Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies were received from Cllr R Hall, who was substituted by Cllr S Clough and Cllr J Ridgway, who was substituted by Cllr N Barker. Councillor D Hancock attended the meeting during the morning. He was substituted by Cllr P Windley after the Committee’s recess for lunch. Apologies were also received from Cllr M Jones.

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.

Cllr A Cooper declared an interest on Item 6 (NED/21/00885/FL). He confirmed that he intended to speak on the application, but that he would take no part in the Committee’s subsequent consideration or determination of the Application.

To approve as a correct record and the Chair to sign the Minutes of Planning Committee held on 16 November 2021. 

The minutes of the meeting, held on Tuesday 16 November 2021, were approved as a true record.

Change of use of amenity land to parking spaces, at various locations in Apperknowle

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for the change of use of amenity land into parking spaces, at various locations in Apperknowle. The Application had been submitted by the Council’s Housing Management Company, Rykneld Homes Limited (RHL). Members were reminded that Planning Committee was required to consider and determine on applications submitted by the Local Authority, when objections to them had been made.

Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to agree the recommendations. Officers felt that it would be an appropriate development. The proposed conversion of amenity land into additional parking spaces for the local community in Apperknowle would be in line with the Council’s Local Plan policies and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Officers contended that the change of use would not harm the character of the area or the amenity of neighbouring residential properties. Planning officers were also satisfied that the change of use would not have an adverse impact on highway safety.

Members were informed that no one had registered to speak on the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the relevant Planning Issues. These included Principle of Development and the location of the amenity sites to be converted into parking spaces within the Defined Settlement Limit for Apperknowle. It took into account the relevant Local Plan policies. Committee considered the impact of the proposal on the character of the local area. It took into account the impact on the residential amenity of local people and the implications for highway safety.

Members discussed the Application. They received clarification on the materials to be used to provide parking spaces and its durability. Members also heard that Highway Authority did not object to the proposed development, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions

At the conclusion of the discussion Committee, by acclamation, approved the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report, in line with officer recommendations.

RESOLVED -

(a)   That planning permission is conditionally approved in accordance with officer recommendations.

(b)   That the final wording of the conditions is 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.

2       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: Amended Drawing Number P-LOC-SN-DET-W-REVA (uploaded to the Council’s website on 21.10.21) and Amended Drawing Number AP-LOC-SN-DET-W-REVA (uploaded to the Council’s website on 26.10.2021).

3       Before above ground works start, a plan to show the positions, design, materials, height and type of any boundary treatments to be erected shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before first use of  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/49/21-22

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of NED/20/00221/FL, to allow for changes to the road alignment and plot positions (Major Development), at  land opposite 24 - 44 Clay Lane, Clay Cross

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to vary Condition 2 (approved plans) of the existing planning permission, granted for a development on the site, at land opposite to 22 to 44 Clay Lane in Clay Cross (NED/20/00221/FL). The variation would change the road alignment and configure the housing plot positions on the development. The Application had been referred to the Committee at the request of Cllr R Shipman, who had raised concerns about it.

Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report. It was also recommended that the existing Section 106 Agreement – or the agreement, reached between the Council as Planning Authority and the developer in order to help offset the impact on local people – be carried forward.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to agree the recommendations. Officers emphasised that the Application would only involve minor changes to an approved development. Committee was reminded that under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 changes could be made to an existing planning permission, as long as these would not make the development fundamentally different to the one which had been approved. Officers confirmed that the proposed minor changes would not significantly alter the approved development. This remained acceptable in principle and was in accordance with the overall objectives of the Local Plan.

Before Members discussed the application, those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee. Cllr R Shipman, M Allen and R Eden objected to the Application. The Agent, S Betts, spoke in support of it.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the relevant Planning Issues. These included the Principle of Development and the existing permission to develop the site. Committee considered the design and layout implications of the proposed minor changes. It also took into account the implications for heritage assets, ecology and the trees covered by the Tree Preservation Order on the site.

Members discussed the Application. They were reminded that the Application related solely to the proposed minor amendments. It did not relate to the original decision to grant planning permission for the overall development on the site.

Members discussed the concerns which had been raised about flood risks and the implications for the current Application. In particular, Members noted the concerns which had now been raised about possible flood risks on the site by the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA). Committee discussed these risks. It was informed that the Developer had agreed to install a tank to take water from the neighbouring brook in order to help mitigate them.

Members were informed that the LLFA had considered the Application and confirmed that the proposed minor changes would not increase the level of risk above those which existed under the existing approved application- either on the management of surface water or the flood risk on or off the site.

