Agenda and minutes

Planning & Development Committee
Thursday, 17th January, 2013 1.00 pm

Venue: Town Hall, Scarborough

Contact: Anne Smith 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of Interests pdf icon PDF 21 KB

Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a personal, prejudicial or pecuniary interest to declare in any of the items on this agenda.  If so, the nature of the interest must be declared at the start or as soon as the interest becomes apparent, of the meeting.  In addition, the attached form must be completed and passed to the Committee Administrator.  The Officers will be pleased to advise, if necessary, and any request for assistance should be made, in the first instance, to the Committee Administrator whose name appears at the end of this agenda.  Ideally, such advice should be sought before the day of the meeting so that time is available to consider any uncertainty that might arise.

Minutes:

Councillor Mrs Jane E Mortimer, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in agenda item 8, Planning Application (12/02488/RG4) - Land Between 36 and 37 Ridgeway, Eastfield, as she was a Board Member at Yorkshire Coast Homes.

 

2.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 150 KB

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 December 2012.  (Minutes attached).

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 December 2012 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

3.

Public Question Time

Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the Committee.

Minutes:

The Chairman reported that no public questions had been received.

 

4.

Government Consultation: Planning Performance and the Planning Guarantee pdf icon PDF 240 KB

To consider a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/12) attached.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/12) which provided details of a consultation document entitled “Planning Performance and the Planning Guarantee” and the responses which had been submitted to the Department for Communities and Local Government.  Members were advised that there could be significant implications for Planning Authorities as a result of proposals in the consultation document which arose from the Growth and Infrastructure Bill which was currently before the House of Lords. Two key measures were proposed.  The first measure made provision for a Local Planning Authority (LPA) which failed to meet certain targets being designated as poorly performing.  Two criteria were proposed. The first related to speed and affected authorities where less than 30% of major applications were being decided within 13 weeks.  The second was a quality threshold which would apply if 20% of major applications were overturned on appeal although this could be amended to relate to all applications.  The designation would last for one year and could result in developers making major applications direct to the Planning Inspectorate (PI) rather than the LPA.  The proposals took no account of the quality of development and officers felt more thought was needed by central government. 

The second key measure related to the Planning Guarantee which required any application to be dealt with within one year, allowing six months for the LPA and six months for the PI.  At the moment 97% of applications were determined in time but Members should be aware that, if an application overran in future, fees would have to be refunded which would have a financial impact.  Officers felt the proposals could potentially cause conflict between LPAs, central government and developers and have a significant negative impact on local democracy by removing the Council as decision maker on major schemes.  An interim strategy had been devised to try to prevent the authority being designated as poorly performing and this was set out in paragraph 1.5 of the report.

A Member asked whether the proposal was legal as there was no right of appeal from the PI decision and was informed that no right of appeal existed from a public inquiry although a judicial review could be called on a matter of law.  The Member also asked whether the construction industry and developers had been consulted and was advised that they had been asked for comments at a recent Architects and Agents meeting but officers had not received very limited feedback.  It was stressed that the consultation was open to all, including the development industry.  Officers hoped that the  Government would listen to the responses submitted.  The Chair commented that planning was not causing the problem in the construction industry because permissions had been given but were not being delivered due to the lack of funding.  The Vice Chair asked about the Planning Dashboard and was informed that the system had been introduced recently following the Planning Review.  The system designated applications green, amber or red  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Revisions to Planning Charges pdf icon PDF 181 KB

To consider a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/11) attached.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/11) which provided the background to and details of the introduction of charges for the provision of pre-application advice and providing written responses to various enquiries including those relating to permitted development.  Members were informed that some neighbouring authorities already made a charge for provision of these non-statutory services.  Following meetings with the Architects and Agents Forum, officers proposed setting up a Planning Surgery system which would provide an opportunity for a 15 minute meeting with planning officers for a fee of £20 plus VAT (£24) and a six month trial was suggested.  Income generated by both sources would contribute toward the funding of the Planning Service.  Members welcomed the Planning Surgery but had concerns about charging for permitted development advice.  Officers advised that this accounted for a lot of officer time and the proposed charge was in line with other Planning Authorities (PA) and considerably less than some.  The intention was to help cover the PA costs due to financial pressures.  Planning fees income was down and ways had to be identified to cover the costs of services provided.   A Member suggested that surgeries should be available for objectors too.  Another Member asked whether the money raised would be retained in planning and this was confirmed.  The Planning Manager reminded Members that central government expected PAs to positively and proactively help applicants with applications.  Committee reports now included details of the steps which had been taken.  The Head of Regeneration and Planning advised that the Architects and Agents Forum were supportive of the Planning Surgeries but Members should be aware that officers would be involved in preparation before the meetings and brought significant local knowledge to the process.  If Members were asked about permitted development enquirers could be directed to the Planning Portal which provided a lot of information.  She felt the proposed charge was reasonable as it provided dedicated time and guidance.  A Member moved acceptance of the proposed charges and was seconded.  Another Member moved an amendment by the removal of the charge for permitted development advice and the amendment was seconded.  Upon the vote being taken the amendment was carried.  Officers then asked for clarification that the removal of the charge related only to residential enquires and would remain for commercial enterprises and this was confirmed.

