Agenda and minutes

(A form is attached and spares will be available at the meeting)

Councillor Turner declared a prejudicial interest (and left the meeting) in relation to application RB2006/0987 (Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 13 No. two and three storey dwelling houses at 187 Moorgate Road, Moorgate, Rotherham) on the grounds that the applicant is a friend.

Resolved:- (1)  That the minutes of the meeting of the meeting of the Planning Regulatory Board held on 28^th September, 2006 be approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman.

(2) That the Chairman inform the Chief Executive of Members’ concerns about the infrequent attendance of the appropriate Officers of the Neighbourhoods Programme Area at meetings of the Planning Board.

Resolved:- That consideration of the following applications be deferred pending visits of inspection, to enable Members to view the sites/premises and the impact of the proposals on the surrounding environment:-

RB2006/0734            requested by the Planning Board

RB2006/1145            requested by the Chair, Councillor Walker

RB2006/1243            requested by Councillor Wardle

RB2006/1450            requested by Councillor Billington

Before the formal meeting of the Planning Board, Members of the Board made a visit of inspection to the above site (Ward Representative Councillor Gilding being in attendance), the subject of an application for planning permission.

In accordance with the right to speak procedures, the following people attended the meeting and spoke about this application:-

Dr. Kelly (Applicant)

Councillor John Gilding, speaking as a member of the public objecting to this application

Resolved:-  That planning permission be granted for the reasons set out in the report and  subject to the following conditions:-

1.   The use hereby permitted shall be carried out only by Anne Wood.

2.   No persons shall work at the premises other than Anne Wood.

3.   The use hereby permitted shall only be open to customers or for deliveries between the hours of 1000 and 1600 Monday to Saturday and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

4.    No more than four persons shall be treated at the site in anyone day.

Reasons:-

1.   Permission for this development would not have been granted but for the special circumstances of the applicant.

2.   Permission for this development would not have been granted but for the special circumstances of the applicant.

3.    In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.

4.    In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.

Resolved:- (1) That, on the development proposals now considered, decisions be recorded as set out in the schedule now submitted and the requisite notices be issued (a copy of this schedule, together with the schedule of decisions made under delegated powers, will be made available when the printed minutes are produced).

(2) That the time limits specified in Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 apply to the decisions referred to at (1) above.

In accordance with the right to speak procedures, the following people attended the meeting and spoke about the applications listed below:-

-        Erection of two storey dwellinghouse at rear of 6 Clifton Bank fronting Wellgate Rotherham Town Centre for Mr. A. Wright (RB2006/0734)

         Mr. S. Hird (Objector)

-        Outline application for erection of new dwelling at land adjacent to High Ash, Kirby Lane, Wentworth for Mr. Keith Bailey (RB2006/1564)

         Mrs. Ann Huntington (on behalf of Marjorie Spittlehouse) (Applicant)

(3) That applications RB2006/0412, RB2006/1355, RB2006/1430 and RB2006/1510 be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes and subject to the relevant conditions listed in the report.

(4) That applications RB2006/1195, RB2006/1305 and RB2006/1564 be refused for the reasons listed in the report.

(5) That consideration of applications RB2006/0734, RB2006/1145, RB2006/1243 and RB2006/1450 be deferred pending visits of inspection, to enable Members to view the sites/premises.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details for the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of 13 No. two and three storey dwellinghouses at 187 Moorgate Road, Moorgate.

Resolved:-  That planning permission be granted for the reasons adopted by Members for the proposed development and listed in the report and subject to the following conditions:-

1.    No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development, hereby permitted, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

2.   Within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development, trees and/or shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme to provide for species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

3.   The trees to be planted along the site’s boundary with Sitwell Grove, as replacements for trees to be removed, shall be advanced nursery stock, the details of which shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in writing, before the commencement of development. The trees shall thereafter be planted in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the site. Any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

4.   No work or storage on the site shall commence until all the trees/shrubs to be retained have been protected by the erection of a strong durable 2.3 metre high barrier fence in accordance with B.S.5837: 2005 Guide for Trees in Relation to Construction. This shall be positioned in accordance with the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement and drawing, JBA (N) 05/72D-02/Rev D from James Blake Associates. The protective fencing shall be properly maintained and shall not be removed without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority until the development is completed. There shall be no alterations in ground levels, fires, use of plant, storage, mixing or stockpiling of materials within the fenced areas.

5.   No tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed nor shall any tree be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any pruning works approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work). If any tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted in the immediate area and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service which detailed the above application for planning permission.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the Council enter into a legal agreement with the applicant under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the purposes of ensuring:-

·              Provision of affordable units, the affordable units to be provided by the Developer on site will be 7.5% of the total number of units (total number to be approved at the reserved matters stage) to be offered on a shared-equity basis to qualifying persons on the Key Choices list to meet local affordable housing need in the form of built units on site.

(2)  That consequent upon the satisfactory conclusion of the agreement, planning permission be granted for the reasons adopted by Members for the proposed development and listed in the report and subject to the following conditions:-

General

1.   Before the commencement of the development, details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Transportation

2.   The development shall not be commenced until details of a 1.8 metre wide footway, constructed to adoptable standards between points A – B, indicated on the attached plan, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Council and the approved details shall be implemented before the development is occupied.

3.   Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition.

4.   Not later than seven days after the completion of the sale or lease of each dwelling, the developer shall procure from the SYPTE a Travel Master Pass and Journey Planner valid for one year on behalf of each household who shall be the first occupants of such a dwelling and the developer shall give details of the application and the date upon which it was made to the Council. 