Committee discussed the information on flood risks which had been presented to it  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/50/21-22

Demolition of the existing social club building and the erection of 3 sustainable, detached, self-build homes, including associated alterations to the existing access. Site of the former Pilsley Miners Welfare Club, Rupert Street, Lower Pilsley, Chesterfield

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

Councillor A Cooper left the meeting at this point.

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for the demolition of a former social club building at Rupert Street in Lower Pilsley. Three sustainable, detached, self-build homes would be constructed and associated alterations would be made to the existing access to the site.

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

Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to approve the recommendations. Officers had concluded that the proposed development would accord with relevant planning policies. The new houses would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding street scene. Officers believed that the proposed development would not be detrimental to neighbouring properties or the amenity of local people. 

Before Members discussed the Application those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee. Councillor A Cooper, speaking as Local Ward Member and J Worthy expressed concerns about it. The Applicants, G Hooper and J Hooper spoke in support of it.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the relevant Planning Issues. It considered the Principle of Development and the site’s location outside but adjacent to the Settlement Limit of Pilsley on Previously Developed Land, within the countryside. Committee took into account the impact of the development on the character of the Area, the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties and Highway Safety. It also took account ecological, drainage and land contamination issues and the impact on parking.

Members discussed the Application. They considered the location of the site adjacent to a Cricket Ground and the implications of this for the Cricket Club and the residents of the new properties, especially when Cricket matches were in progress. Members discussed and emphasised the importance of a good relationship between the Club and homeowners. They considered the safety arrangements that would be put in place and whether any additional measures might be required.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor P Elliot and Councillor and W Armitage moved a motion to approve the Application, in line with officer recommendations. The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED -

(a)  That planning permission is conditionally approved in accordance with officer recommendations.

(b)  That the final wording of the delegations be granted to the Planning Manager (Development Management).

Conditions

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

2.     The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following submitted plans, 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:

·       Drawing No PMWI-114 Rev 02 Site Cricket Mitigation Plan (published 12.10.2021)

·       Drawing No PMWI-109 Rev 02 Site Levels Plan (published 12.10.2021)

·       Drawing No PMWI-108 Rev 02 Site  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/51/21-22

Proposed development of 50 dwellings with associated roads, sewers, gardens, parking and garages, (Major Development) (Departure from the Development Plan) (Amended Plans), at  and between the Old Canal and North Side of Primrose Lane, Killamarsh

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted for the development of fifty dwellings, along with associated roads, parking and garages at land between the old canal and the north side of Primrose Lane in Killamarsh. This would be a major development and a departure from the Development Plan. The Application was a re-submission of an earlier Application for the proposed development of fifty dwellings (NED/20/00919/FL), which had been refused.

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

Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report and a Section 106 Agreement – or an agreement, reached between the Council as Planning Authority and the developer in order to help offset the impact on local people.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to agree the recommendations. Officers considered the site a sustainable location for additional housing. It lay within the defined Settlement Development Limits for Killamarsh and had been designated for housing by the Local Plan. The officers contended that, on the whole, the proposed development was of good design and would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding area. They had concluded that the development would not be detrimental to the amenity or privacy of neighbouring residents. They had also concluded that there would be no unacceptable impact on highway safety.

Before Members discussed the Application those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee.  Cllr T Lacey, speaking as Local Ward Member, E Cookson and D Grzona objected to the Application. The Planning Agent, M Edgar, spoke in support of it.

Committee considered the Application.  It took into account the relevant Planning issues. It considered the Principle of Development, the location of the site within the Settlement Development Limits for Killamarsh and its designation as a housing site by the Local Plan.  Committee also took into account environmental issues, including the relative proximity of the site to a hazardous installation. It considered the Design and Layout of the proposed development and in particular, the density of buildings to be constructed on the site. It considered the potential impact on neighbours, as well as ground stability, drainage and the impact on ecology. It took into account the provision of affordable housing and what health and other infrastructure improvements might be required.

Members discussed the Application. They reflected on the reasons why the original development proposal had been rejected and whether it would now be appropriate to approve the development.  They discussed car parking on the site and the concerns which had been raised about traffic congestion. Members heard about the traffic assessment which had now taken place. Committee was reminded that the absence of a traffic assessment had been highlighted previously as an issue of concern. 

Members discussed the number of properties to be built on the site. Concern was expressed by some Members that this was higher than  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/52/21-22

Application to regularise the construction of 2 private ponds (amended title), at land to the South East of Siberia Cottages, Sydnope Hill, Darley Moor

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to regularise the construction of 2 private ponds (Amended Title) on land to the south-east of Siberia Cottages, Sydnope Hill, Darley Moor. The Application had been submitted by local Ward Member, Councillor W Armitage, who had raised concerns about it.

Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to agree the recommendations. Committee heard that the dimensions and shape of the previously approved ponds had been changed. Officers felt that this would not cause significant harm to the character, quality or distinctiveness of the landscape. The construction of the ponds had resulted in a net gain in habitat and biodiversity, when compared to the former arable field.

Before Members considered the Application those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee. The Applicant, P Kelly, the Agent, J Church and the Ecology Consultant to the Agent, S Brain, all spoke in support of the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Planning Issues. In particular, it considered the Principle of Development on the site and how this had been established when the original planning permission had been granted. It took into account the changes in size and configuration of the two ponds. It considered Local Plan policies and the scope for new developments in a countryside setting.

Members discussed the application. They discussed the use of the pond for private fishing. They heard about the bio diversity which had been achieved through the ponds. Members considered the location of the ponds and the distance from neighbouring properties. They heard about the tree planting and other landscaping work at the site. Committee also discussed the use of the ponds for private fishing by a disabled family member and his friends. Members also considered the concerns which had been raised by the resident of a neighbouring property and what impact the development would have on the privacy and amenity of this property.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor P Elliot and Councillor D Ruff moved and seconded a motion to approve the application in line with officer recommendations. The motion was put to the vote and was approved.

RESOLVED -

(1)  That planning permission is conditionally approved, in accordance with officer recommendations.

(2)  That the final wording of the delegations be granted to the Planning Manager (Development Management)

Conditions

(1)  The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans referenced unless otherwise specifically agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority or otherwise required by any other condition in this decision notice:

·       Site Location Plan – JC/K63/1 (date stamped 14/08/2021)

·       Drawing No 9 Topographical Survey of Ecological Wildlife Ponds (date stamped 14/08/2021)

·       Drawing No. PK01 Landscaping Details – Specimen trees and shrub screening (date stamped 14/08/2021)

·       Drawing TR-01 Rev V1 Wildflower and Grassland Location included in within the Ecological Addendum Version 1 (date stamped  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/53/21-22

Application to vary condition 2 of planning application 18/00177/FL to allow for increased footprint, alter height of roof, verge detailing, amended doorway positions, fenestration and changes to internal layout (resubmission of application 20/00795/FL) (Amended Title). At land to the South East of Siberia Cottages, Sydnope Hill, Darley Moor

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that an Application had been submitted to vary Condition 2 of Planning Application 18/00177/FL, to allow for an increased footprint, alter the height of the roof, verge detailing, amended doorway positions, proposed fenestration and changes to the internal layout. This was a re-submission of Application 20/00795/FL) (Amended Title) at land to the south east of Siberia Cottages, Sydnope Hill, Darley Moor.

The Application had been submitted by local Ward Member, Councillor W Armitage, who had raised concerns about it.

Committee was asked to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to approve the recommendations. Officers contended that the proposal met the requirements of the Local Plan, the Ashover Neighbourhood Plan and the overarching aims of the National Planning Policy Framework. They had concluded that the changes to the scale, character and appearance of the original building would not have an unacceptable impact on the character of the countryside, or on nearby residential properties and land uses.

Before Members considered the Application those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee. The Applicant, P Kelly, the Agent, J Church and the Ecology Consultant to the Agent, S Brain all 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 that the Application only related to the scale and detailing of the building. It considered the impact on the neighbouring countryside and view of the landscape. It took account implications of the development for the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties, highways safety and biodiversity.

Members discussed the application. They heard how the building was of a high quality design which would have a limited visual impact on the surrounding landscape. Members were reminded of the extensive tree planting which had taken place and discussed its compatibility with the surrounding landscape. They heard how the building would continue to be used for storage and leisure purposes. They discussed the location of the nearest neighbouring properties and considered whether the development would have an impact on them.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor P Elliot and Councillor D Ruff moved and seconded a motion to agree the Application, in line with officer recommendations. The motion was put to the vote and was approved.

RESOLVED -

(1)  That planning permission is conditionally approved in accordance with officer recommendations.

(2)  That the final wording of the delegations be granted to the Planning Manager (Development Management)

Conditions

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

·       Drwg.no PK/MH/10, Plans and Elevations (date stamped 16/08/2021)

·       Drwg.no PK01, Block Plan (date stamped 16/08/2021)

·       Drwg.no JC/K63/701/B, Revised Block Plan (date stamped 16/08/2021)

2.     All planting, seeding or turfing in the approved scheme of  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/54/21-22

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee informed Members that three appeals had been lodged, one appeal had been allowed and one appeal had been partly allowed and partly refused.

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

None.