application: PA/2021/22 (Minute: 2117iii)

Application: PA/2021/170 (Minute: 2119iii)

 

Councillor D Southern

Application: PA/2020/1949 (Minute: 2117ii)

 

Councillor D Wells

Application: PA/2020/1949 (Minute: 2117ii)

Application: PA/2021/170 (Minute: 2119iii)

2116.

To take the minutes of the meeting held on 2 June 2021 as a correct record and authorise the chairman to sign pdf icon PDF 249 KB

Minutes:

Resolved – That the minutes of the proceedings of the meeting held on 2 June 2021, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the Chairman.

2117.

Applications deferred from previous meetings for a site visit. pdf icon PDF 81 KB

Minutes:

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 submitted reports and updated them orally.

2117i

PA/2019/609 Advertisement consent for 16 internally illuminated fascia signs, 11 internally illuminated other signs and three non-illuminated other signs at Site of new petrol station, Ferriby Road, Barton upon Humber pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control submitted a report on this application for consideration by the committee.  In accordance with the decision at the previous meeting, members had undertaken a site visit on the morning of the meeting. 

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the Chairman read out a letter from local ward member Councillor K Vickers, who was concerned that the application would generate additional light pollution and would adversely impact the local environment. 

 

Councillor Hannigan was also concerned that the application would create unnecessary light pollution and be detrimental to the amenities of local residents. 

 

Councillor Grant stated that there was no objection to the application from the council’s Environmental Health department.  Consequently, he believed the application should be granted.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Hannigan and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That the application be refused for the following reason –

 

The proposal was considered to have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of the surrounding area and the visual amenity of the street scene through the effects of light pollution.  Accordingly, the development was considered to be contrary to policy DS1 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

Motion Carried

2117ii

PA/2020/1949 Planning Permission for the change of use of land to permit the siting of static caravans at Brookside Caravan Park, Stather Road, Burton upon Stather pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control submitted a report on this application for consideration by the committee.  In accordance with the decision at the previous meeting, members had undertaken a site visit on the morning of the meeting. 

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the Chairman read out a letter of objection to the application from local ward member Councillor Marper local ward member

 

Councillor Hannigan was concerned that there was a significant difference between a static caravan and a tourer.  The static caravans could be occupied for most of the year and the location of the site, near to the boarding kennels was not ideal.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Hannigan and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons –

 

1.

The development would be detrimental to the residential amenity rights of existing residents by virtue of intensification of use as a caravan site and an increase in associated vehicular trips. The proposal is considered to be contrary to policies DS1, H7 and RD2 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

2.

Insufficient information has been provided to assess the ecological impacts of the development. The proposal is considered to be contrary to policies CS5 and CS17 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy, and saved policies RD2 and R13 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan, as well as paragraphs 170 and 175(d) of the National Planning Policy Framework. 

 

Motion Carried

2117iii

PA/2021/22 Planning Permission to erect a garage/garden room at 8 The Old School Yard, Redbourne, DN21 4QN pdf icon PDF 999 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Group Manager - Development Management and Building Control submitted a report on this application for consideration by the committee.  In accordance with the decision at the previous meeting, members had undertaken a site visit on the morning of the meeting. 

 

Prior to consideration of the item, an objector addressed the committee.  He was concerned that the application was situated on top of the main sewer.  This would invariably lead to issues where maintenance to the sewer was needed.  The area already experienced surface water run-off issues and this application would only exacerbate the problem.  There were also issues with the access to the site, particularly a telegraph pole that would obscure views.

 

The applicant spoke in support of the application.  He stated that the garage was to be built to allow for the restoration of a classic car.  The windows in the garage would be positioned so as not to overlook neighbouring properties.  Any potential drainage issues had been accounted for in the application and the development would not place additional pressure on the main sewer.

 

Councillor Poole, local ward member was concerned that the drainage issues at the development site would impact neighbouring properties.  Surface water run-off was also a concern at the site.

 

The Group Manager orally updated the committee on an additional informative that, were the committee minded to grant the application, could be attached to the conditions.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Hannigan and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained within the report, subject to the inclusion of the following additional informative –

 

Our records indicate that the proposed development site is located over a 150mm foul sewer. This must be consented by Anglian Water Approval. You are advised to contact Anglian Water to gain approval that your development will not be in breach of any legislation or requirements that stand separate to planning.

 

Motion Carried

2118.

Major Planning Applications. pdf icon PDF 83 KB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management 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.

