Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee - Tuesday, 14th June, 2022 6.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Matlock, DE4 3NN. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services 

Media

Items
No. Item

22/22

Interests

Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any interests they may have in subsequent agenda items in accordance with the District Council’s Code of Conduct. Those interests are matters that relate to money or that which can be valued in money, affecting the Member, her/his partner, extended family and close friends. Interests that become apparent at a later stage in the proceedings may be declared at that time.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

23/22

Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting

10 May 2022

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Garry Purdy, seconded by Councillor Richard FitzHerbert and

 

RESOLVED

(unanimously)

That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 12 April 2022 and 10 May 2022 be approved as a correct record.

 

24/22

Application No. 21/01346/LBALT pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Erection of rear extension accommodating a swimming pool, conversion of orangery/shed into kitchen and incorporation into main dwelling and associated internal alterations at Bradley Hall, Yew Tree Lane, Bradley, Derbyshire.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Development Manager gave a presentation showing details of the application and photographs of the site and surroundings.

 

The Committee visited the site prior to the meeting to allow Members to appreciate the proposal in the context of its surroundings.

 

Consultation responses were set out in section 5 of the report.

 

It was moved by Councillor Garry Purdy, seconded by Councillor Richard Fitzherbert and

 

RESOLVED

 

 

 

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report and the further condition set out below:

 

Prior to any excavation of the ground in association with the construction of the swimming pool extension, a construction method statement which seeks to safeguard historic fabric shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason:

 

In the interests of preserving the special character and appearance of the Listed Building in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), the National Planning Practice Guide and the Historic England Advice Note 2 - Making Changes to Heritage Assets (2016).

Voting:

 

For

Against

Abstention

 

 

7

5

0

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

25/22

Application No. 22/00182/FUL pdf icon PDF 229 KB

Change of use of land to 8 no. pitch traveller site with associated new access at The Woodyard, Derby Road, Homesford, Matlock.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Development Manager gave a presentation showing details of the application and photographs of the site and surroundings.

 

The Committee visited the site prior to the meeting to allow Members to appreciate the proposal in the context of its surroundings.

 

In accordance with the procedure for public participation, Mr John Youatt (Agent), Dr Siobhan Spencer MBE (Derbyshire Gypsy Liaison Group) and Mr Roger Yarwood (Local Resident) spoke in support of the application. Mr Stephen Walton and Mr Richard Walsh (Local Resident) spoke against the application.

 

Consultation responses were set out in section 5 of the report and supplementary late representations received after the Agenda publication.

 

Following publication of the agenda:

 

1. An email from the agent has been received, with an attached statement from the WHS (undated) which sets parameters for possible development of the site Conservation and Planning Panel. Within this document it is advised that the Conservation and Planning Panel would not object to a use on the site that conformed to the aspirations of the WHS management plan, e.g. eco-tourism, and also reintroduced the wooded character of its surroundings. It is stated that this does not mean:

 

- Screen hedge planting

- Extensive earth works

- Intrusive signage.

 

Small lodges, e.g. 3m x 5m to the rear of the site (i.e. as far from the road as possible), in a dark recessive colour, in a broad leaf woodland setting may be acceptable. Trees would be planted to look ‘scattered’ and not formally ‘regimented’ to give the impression of natural woodland.

 

That agent advises that the Council must recognise the established use is worse than do nothing. They state that its choice is between lodges or travellers’ pitches, which are in part an economic activity.

 

Officer Response:

DVMWHS Conservation and Planning Panel is not a statutory consultee and the guidance paper issued by the Panel was done so in exceptional circumstances. The Panel meeting was also held on the 25th November 2015, prior to the findings of the appeal inspector in respect of application 15/00642/FUL for an 8 pitch Traveller site at The Woodyard and the assessment of the impact of the development on the DVMWHS, a designated heritage asset.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the nature of development described by the panel was such that the site would enhance the broadleaved woodland setting of this part of the WHS, particularly in views from the turnpike road. The development applied for is more extensive in terms of site coverage and offers little opportunity to introduced broadleaved tree planting.

