Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notices of substitutions from Members.

There were no apologies for absence. Councillor J Ridgway noted that she would be leaving the meeting at 3pm.

Members are requested to declare the existence and nature of any disclosable pecuniary interests and/or other interests, not already on their register of interests, in any item on the agenda and withdraw from the meeting at the appropriate time.

Councillor Reader declared an interest in Item 4a NED/20/00221/FL - Clay Cross in that she intended to speak on the application in her capacity as a Ward Councillor. She confirmed that following any questions from Members she would then take no further part in the committee’s deliberations on this application.

To approve as a correct record and the Chair to sign the Minutes of Planning Committee held on 17 November 2020.    

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 17 November 2020 were approved as a correct record.

Residential Development - 34 Dwellings at land opposite 24-44 Clay Lane, Clay Cross

The Planning Manager (Development Management) presented the report and drew Members attention to the late updates report and the report from the Applicant’s Ecologist. The application was being considered by the Committee at the request of Councillor T Reader due to possible concerns around flooding at Press Brook, highway safety and impact on services such as local schools and GP practices, in addition to the possible impact on historical mine works and a possible impact on wildlife. Representations were heard in objection from Ward Councillor T Reader, Mandy Bingham, Fenella Jones, Richard Bargh and Richard Eden. Representations were heard in support of the application from the Applicant’s Agent, Darren Abbott (DLP Consultants).

Members had the opportunity to question speakers and officers. The application was discussed in length, including concerns over flooding on the site and the potential impact on other nearby sites, as well as the number of dwellings in the proposed application in relation to the emerging Local Plan. Officers noted that Flood Risk Assessments which had been submitted by both the Applicant and the Derbyshire Flood Team (as the lead Local Flood Authority and statutory consultee) were deemed acceptable and that the number of dwellings in the Local Plan is indicative and not a maximum number in relation to the site in question. Members also considered implications around air pollution and drainage.

RESOLVED –

(a) That the application be approved in line with Officer Recommendations, subject to final completion of a section 106 agreement.

(b) That determination of the final conditions for approval be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development).

1.            The development hereby approved shall be started within 3 years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with section 91 (as amended) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

2.               The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the following plans:-

·         19-03-P01 Rev F – Site Plan

·         CLCC-BSP-ZZ-XX-DR-C-0002 REV P02 – Refuse Vehicle Swept Path Analysis

·         INF_N0708(08)001A – Illustrative Landscape Masterplan

·         INF_N0708(08)003A – Hard and Soft Landscape Palette Sheets

·         RSE_4068_BIA REV V4 – BIA Visualisation

·         19-03-P30 – Sections to Press Brook

·         19-03-P-00 – Location Plan

·         19-03-P02   PLOT 1 BEAL (A1)  

·         19-03-P03   PLOT 3 BEAL (A1)

·         19-03-P04   PLOT 7 BEAL (A1) 

·         19-03-P05   PLOTS 8 AND 20 BEAL (A1)

·         19-03-P06   PLOTS 2 AND 29 PETWORTH (A1) 

·         19-03-P07 REV A   PLOT 4 LINDISFARNE (A1)  

·         19-03-P09 REV A   PLOT 27 LINDISFARNE (A1) 

·         19-03-P10   PLOT 30 LINDISFARNE (A1)  

·         19-03-P11 REV A   PLOT 16 LINDISFARNE (A1) 

·         19-03-P12   PLOT 35 LINDISFARNE (A1) 

·         19-03-P13   PLOT 9 SUDBURY (A1)  

·         19-03-P14   PLOT 10 SUDBURY (A1)  

·         19-03-P14   PLOT 10 SUDBURY (A1)  

·         19-03-P15   PLOT 11 CLAYDON (A1) 

·         19-03-P16   PLOT 12 CLAYDON (A1)  

·         19-03-P17   PLOT 15 CLAYDON (A1) 

·         19-03-P18 REV A   PLOT 14 DANBURY (A1)  

·         19-03-P19 REV A   PLOTS 21-22, 23-24 AND 25-26 2 BED AFFORDABLES

·         19-03-P20   PLOT 28 ROSEDENE (A1)  

·         19-03-P21   PLOT 34 ROSEDENE (A1)  

·         19-03-P22   PLOT 31 BUCKINGHAM (A1)

·         19-03-P23   PLOTS 5-6 HARDWICK (A1)  

·         19-03-P24   PLOTS 17, 18, 32 AND 33 HARDWICK (A1) 

·         19-03-P25   GARAGES (A1)  

·         19-03-P26 REV  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/59/20-21a

Reserved Matters application for 180 dwellings on land North of Spindle Drive and East of Deerlands Road, Wingerworth

The Chair reminded the Committee that this was a reserved matters application and that the access point and number of dwellings had already been determined at appeal by the inspectorate and should not be discussed as part of this application.

The Planning Manager (Development Management) presented the report and drew Members attention to the late updates report (including a letter from the Agent) and the fact that no objection to the scheme had been received from Yorkshire Water. Representations were heard in objection from Ward Councillor Barry Lewis, and Tony Carter. Representations were heard in support of the application from the Applicant’s Agent, Paul Hill (RPS Group).

Members had the opportunity to question speakers and officers. Officers confirmed that there were a number of outstanding matters still to be agreed in consultation with the Council on ecological enhancements and appropriate engineering solutions regarding surface water, and that the client’s ongoing commitment to provide 40% affordable housing should provide reassurance to Members on the application.