2118i

PA/2020/2046 Outline application for residential development of up to 79 dwellings with all matters reserved except for access at Vicarage Fields, Scawby Road, Broughton pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

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

 

The applicant’s agent addressed the committee and spoke in support of the application.  The agent addressed the concerns of residents about the additional vehicle movements and impact the development would have on the highway network.  The site was in the new local plan and was lasted as suitable, sustainable development.

 

Councillor Ross, local ward member addressed the committee and stated that the development was situated close to two major highway junctions.  Highway users would have practically zero visibility when exiting the site.  The location of the site was a notorious accident blackspot and was also subject to flooding.  The drainage infrastructure in the village was at full capacity and could not support any additional dwellings.

 

The Chairman read out a letter from local Member of Parliament Andrew Percy, respectfully requesting that the committee visit the site to see first hand the issues that the development would generate.

 

Councillor J Davison was also concerned about the impact the development would have on the local highway infrastructure.

 

Councillor Grant was concerned that the Section 106 agreement made no reference to the number of affordable homes the site would provide.

 

It was then moved by Councillor J Davison and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood -

 

That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site and for further consideration be given to the Section 106 contributions.

 

Motion Carried

2118ii

PA/2021/30 Planning permission to erect 10 affordable homes at land rear of Minster Day Care Centre, Chesterfield Road, Scunthorpe, DN15 7UP pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Minutes:

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

 

The applicant’s agent addressed the committee and spoke in support of the application.  He stated that the development site had excellent transport links.  The affordable homes would provide real benefits to the community.  The development provided off-road parking for its residents as well as three visitor parking spaces.  The development would not impact on any parking provision for nearby residents and the planning officer’s recommendation was, in his opinion, the correct course of action.

 

Councillor Walshe, local ward member attended the meeting and spoke in support of local residents who were concerned the impact the development would have on their local amenities.

 

Councillor Hannigan agreed with the development in principle.  However, due to the concerns expressed by the local residents a site visit was required.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Hannigan and seconded by Councillor J Davison-

 

That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site.

 

Motion Carried

2119.

Planning and other applications for determination by the committee. pdf icon PDF 83 KB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management 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 Development Management updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

2119i

PA/2020/1363 Planning permission to erect a dwelling and detached garage with associated works at Keepers Hide, Vicarage Lane, Redbourne, DN21 4QW pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Councillor J Davison informed the committee that he was concerned about condition 3 contained within the planning officers report.  It would be very difficult to ascertain how the water was to be controlled.  The Parish Council had objected to the application as it was outside the development boundary, was in the open countryside and constituted backland development.

 

It was then moved by Councillor J Davison and seconded by Councillor Hannigan –

 

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons -

 

1.

The proposal is located within the open countryside and is considered unacceptable in principle. No specific need has been demonstrated to meet any of the exceptions to the wider presumption against development in the countryside outlined in North Lincolnshire Local Plan policy RD2 and the proposal is therefore contrary to policy RD2 and North Lincolnshire Core Strategy policy CS3 which seek to restrict such development. The incursion of an increase of built development in the countryside that cannot be adequately justified does not outweigh the benefit of the provision of an additional dwelling and the tilted balance applied through paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

2.

The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its scale and siting to the rear of the existing dwelling outside the settlement boundary, would increase the visual impact of the village on the wider area and result in harm to the open character and appearance of the wider landscape. As such, it would be contrary to North Lincolnshire Core Strategy policy CS5 and North Lincolnshire Local Plan policy DS1.

 

3.

The proposal constitutes backland development which necessitates the removal of trees and bushes from the site to the detriment of the character and appearance of the Redbourne Conservation Area. As such, the proposal would not accord with North Lincolnshire Core Strategy policy CS6 and North Lincolnshire Local Plan policy HE2.

 

Motion Carried

2119ii

PA/2020/1967 Planning permission to site a temporary dwelling in connection with an equestrian business at land off Ings Road, Kirton in Lindsey, DN21 4BX pdf icon PDF 343 KB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.  He informed the members that the application was for a new rural equestrian business.  If granted, it would allow the applicant, who was a British coach to turn a hobby into a business, providing a riding school for use by the local community.  The Parish Council had objected to the application as it was outside the development boundary.  However, the application was not a domestic business.

 

Councillor J Davison stated that despite the Town Council objection, he had no issues with the application.

