Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies for Absence were received from Councillor L Hartshorne, who was substituted by Councillor C Gare. Apologies were also received from Councillor S Fawcett and Councillor M Foster.

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.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

To approve as a correct record and the Chair to sign the Minutes of Planning Committee held on 5 September 2023.      

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 5 September 2023 were approved as a true record.

Change of use of existing building to 3 supported living units (Amended Plans/Additional Information) at Garden House, Station Road, Pilsley.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for the change of use of an existing building to three Supported Living Units at Garden House, Station Road, Pilsley. The Application involved Amended Plans and Additional Information. The Application had been referred to the Committee by Local Ward Member, Councillor A Cooper, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to refuse the Application. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this. Officers were concerned about the likely impact of the development on the surrounding area. The greater activity on the site which the change of use would generate, including the increased number of care workers travelling to and from the units to provide 24-hour care, as well as visits from friends and relatives of those living in the units, would affect neighbouring residents and adversely impact on the standard of amenity which they currently enjoy. The officers had concluded that there were no other material matters that would outweigh this conclusion in favour of the change of use. Consequently, they felt that the Application should be refused.

Before the Committee considered the Application it heard from H Staton, K Goodwin, D Beresford, L Booth and A Walker, who spoke against the Application. It also heard from the Applicant, A Rickett and the Agent for the Application, J Hughes, who spoke in support of it.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the site’s location within Pilsley.  It considered the relevant national and local planning policies.  These included Local Plan Policy, SS1, on Sustainable Development, Local Plan Policy SS7, on the development of unallocated land within Settlement Development Limits, Local Plan Policy LC4, on the type and mixture of housing. It considered Local Plan Policy SDC12, requiring new developments to respond positively to local character and preserve or enhance the quality and local identity of existing communities and their surroundings. It also took into account the National Planning Policy Framework, when read as a whole.  

Members discussed the Application. They reflected on whether consultation on the proposed development with local people had been adequate. They considered the concerns which had been raised about the volume of additional traffic using the private road, what impact this would have on the neighbouring residents and whether the change of use would be detrimental to the surrounding area.

Members were reminded of the need to determine the Application on Planning grounds. In this context they heard of how one person requiring care had already moved on to the site and the reasons for this. Committee was informed that this action should carry no weight in determining the Application, which ought be judged on its merits.

At the conclusion of the discussion, Councillor K Rouse and A Cooper moved and seconded a motion to refuse the Application. The motion was approved. 

RESOLVED -

That the Application be refused, in line with officer recommendations.

Reasons

The application is considered to be unacceptable as it would result in 3 supported living  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/31/23-24

Change of use of commercial unit with ancillary accommodation to 1 office and 3 one bedroom residential apartments, including alterations to openings (Amended Title)(Amended Plans) at 67 Rupert Street, Lower Pilsley.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for the change of use of a Commercial Unit, with ancillary accommodation, to 1 office and 3 three-bedroom residential apartments, including alterations to openings, at 67 Rupert Street, Lower Pilsley. The Application involved an Amended Title and Amended Plans.

The Application had been referred to Committee by Local Ward Member, Councillor K Gillott, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application. The report to Committee explained the reason for this.

Officers contended that the proposed conversion of the vacant property into three apartments and an office would not represent a significant intensification over what the property could currently be used for. In particular, it would not have a significantly greater impact on the highway than if it was being used as a Commercial Unit. Although the conversion would result in a loss to the area of a commercial space, this would be outweighed by the proposed improvements to the front of the building, which, it was argued, would make a positive contribution to Lower Pilsley. The report contended that as the Application met the requirements of the relevant planning policies, and there were no material reasons for refusal, it should be approved.

Before the Committee considered the Application it heard from the Applicant, P Kemp. No one had registered to speak against it.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the location of the site, within the Settlement Development Limits for Pilsley. It considered the relevant local and national planning policies. These included Local Plan Policy SS7, requiring developments to be appropriate in scale, design and location, Local Policy ID5, on the loss of existing Social Infrastructure and Local Plan Policy SDC12, requiring all new developments to be of high-quality design and to make a positive contribution to the quality of the Local Environment. It also took into account Local Plan Policy SS12, requiring new developments to create a good quality of amenity for future occupants of land and buildings.

Members discussed the Application. In particular, they considered what impact the proposed development would have on on-street parking in the surrounding area and the provision for on-site parking as part of the proposed development. They reflected on the previous use of the site as a post office and the volume of traffic this would have generated. Members noted the conclusion of the Local Highway Authority that the proposals would not lead to a severe or unacceptable Highway impact and that the Highway Authority would not object to the Application. During the discussion some Members queried whether bats currently nest within the roof of the building and suggested that a bat box ought to be installed in the building. The owner indicated his support for this.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor P Elliot and Councillor D Hancock moved and seconded a motion to approve the Application. The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED -

That the Application  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/32/23-24

Proposed confirmation of Tree Preservation Order (TPO 293/2023) Trees at Clifton Court, Dronfield Woodhouse, Dronfield. 

(Planning and Environment Manager)

The report to Committee proposed that Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 293/2023, on trees at Clifton Court, Dronfield Woodhouse, Dronfield, be confirmed, subject to modifications. Members were informed that this Order had been provisionally made on 5 June 2023. It would apply for six months from that date, or until it had been Confirmed or Modified.

Members were reminded that the Council was required to take into account all ‘Duly Made’ objections and representations which had not been withdrawn, before confirming the Provisional Order. The report explained that two objections to it had been received.  One letter in support of the Order from neighbouring residents had also been received.

Members considered the report and the assessment of the Council’s Principal Arboriculture Officer that there was a perceived threat to specified trees at Clifton Court if the Order was not confirmed. In this context, the report recommended that the Order be amended, to only protect four individually identified trees considered worthy of protection and to exclude the recently planted young trees in the front garden of properties, which were planted as part of the Clifton Court development.

RESOLVED -

That Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 293/2023 on trees at Clifton Court, Dronfield Woodhouse, Dronfield, subject the modification, as specified in the report.

By Acclamation

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that one appeal had been lodged, one had been allowed and two appeals had been dismissed.

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

None.

The Chair to Move:

“That the public be excluded from the meeting during the discussion of the following item of business to avoid the disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 & 5, Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972”.  (As amended by the Local Government (Access to Information)(Variation) Order 2008).

RESOLVED – That the public be excluded from the meeting during the discussion of the following item(s) of business to avoid the disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 5, Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006. 

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

Committee received an update on the current ‘Section 106’ Agreements, or agreements, reached between the Council as Planning Authority with developers to carry out specific work to help offset the impact of new developments on local people.

The report set out details of those agreements where the funding had now been secured. It also included information about Section 106 agreements where the funding had not yet been received or written-off and those where payments have yet to be made as the relevant trigger points for these payments had not yet occurred.

Members discussed the report. As part of this they received updates on specific agreements.

RESOLVED -

(1)         That the information contained within Appendices A, B and C of the report is noted.

(2)         That the contents of paragraphs 2.1 to 2.2 of the report is noted.

(3)         That the Committee receives further updates on the matter approximately every three months.

By Acclamation

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

None.