RESOLVED –

(a) That the Reserved Matters application be approved in line with Officer Recommendations, with an additional condition to require the submitted tree protection measures to be implemented before development starts and be retained as such thereafter. 

(b) That determination of the final conditions for approval be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development).

1.    The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plans, add in plan details, unless otherwise specifically agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority or otherwise required by any other condition in this decision notice.

2.    Within 28 days of the development, hereby approved commencing, species specifications (including the manufacturer, range and colour details where applicable) or samples of the walling and roofing materials to be used, shall be made available on site for inspection, and subsequent written approval, by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3.    Notwithstanding any submitted details, within 28 days of the development hereby approved commencing details of the proposed attenuation basin, its means of construction and its contours, depths and extent, along with the landscaping of the basin and adjoining land and the provision of any other structures/features incorporated into it, along with a timetable for implementation, shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The attenuation basin and all/any associated landscaping shall then be implemented as agreed and be retained as such thereafter.

4.    Prior to the occupation of the 175th house, hereby approved, the agreed scheme of boundary treatments shall be implemented in full. Once implemented the agreed scheme shall be retained as such thereafter.

Application to vary condition 2 of 18/00177/FL - land to South East of Siberia Cottages, Sydnope Hill, Darley Moor DE4 5LP

The Planning Officer presented the report and drew Members attention to the late updates report. She noted that this was a retrospective application to vary the approved conditions. Representations were heard in objection from Keith Moore.

Members had the opportunity to question speakers and officers, and were reminded to consider only the application in front of them and not in comparison to that which has been previously approved. The application was discussed in length, including the size and character of the building. Following the discussion, Councillor M Foster moved a motion to refuse the application contrary to Officer’s recommendations in that the application is considered unacceptable as by reason of its size, scale and height it would fail to respect the character and beauty of the countryside, protect or enhance the natural environment and be a prominent intrusion. As such, it would fail to comply with policies GS6 and BE1 of the North East Derbyshire Local Plan, policies SS9 and SDC3 of the North East Derbyshire Local Plan (2014-2034) Publication Draft, polices AP2 and AP13 of the Ashover Neighbourhood Plan and the policies contained in the National Planning Policy framework when read as a whole. This was seconded by Councillor Shipman.

RESOLVED –

That the application be refused, contrary to Officer Recommendations, for the reasons detailed above with the final wording delegated to the Planning Manager in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee

Application pursuant of 19/00255/FLH to allow for garage repositioning at Clover Lea, Chapel Hill, Ashover

The Planning Officer presented the report and drew Members attention to the late updates report. She noted that officers could not take responsibility for the photos which had been submitted by objectors and were shown during the speaker’s submissions. Representations were heard in objection from Councillor Chris Miller (Ashover Parish Council), Mike Thomas, Sheila Kirby and Mrs J H Hardwick. Representations were heard in support of the application from the Applicant, Mike Weightman.

The application was discussed in length, including concerns regarding the impact on windows of neighbouring properties and the noise of the development. Members debated the conditions that could be added to the application to improve screening to neighbouring properties as well as conditioning the area of useable patio to reflect what has been previously approved.

RESOLVED –

(a) That the application be approved in line with Officer Recommendations, subject to the revised conditions as follows:

1. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on drawing “Proposed Detached Garage Details Rev A” dated Nov 2020 and received on 26th Nov 2020 unless otherwise agreed through a formal submission under the non-material minor amendment procedures or as otherwise specifically required by other conditions contained within this decision notice.

2. Prior to the first use of the garage hereby approved, as such, a scheme of landscaping, including a timetable for its implementation, to allow for new boundary hedge planting/existing hedge growth and subsequent retention, as appropriate, shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Specifically, the submitted scheme shall show, as a minimum, the hedge on the eastern site boundary with Chapel Hill replanted where necessary and then kept, as a whole, at a minimum height of 2 metres above the height of the wall (when measured from the road side) and a new hedge planted on the western site boundary, allowed to grow and subsequently then be retained at a height 2 metres above the height of the boundary wall.

The agreed scheme shall then be implemented as agreed and be retained as such thereafter. 

Reason: In the interests of enclosing the site in order to protect the amenity of residents of neighbouring properties.

3. Notwithstanding any other submitted details, prior to the first use of the green roof garden/patio terrace, as such, a wall shall be erected along the line of the “Steel Fence”, as depicted on the submitted and otherwise approved drawings, to a height no greater than 1 metre. No other enclosing structure/wall or fence shall then be erected/placed or constructed beyond that point to any garage edge or on the edge of the garage itself. The area between the newly erected wall, as required by this condition, and the edge of the garage itself shall then not be used as a sitting out area, veranda, patio/garden, balcony or similar.

Reason: To ensure the area of extended garage beyond that approved by application NED/19/00255 is not used as an amenity area in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/62/20-21

To inform the Committee of the appeals lodged and determined.

The report to Committee gave details of those Planning Appeals which had been lodged and determined. Members heard that two appeals had been lodged, none had been allowed and that four had been dismissed. Members were asked to note that the fourth appeal which had been dismissed (Land Allocation Ltd – Approved by Committee decision) suggested that there was not a consistent process from inspectors which can make it difficult for Officers to give clear guidance to Members, and that in assessing large scale housing developments they would need to be quite clinical in evaluating the weight attached to different policies. The Planning Manager noted the possibility of getting independent advice on issues such as Highways safety in the future if Members deemed this was necessary.

RESOLVED -

The Committee noted the report.

To consider any other matter which the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

There were no matters of urgency to consider.