 

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

2119iii

PA/2021/170 Outline planning permission to erect three detached dwellings with appearance, landscaping, layout and scale reserved for subsequent consideration at land rear of 81-85 Barnabas Road, Barnetby le Wold pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the applicant’s agent addressed the committee.  He informed the members that the applicant had held an in-depth discussion with the council’s highways department on the merits of the application.  All concerns associated with the application had been considered by the applicant and eloquently addressed in the planning officers report.  The application was just outside the development boundary, however, it was deemed acceptable.  A second sustainability survey had been undertaken by the applicant.  The development was situation in a large but sustainable village.  There was also no impact on the street scene.

 

Councillor Waltham MBE, local ward member informed the committee that he had serious concerns whether development should occur on the site.  The site was situated outside the development boundary and Barnetby had experienced significant development in recent years which was now having an adverse impact on the village amenities and infrastructure.  A site visit would be of great use to the committee.

 

Councillor Wells was concerned that the development plot was small and outside the development boundary.  It was backland development and the visual impact of the application would be considerable.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Wells and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site.

 

Motion Carried

2119iv

PA/2021/169 Planning permission to create private drive access at land east of St Barnabas Road, Barnetby le Wold pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Councillor Wells was concerned that the entrance to the site was small in relation to the application and there was no public access.  The development was on a busy road and close to the school.  Members would benefit from visiting the site prior to its determination. 

 

It was then moved by Councillor Wells and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site.

 

Motion Carried

2119v

PA/2021/255 Planning permission to erect a detached dormer bungalow with single-storey side extensions and attached covered open bay garage at land adjoining and to the rear of 12 Mill Lane, Kirton in Lindsey, DN21 4DY pdf icon PDF 928 KB

Minutes:

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

2119vi

PA/2021/287 Planning permission to erect a single and two-storey rear extension and a two-storey side extension, to include a replacement roof at 26 Tee Lane, Burton upon Stather, DN15 9ED pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Prior to consideration of the item, an objector addressed the committee.  He informed members that he was speaking on behalf of the owners of three nearby properties that would be affected by this application.  Local residents were concerned that the development could lead to the collapse of their driveways due to the weakened foundations.  The development was left than five feet away from neighbouring properties.  It would be over bearing and intrusive.  Were the development to proceed, the fence between the properties could not be maintained.

 

The applicant’s agent also addressed the committee.  He stated that the application had been amended to increase the space between neighbouring properties.  The plots were extremely large.  There would be no negative impact or ‘shadowing’ on neighbouring properties.  The development would be two feet from the nearest boundary.  Neighbours to the development site had built right up to the boundary. 

 

Councillor Hannigan stated that the application was for a large extension and, in his opinion, warranted a site visit.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Hannigan and seconded by Councillor Wells –

 

That the application be deferred to the next meeting to allow the committee to visit the site.

 

Motion Carried

2119vii

PA/2021/369 Planning permission to erect a farm manager's dwelling at land to the rear of Hill Crest, East Lound Road, Owston Ferry (access from Burnham Road) pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the applicant addressed the committee.  He informed members that the application was made by a family business.  The business had to move due to the noise and smell emanating from the site.  Due to Government rules, a presence was required on site at all times to care for the animals.  As a result of theft, burglary and in order to care for the animals, 24-hour staffing was required to safeguard the site.  The business had employed five generations of the family but needed the application to be approved to ensure its long-term future.  The Parish Council were in support of the application.  The development was not contrary to policy LC14 as it had no adverse impact on the historical landscape.

 

Councillor C Sherwood was of the opinion that the application was in the open countryside and should be granted.

 

It was then moved by Councillor C Sherwood and seconded by Councillor Wells –

 

That planning permission be granted, subject to 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: 005 Site Location Plan; 006 Existing Block Plan; 001 Ground and First Floor Plans; 002 Elevations as Proposed; 003 3D View 1; 3D View 2; Design and Access Statement.

 

Reason        

For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

 

3.

Unless otherwise agreed by the local planning authority, development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation must not commence until parts 1 to 4 below have been complied with. If unexpected contamination is found after development has begun, development must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination to the extent specified by the local planning authority in writing until part 4 has been complied with in relation to that contamination.

 

Part 1: Site Characteristics

A Phase 1 desk study shall be carried out to identify and evaluate all potential sources of contamination and the impacts on land and/or controlled waters, relevant to the site. The desk study shall establish a 'conceptual model' of the site and identify all plausible pollutant linkages. Furthermore, the assessment shall set objectives for intrusive site investigation works/Quantitative Risk Assessment (or state if none required). Two full copies of the desk study and a non-technical summary shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval prior to proceeding to further site investigation.