RESOLVED that, subject to confirmation by Cabinet on 22 January 2013, from 1 February 2013, the proposed planning charges and Planning Surgery are implemented and that officers are delegated powers to modify the charges/arrangements if required. 

Reason:  Handling planning applications and some other planning services are currently subject to fees. However, there are aspects of the service where discretionary charges are not presently applied. Especially in these financially constrained times, it is appropriate that these costs are at least partially covered. Introduction of a means to deal with straightforward planning enquiries should improve the service to customers.

 

6.

Section 106 Annual Monitoring Report pdf icon PDF 233 KB

To consider a report by the Head of Regneration and Planning (Reference 13/10) attached.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/10) which provided Members with an update regarding the progress with monies secured under Section 106 (S106) Agreements as at 31 December 2012.  The report included various appendices.  Appendix 1 provided a summary of current S106 funds; appendix 2 gave a break down of the figures by type, i.e. affordable housing, public open space etc.; appendix 3 provided the current status of individual obligations; and appendix 4 was a report from Environment and Countryside Services on outstanding contributions in respect of South Cliff Gardens and Valley Gardens.  Members were reminded that this was a monitoring report giving information on sums received and spent to date.  However, there had been developments since December 2012 with the first education sum in respect of West Garth of £115k now due and progress on transfer of land for the community facility; the application for village green status at Highfield Road had been successful so there was now some doubt as to whether that scheme would be implemented; and the Wykeham Lakes agreement had been completed with £84K for road improvements on Long Causeway Road.

A Member referred to the second paragraph on page 123 of the report and reference to the proposal from SUSTRANS for a cycle link through South Cliff Gardens.  She had not heard about this and asked whether ward councillors would be consulted.  She also referred to 9 Grosvenor Crescent, page 115 of the report, and asked that ward councillors be consulted on that development too.  The Planning Manager advised that the report details funds which had been received.  The Member was advised to contact Parks with her concerns and request for consultation on matters relating to her ward.  The report simply provided the facts regarding S106 monies.  The SUSTRANS proposal was at an early stage and was looking at taking a route along the sea front.  If the proposal came forward there would be public consultation.

A Member enquired about the development at Muston Road and was informed that this agreement had not yet been triggered so no payment had been received.  The Planning Officer agreed to let the Member know the triggers for that agreement.  A Member commented on the amount of money which had not been spent but was informed that the majority had not yet been triggered, however, if all the developments went ahead the money would become due.  Members were reminded that a lot of the money was allocated for transport and education and would go to NYCC.   A Member asked about The Sands and was informed that the agreements had been superseded by fresh applications so new agreements were to be prepared.  The Chair referred to paragraph 1 of page 123 and asked whether this was an appropriate use of S106 monies and Mr Graham advised that it would depend on the wording of the agreement.

RESOLVED that the updated information on Section 106 planning obligations be received and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Planning Application (12/02320/FL) - Mere Social Club, Seamer Road, Scarborough pdf icon PDF 131 KB

To consider:

i)          a planning application for the addition of mezzanine floor to unit approved under 10/02116/FL to create an additional 232 square metres of floorspace, for Mr G Ledden, Crown Properties Ltd; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/15) attached.

View Plans and Documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered:

i)          a planning application for the addition of mezzanine floor to unit approved under 10/02116/FL to create an additional 232 square metres of floorspace, for Mr G Ledden, Crown Properties Ltd; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/15).

