Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies were received from Councillor R Hall and J Ridgway. 

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 H Liggett informed Committee that she would speak as a Ward Member on Item 4 (Application NED/21/01376/OL – Shirland). Councillor Liggett indicated that she would then leave the meeting and would not participate in the Committee’s discussion of and determination on the Item.

To approve as a correct record and the Chair to sign the Minutes of Planning Committee held on 22 November 2022.      

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 22 November 2022 were approved as a true record. 

Application to vary conditions 4 (Approved Plans), 16 (Temporary Access) and 17 (Highway Improvement Works) of planning approval 19/00335/OL, to provide a revised site access (Major Development) at land to the South of Hallfieldgate Lane, Shirland.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to vary Condition 4 (Approved Plans), Condition 16 (Temporary Access) and Condition 17 (Highway Improvement Works) of Planning Approval 19/00335/OL. These changes would provide a revised site access for a Major Development on land to the South of Hallfieldgate Lane, Shirland. The Application had been referred to Committee by Ward Member, Councillor H Liggett, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to conditions and an appropriate ‘Section 106’ Agreement; or an agreement reached between the Council as Planning Authority with a developer to carry out specific work to help offset the impact of new developments on local people. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers had concluded that because the proposed variations would only involve minor changes. It would be possible to deal with them through a ‘Section 73 Application’ under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to make minor amendments to approved plans.

Members heard that the Application proposed to change access to the site. However, the proposed variations would have some impact on the long term health of one of the trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). Officers contended that this this would still be preferable to implementing the original access arrangements, as these would have a greater impact on the trees covered by the TPO than the suggested new access arrangements.

Officers felt that the proposed change to the access arrangements would not have an adverse impact on either the local street scene, or on the nearby Conservation Area. They recommended that as a condition for approval an appropriate Section 106 agreement should be put in place, to ensure that the financial contributions to education and affordable housing, which had been unilaterally offered by the developer, would now be carried over to this new permission.

Before the Committee discussed the Application it heard from Councillor C Cupit as local ward Member and Councillor H Liggett as local ward Member. After Councillor H Liggett had spoken she then left the meeting and took no part in the Committee’s consideration and determination of the Application. Committee also heard from R Southey, K Bush and P Webster who objected to the Application. No one spoke in support of the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the relevant Planning Issues. It considered the Principle of Development and noted how outline planning permission had been granted on appeal, to construct up to 90 dwellings on the site.  It took into account the implications for nearby heritage assets and the location of the proposed site access in relation to the Hallfieldgate Gate Conservation Area. It considered the impact on the local street scene, including those trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order, the necessity to remove a section of hedgerow and the effect on neighbouring properties.

Members discussed the Application.As part of this, they considered the possible implications for road safety of the proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/69/22-23

Section 73 Approved Plans Application to vary condition 1 (Approved Plans) of planning approval 18/00812/RM to vary the layout and landscaping details (Major Development) at land to the East of Prospect House, Highstairs Lane, Stretton

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to vary Condition 1 (Approved Plans) of Planning Approval 18/00812/RM in order to vary the layout and landscaping details of a major development at land to the east of ‘Prospect House’, Highstairs Lane, Stretton.  The Application had been referred to Committee by Local Ward Member, Councillor A Cooper, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to conditions. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers had concluded that it would be appropriate to deal with the variation through a ‘Section 73 Application’ under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to make minor amendments to already approved plans. Members were reminded that the site had planning permission for 28 dwellings. The proposed minor changes to the landscaping and layout details were necessary because a new company had now taken over the development of the site and had different house types to those of the previous company, which would require a different layout and landscaping on the site. Officers felt that the variations would be acceptable, the proposed changes would conform to the relevant Development Plan and National Planning Policies. They concluded that the Application should be approved.

Before the Committee discussed the Application it heard from L Harries, who objected to the Application and J Millhouse, the Agent for Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Principle of Development, the work on the site that was now underway and the landscaping changes which had been made. It considered the revised designs and how they compared with those originally agreed. It took into account the officer assessment of the proposed changes and in particular what impact they would have on those trees covered by the Root Protection Area at the boundary of the site. They heard the reasons why this area had been re-calculated. They discussed the protective fencing to be installed and the additional measures requested by Derbyshire Wildlife Trust.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor D Ruff and A Powell moved and seconded a Motion to agree the Application, in accordance with officer recommendations. The Motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED

(1)  That Application NED/22/00885/RM be conditionally approved, in line with officer recommendations.

(2)  That the final wording of the conditions  be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management).