5.   Secure cycle parking facilities shall be provided within the site in accordance with the Council’s Cycle Parking Guidelines for New Developments before the development is occupied

Drainage

6.   Details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any off-site work, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until such approved details are implemented.

7.   The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

8.   No piped discharge of surface water from the application site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall for surface  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the change of use of industrial unit from Class B2 to Class D1 (non-residential education) at the Gear Works, Rother Way, Hellaby for Target Learning Trust.

The Inspector allowed the appeal and noted that the appeal site was small scale and was in a far from prominent location. He further noted that the school had been operating for approximately two years and that that there was no evidence that it inhibited the operations of other commercial uses in the area or made it less attractive to potential industrial uses. He states that “The Council’s concern that this could lead to a precedent for the loss of other B2 uses appears unfounded; had it been a larger or more prominent site, or had there been other examples of such changes of use, the concern might be more understandable”.

The Inspector was satisfied that the level of staff employed at the school was sufficient such that the proposal did not harm the economic or regeneration objectives of the industrial estate. In addition, the school’s commitment to transporting its forty pupils by minibus helped to minimise the use of private car travel. The Inspector noted that there was a substantial area of wildlife and wetland that ran adjacent to the site which the school made use of. He concluded that, although this appeared to be an unusual location for a school, it appeared to function well and to meet the needs of its member community without detriment to the industrial estate within which it was located. He, therefore, found that the proposal complied with the provisions of the development plan.

Resolved:-  That the decision be noted.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of retrospective planning permission for the display of an illuminated wall mounted shop sign at 12 Hangsman Lane, Laughton Common.

The Inspector confirmed the Council’s view and dismissed the appeal.  He concluded that “In my view the appeal sign is an incongruous addition to the already high level of advertising on the front of the building. I consider the sign spoils the plain wall of the side elevation. Moreover when seen in conjunction with the existing advertisements it overburdens the property with signage to the detriment of the host building and the street scene as a whole.”

The owners of the premises have been written to requesting the removal of the sign.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the decision be noted.

(2)  That legal proceedings be authorised against the appellant should the sign not be removed within one month of the date of this report.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of land used for siting a storage container at Common Side Farm, Laughton Common.

Planning permission was refused for the above use of land on 9th March 2006.  An Enforcement Notice was subsequently served on the owner of the site, on 6th April, 2006 which took effect on 11th May, 2006 subject to any appeal and allowed a period of three months for compliance.

The site was visited after the completion of the compliance period when it was noted that the storage container had been removed.

Resolved:-  That the report be noted.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against an enforcement notice to secure the removal of all plant and machinery associated with the use of the sewage works as a waste transfer station at Aven Industrial Estate, Scotch Spring Lane, Maltby.

A retrospective application for use of land as an extension to the existing waste transfer and recycling facility located on Aven Industrial Estate, Scotch Spring Lane, Maltby was refused by Planning Board on 12th May, 2005, with a recommendation that an enforcement notice under Section 171 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 be served on Brookes Haulage Ltd. to secure the removal of all plant and machinery associated with the use as a waste transfer station and the reinstatement of the former sewage works, with a compliance period of three months.

An appeal against the Enforcement Notice on the grounds (a) that planning permission should be granted was subsequently lodged. No appeal against the refusal of planning permission was lodged.

The Inspector determined the appeal by written representation and concluded that the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness was not outweighed by any other considerations. He noted that there was a substantial mound of waste some 10-15 m high over a sizeable part of the site, which was located adjacent to open fields where the countryside was fairly flat. He concluded that “the large mounds of waste looked very out-of-place in such a landscape. Furthermore, the small piles of waste and items of derelict plant gave the land a cluttered appearance and detracted from its openness. The processing activities with the associated machinery also contributed to the erosion of openness”.

The Inspector noted comments from the appellant that the site was formally in an overgrown and untidy state, but did not consider that this would justify the current proposal and that to do so “…would be tantamount to encouraging dereliction”.

The Inspector concluded that the appeal on ground (a) should not succeed and that planning permission would not be granted on this deemed application.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the decision to dismiss the Enforcement Notice appeal be noted.

(2)  That the site be monitored to ensure compliance with the Enforcement Notice.

Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the erection of a detached dwellinghouse at 203 Meadowhall Road, Kimberworth.  This application had previously been granted in August, 2005, subject to the satisfactory signing of a Section 106 agreement.  A further application was submitted as an amendment to the previous permission, which was refused and subsequently an appeal was submitted against this decision.

The Inspector dismissed the appeal and stated that; “Taking the increase in width and height and the re-siting together, along with various other minor adjustments to the design, I consider that there would be little to choose between the two proposals in terms of their impact on the openness of the Green Belt”.  The Inspector then went on to note what benefits connected with the mining archaeology and environmental improvements the Council had previously considered (at least in part) secured by the Section 106 Agreement tied to the original permission, which was considered to represent the ‘special circumstances’ required to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt. 

The Inspector was concerned that there was no Section 106 Agreement in front of him for this appeal and it would not be protected were he to allow the appeal. 

Given this, the Inspector concluded that there were no very special circumstances before him that would outweigh the harm that would be caused by reason of inappropriateness and harm to the openness of the Green Belt. 

Resolved:-  That the decision be noted.

Further to Minute No. 93(a) of the meeting of the Planning Board held on 28th September, 2006, Members were informed of the progress of the Stadium City Developments Judicial Review. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services reported that, at the hearing held on 3rd October, 2006, Mr. Justice Sullivan had granted Stadium City Developments permission to proceed to the next stage, which would be a substantive hearing.

The outcomes would be reported to a future meeting of the Planning Board.