Councillor Mrs Robinson asked whether she should declare a personal interest in this item as she knew the applicant but Tom Graham, Solicitor, advised that this was not necessary because there was no close association.  Members welcomed the application but asked whether the restrictions on the sale of goods were acceptable to the applicant.  The planning officer advised that this related to the mezzanine only and was acceptable to the applicant. 

RESOLVED that permission be GRANTED, subject to the following condition:-

1          The development hereby approved shall be used for the sale of goods falling within Class A1 use category of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended, with the exception of the following uses:

            i)         The sale of food and drink to be consumed off the premises

ii)         Sale of clothing and footwear

iii)        Sale of toys, camping and travel goods

iv)        Sale of medical goods, cosmetics and toiletries

v)         Sale of sports goods and equipment.

Except where the retail sale of these goods forms a minor and ancillary part of the operation of any of the retail activity of the premises.

Reason: To ensure that this development does not create a destination for retail food and non-bulky goods shopping that could affect the vitality and viability of Scarborough town centre in accordance with Local Plan Policy S1 and guidance in the NPPF.

            Informatives

The recommendations provided by Network Rail in relation to their property is attached for information.

You are advised to contact the Local Planning Authority to discuss signage requirements for the development as certain types of advertisements may require prior approval.

 

Councillor Mrs D Clegg, Vice Chairman, in the Chair

 

8.

Planning Application (12/02488/RG4) - Land Between 36 and 37 Ridgeway, Eastfield pdf icon PDF 124 KB

To consider:

i)          a planning application for erection of seven bungalows, for Yorkshire Coast Homes; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/16) attached.

View Plans and Documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered:

i)          a planning application for erection of seven bungalows, for Yorkshire Coast Homes; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/16).

Members were informed that further information had been provided to Yorkshire Water (YW) and the Highways Authority (NYCC) and additional conditions may be required which would be agreed in consultation with the Vice Chair. 

In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Mr Mick Paxton, the Applicant’s Agent, spoke in support of the application before the Committee commenced its debate of the item.

The Ward Councillor asked whether the existing trees would remain; whether the informal footpath to Ryefield Road would remain and he had concerns about the disposal of sewerage due to the differences in height across the site.  He was informed that the position on the trees was not yet decided as responses were awaited from NYCC; details were also required from YW on disposal of foul and surface water from the site; and no legal right of way existed across the site.  The Councillor advised that a water main ran under the footpath so he expected it would be retained and he had concerns about parking and street lighting.  The planning officer advised that parking had been kept to a minimum within the site but would be sufficient for potential visitors and the emergency services.  Parking problems would be a highways matter and dealt with accordingly.  Small scale, low-level, informal, lighting was proposed so there should be no adverse impact on neighbouring properties.  A Member asked whether the Police Architectural Liaison Officer had been consulted and this was confirmed (paragraph 3.5 refers).  She also commented on the quality of the slides displayed and was informed that this was due to the resolution but clearer plans were available via the IPads.  A Member asked about pedestrian access to the site and had concerns about the surfacing and was informed that details were still being discussed but some areas would have shared surfaces.  The expected age of the occupiers would be taken into account in making those decisions.

A Member queried condition 4 relating to permitted development rights and was informed that the intention was to ensure control over car ports, garages, sheds, etc rather than a complete ban.  The Member commented that the footpath was used as a link from Ryefield Road to public transport and suggested that it should be retained.  The planning officer confirmed that he was still working on this aspect of the application.

RESOLVED that, third party representations having been considered and subject to satisfactory comments from the Highway Authority and Yorkshire Water, permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:-

1       Development shall be carried out in accordance with the following     plans:-

         Reference     Title                                 Date received

         2578 – 76      Drainage System         21.11.12

         2578 – 72      Elevations                     21.11.12

         2578 – 70      Bungalow Type A         21.11.12

         2578 – 71      Bungalow Type B         21.11.12

         2578 – 75      Site Layout Plan           21.11.12

Reason:  To avoid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Councillor Mrs J E Mortimer, Chairman, resumed the Chair.

 

9.

Planning Application (12/02160/FL) - Primrose Valley Holiday Village, Primrose Avenue, Primrose Valley, Filey pdf icon PDF 140 KB

To consider:

i)          a planning application for proposed demolition of Linkfield House,  bungalow and 40 chalets for the development of 62 static caravans, for Bourne Leisure; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/18) attached.