Conditions

1)    The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the following drawings unless otherwise subsequently agreed through a formal submission under the Non Material Amendment procedures and unless otherwise required by any condition contained in this decision notice:

·       STRET – 001 - proposed site plan; date scanned 14.10.22

·       2016-458 005 rev A - Site location plan

·       2016-458 045 rev E - Hedge Translocation

·       2016-458 014 rev G - Refuse Collection Scheme

·       GL0779 - Hedge translocation Method Statement rev A

·       GL0779 - Landscape Management Plan rev D

·      GL0779 03 - Soft Landscaping proposals;  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/70/22-23

Section 73 Approved Plan Application to vary condition 1 (Approved Plans) of planning approval 17/00768/RM to vary the scale and appearance details (Major Development). Land to the East of Prospect House, Highstairs Lane, Stretton

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to vary Condition 1 (Approved Plans) of planning approval 17/00768/RM to change the scale and appearance details at land to the east of Prospect House, Highstairs Lane. This was the same site and development covered by the previous Application on the Agenda (NED/22/00884/RM). The Application had been referred to Committee by local Ward Member, Councillor A Cooper, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to conditions. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers had concluded that it would be appropriate to deal with the variation through a ‘Section 73 Application’ under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, which allow for minor amendments to approved plans. Members were reminded that the site had planning permission for 28 dwellings. The proposed changes to the approved scale and appearance details of the development would be required because a new company had now taken over the development of the site and had different housing types to the previous company.  Officers felt that the changes would be acceptable, that they would conform with relevant national and local planning policies and so should be approved.

Before the Committee discussed the Application it heard from L Harries, who objected to the Application and J Millhouse, the Agent for the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Principle of Development and the work on the site. It considered the overall size and scale of the properties and how these compared to those originally approved. It took into account the relevant Local Plan Policies and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Members discussed the Application. They considered the new designs for properties and how they compared and contrasted to the original designs, as well as the size and scale of what was now proposed. Members heard how these dwellings would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding street scene. They also considered the possible impact of the proposed changes on neighbouring properties and the conditions that would be required to protect their privacy and amenity.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor D Ruff and Councillor A Powell moved and seconded a motion to approve the Application, subject to conditions

The Motion was put to the vote and was agreed. 

RESOLVED

(1)  That the Application is conditionally approved, in line with officer recommendations;

(2)  That the final wording of the conditions be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management).

Conditions

1)    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans insofar as they relate to scale and appearance:

·         Site Location Plan: 2016-458 005A

·         Site Survey as Existing: 2016 - 458 006A;

·         STRET 002 - House Type Bamburgh

·         STRET 003 – House Type Bamburgh (V4)

·         STRET 004 - House Type Barnard

·         STRET 005 – House Type Balmoral

·         STRET 006 - House Type Canterbury

·         STRET 007 - House Type Durham

·         STRET 008 – House  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/71/22-23

Proposed second storey extension to create rooms in roof space and two storey extension to front (revised scheme of 21/00774/FLH) (Amended Plans)at 20 Bents Crescent, Dronfield.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for a second storey extension to create rooms in a roof space and a two storey extension to the front of a property on Bents Crescent, Dronfield. The Application had been referred to Committee by local Ward Member, Councillor M Foster, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to conditions. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers contended that the proposed development would be in keeping with the style, proportion and materials of the surrounding street scene.  It would not have an adverse impact on the privacy and amenity of neighbouring residents. Officers had concluded that it would be an acceptable development, which would accord with the relevant national and local planning policies. They recommended that the Application should be approved, subject to conditions.

Before the Committee discussed the Application it heard from M Carr and K Rogers, who objected to the Application. They also heard from the Applicant, S Kay.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Principle of Development and the location of the property within the defined Settlement Development Limit (SDL) for Dronfield. It considered the relevant planning policies and in particular: Local Plan Policy LC5, (requiring domestic extensions to be in keeping with the existing property and street scene and not  cause significant loss of amenity and privacy for neighbouring residents) and Dronfield Local Plan Policy D3 (requiring developments to respect the character and historic context of existing developments).

Members discussed the Application. They reflected on the surrounding street scene and assessed whether the proposed extension would complement this. They discussed the impact the proposed development on the neighbouring properties and whether this could be mitigated through appropriate conditions.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor M Foster and H Liggett moved and seconded a Motion to refuse the Application, contrary to officer recommendations on the grounds that it would not be line with the Dronfield Neighbourhood Plan Policy D3 (Loss of amenity and especially light to neighbouring properties) and Local Plan Policy LC5, (compatibility with the street scene).

The Motion was put to the vote and was defeated.

Councillor D Ruff and A Powell then moved and seconded a Motion to approve the Application subject to conditions, in line with officer recommendations. The Motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED

(1)  That Application NED/21/1169/FLH be conditionally approved, in line with officer recommendations.

(2)  That the final wording of the conditions be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management).

Conditions

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

[Reason: To comply with the provision of 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 drawings:

·         Amended First Floor Plan (date scanned 28^th October 2022)

·         Amended Front  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/72/22-23

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that two appeals had been lodged. No appeals had been allowed, dismissed or withdrawn.   

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

None.