 

An investigation and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2119vii

2119viii

PA/2021/445 Planning permission to erect a single-storey extension above the existing garage and gym at Wesley Guest House, 16 Queen Street, Epworth, DN9 1HG pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

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

2119ix

PA/2021/536 Planning permission for the change of use of a barn and for internal alterations and refurbishment of existing stores, garage and barn to provide ancillary residential accommodation at Bracken Court, Brackenhill Road, East Lound, Haxey, DN9 2LR pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Prior to consideration of the item, the committee was informed that there was an inaccuracy in the report.  The Head of Service advised of the inaccuracy and confirmed that the correct property had been assessed.

 

An objector then addressed the committee.  She also referred to the inaccuracies in the report, particularly the inclusion of a building on the site plan that had been demolished 30 years ago.  There was particular concern over the building regulations that would relate to the application.  The west wall at the property would only be 8 cm away from a neighbouring property.  The site plan attached to the application bore no relation to the property as it was a completely separate residence.  There were concerns expressed by neighbours about the glazing to the west side of the barn.  The development would overlook neighbouring properties and lead to a loss of privacy.

 

Councillor Davison stated that the application was for a large extension.  However, the objections raised by the speaker were not planning considerations.

 

It was then moved by Councillor J Davison and seconded by Councillor C Sherwood –

 

That planning permission be granted in accordance with the recommendations contained within the report, subject to the following condition being amended –

 

4.

The west elevation first-floor window serving the proposed balcony as shown on the submitted plans and elevations shall be obscure glazed to a minimum of level 3 of the 'Pilkington' scale of obscuration or equivalent and non-opening, and retained as such thereafter, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason        

To avoid any actual or perceived overlooking to the west resulting in a loss of residential amenity, in accordance with policies DS1 and DS5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

Motion Carried

2119x

PA/2021/727 Planning permission to erect three dwellings, re-submission of PA/2021/96 at Hop Villa, 6 Well Street, Messingham, DN17 3RT pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Minutes:

The Group Manager – Development Management and Building Control submitted a report for determination by the committee including summaries of policy context, representations arising from consultation and publicity and assessment of the applications.  The Head of Service updated the reports orally where appropriate.  Other officers attending gave advice and answered members’ questions as requested.

 

Speaking against the application, a local resident stated that the application had been refused on two previous occasions, for reasons of it being over development of the site and not in keeping with the local area.  There was insufficient amenity space and restricted vehicular movements.  In his opinion, nothing had changed from previous refusals.

 

The applicant’s agent informed the committee that the previous scheme had been altered.  The vehicular movements were now very different.  There was now no loss of amenity on neighbouring properties.  The objections inferred that the application was an over development of the site and not in keeping with the local area.  This was not true.  The application was for two storey properties and not three storey.  The planning officers report had identified the key points and recommended approval.  The application was now further away from the road and retained its character.

 

Councillor Poole, local ward member believed that the application would lead to an over development of the site and was not the appropriate place for such a development.  The impact of the development on neighbouring properties would be immense.  The site would cause issues for vehicular movements and was not appropriate for a development of this size and scale.

 

Councillor J Davison confirmed that previous applications at the site had been appealed, and subsequently lost.  Well Street was very narrow and not easy to navigate down in a vehicle.  A development of this size and scale was inappropriate for its location.  The previous reasons for refusal by the committee were still valid.

 

It was then moved by Councillor J Davison and seconded by Councillor Hannigan –

 

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons –

 

1.

The proposal would represent over-development of the plot. The erection of three dwellings in this location would be out of keeping with the existing character of Well Street and give rise to unacceptable visual amenity impacts. The proposed density of the development is contrary to that outlined for a Rural Settlement within policy CS7. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies CS5 and CS7 of the North Lincolnshire Core Strategy as well as paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

2.

The proposal would result in the unjustified total loss of an undesignated heritage asset. This scale of harm without any meaningful justification is therefore considered significant and contrary to the aims of policy CS6 of the Core Strategy and paragraph 197 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

Motion Carried

2120.

Any other items, which the chairman decides are urgent, by reasons of special circumstances, which must be specified.

Minutes:

There were no urgent items for consideration at the meeting.