View Plans and Documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered:

i)          a planning application for proposed demolition of Linkfield House,  bungalow and 40 chalets for the development of 62 static caravans, for Bourne Leisure; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/18).

Members were informed that the proposal would result in a significant improvement by the removal of existing derelict buildings and chalets and a reduction in traffic in the area due to the removal of three access points to Primrose Valley Road with access being re routed through the park.

In accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme, Mr Mark Johnson, the Applicant’s Agent, spoke in support of the application before the Committee commenced its debate of this item.

Members welcomed the application and stressed the importance of condition 9 which would ensure there was no soakaway into the subsoil.  A Member asked whether the landscaping would screen the site from properties on Primrose Valley Road and this was confirmed.

RESOLVED that permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:-

1          Development shall take place in accordance with the application plans, amended by the revised landscaping plan reference (awaited), received on (awaited).

           Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.

2          Prior to the commencement of works on site, including the demolition of any structures, a phasing plan for both the demolition phase and the new development phase shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The Planning Authority shall be notified in the event of any variation from that approved programme. 

Reason: In the interests of visual and residential amenity in accordance with Policies E2, L6 and L7 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

3         No new concrete bases for static caravans shall be installed until the demolition has been completed in accordance with the phasing plan to be submitted in accordance with Condition 2 of this approval.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policies E2, L6 and L7 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

4         Landscaping for the site will be carried out in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme and supporting Landscape Management plan as submitted, and shall be commenced in the first full planting season following the implementation of this permission.  Any losses within the first five years of the scheme shall be made good in the next available planting season.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policies E2, L6 and L7 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

5          In conjunction with Condition 2 above, and before the occupation of the first new static caravan, all the existing vehicular accesses onto Primrose Valley Road within the application site boundary shall be closed off permanently to vehicular traffic.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety

6          The occupation of the caravans on site shall be limited to the period 1st March in each year to the 4th January in the following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Planning Application (12/02593/FL) - 4 Nettledale Lane, Snainton pdf icon PDF 130 KB

To consider:

i)          a planning application for a proposed one bed stone built cottage for holiday let, for Mr W Elliott; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/20) attached.

View Plans and Documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered:

i)          a planning application for a proposed one bed stone built cottage for holiday let, for Mr W Elliott; and

ii)         a report by the Head of Regeneration and Planning (Reference 13/20).

Members were informed that, while the site was outside the development limits, officers had taken into account the fact that it was now included in the Snainton Conservation Area, a significant change, and 6 Nettledale Lane had been built so the site could now be considered as infill.  The cottage would replace an existing garage and would enhance the character of the street scene. 

Some Members had concerns about potential parking problems and the shared access but were informed that ample parking was provided adjacent to the property and the shared access was one entrance way from the road which split affording access to this site and 6 Nettledale Lane.

RESOLVED that, subject to the expiry of the consultation period, permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:-

1          The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the application plans.

            Reason: To avoid doubt.

2          Prior to the commencement of development above foundation level a one metre square freestanding panel of stonework showing the type of stone and stonework to be used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed on site and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All new stonework shall match that of the approved panel in terms of the stone used and the coursing, jointing and mortar mix and finish. The stone panel so constructed shall be retained on the site until the development hereby approved has been completed.

Reason: To ensure that the stonework is in keeping with that traditionally found in the Snainton Conservation Area in order to preserve and enhance the character of the Conservation Area.

3          The roof of the development hereby permitted shall be clad in traditional, non-interlocking, non pre-coloured natural red clay pantiles.

Reason: To ensure that the development is in keeping with the Snainton Conservation Area and in accordance with Policy E12 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

4          Before the development commences, details of the facing material of the proposed retaining wall around the building, including such samples as may be required, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is in keeping with the Snainton Conservation Area and in accordance with Policy E12 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

5          Before the development commences, details of the treatment of all hard surfaces associated with the development, including such samples as may be requested, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is in keeping with the Snainton Conservation Area and in accordance with Policy E12 of the Scarborough Borough Local Plan.

6          All roof lights installed in this development shall be of a ‘heritage’ style as specified in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

At the close of the meeting the Chairman advised that Mrs Elliott, Head of Regeneration and Planning, was leaving the authority and thanked her for her hard work and commitment during her time with Scarborough Borough Council.