 

2. In addressing the officer’s report the agent also makes the following comments:

In 2014 the DDCC corporate committee resolved to adopt the Woodyard as its preferred site of 16, as a permanent site for travellers. It tested it against criteria and spent £1000s, concluding it was viable. The committee decided to adopt the Woodyard on a majority. The council has subverted that decision ever since. An application was approved for 3 temporary pitches for 3 years. It’s valid until the first  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25/22

26/22

Duration of Meeting (Motion to Continue)

Minutes:

At 8:30pm, it was moved by Councillor Stuart Lees, seconded by Councillor Tom Donnelly and

 

RESOLVED

(unanimously)

That, in accordance with Rule of Procedure 13, the meeting continue to enable the business on the agenda to be concluded.

 

27/22

Application No. 20/00037/FUL pdf icon PDF 268 KB

Hybrid planning application comprising of a full application for the erection of 5 no. dwellinghouses and an outline planning application for the erection of 12 no. dwellinghouses with approval being sought for access, layout, scale and landscaping at Land Off Thatchers Croft, Thatchers Lane, Tansley.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation showing details of the application and photographs of the site and surroundings. Members were advised that as a requirement of the Section 106 Agreement (required with the granting of planning permission), a financial contribution towards affordable housing would be required to off-site provision amounting to the equivalent of 1.1 dwelling. Members were also informed of the additional conditions requested by the Lead Local Flood Authority and with respect to tree protection.

 

In accordance with the procedure for public participation, Mr Richard Pigott (Agent) spoke in support of the application. Cllrs Vicki Raynes and Ian Strange (Tansley Parish Council), Mr Stephen Walton (Local Resident), Mr Richard Walsh (Local Resident), Ms Alayne Howard (Local Resident), Ms Samantha Wood (Local Resident) and Mr Geoffrey Prentice (Local Residents) spoke against the application. Cllr Paul Cruise (Ward Member) commented on the application on behalf of the local residents.

 

There followed a short adjournment at 7:53pm, returning at 8:02pm

 

Consultation responses were set out in section 5 of the report and supplementary late representations received after the Agenda publication.

 

Following publication of the agenda:

 

One letter of representation submitted to Sarah Dines MP and Local Ward Members has been received objecting to the proposals which is summarised as follows:

 

DCC Highways as a Statutory Consultee they recommend refusal. Derbyshire Fire and Rescues response says it expects New Builds to comply with B5 Approved Doc B Vol 1 Dwellings and access, a fire engine should not have to reverse more than 20mtrs – question whether there is enough space for a fire engine to turn and, if it cannot turn, then there is more than 20 mtrs of new road, from the turning area to the junction with Thatchers Croft - therefore question if there is compliance

Why do planners think they can ignore this advice, compliance is required with Fire Service access, it is not advisor

Likewise DCC engineers obviously have expert knowledge related to highway safety, why would our planners consider they are able to ignore this advice?

also note that the required 106 contributions which have been requested by DCC for Education have been significantly reduced by the planning department,  and off site contributions to Play Equipment are required - surely Planners have seen the sorry state of the existing play area, where there is no rubber surface matting to ensure children's safety - surely any monies for play areas should be used to make safe this on site facility

there is no assessment related to the Bentley Brook catchment and the fact this site sits above the Bentley Brook tributary and  is to have SUDS - there is no indication of management of the SUD's

DDDC know DCC do not adopt SUDS

there is no indication of the tenure of the new streets, how are they to be maintained or managed - sure we would all like to know , bearing in mind the access road Thatchers Croft is not financially secure and conditions related  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27/22

28/22

Application No. 22/00374/FUL pdf icon PDF 219 KB

Erection of 1 no. Dwellinghouse (Revisions to house design as previously approved under planning permissions 16/00941/OUT and 19/01050/REM) at Plot 6, Pump Close, Matlock.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Development Manager gave a presentation showing details of the application and photographs of the site and surroundings.

 

The Committee visited the site prior to the meeting to allow Members to appreciate the proposal in the context of its surroundings.

 

Consultation responses were set out in section 5 of the report.

 

In accordance with the procedure for public participation, Cllrs David Hughes spoke on the retrospective application

 

It was moved by Councillor Tom Donnelly, seconded by Councillor Stuart Lees and

 

RESOLVED

 

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report.

Voting:

 

For

Against

Abstention

 

 

9

0

3

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

29/22

Duration of meetings (Motion to Continue)

Minutes:

At 8:55pm, it was moved by Councillor Stuart Lees, seconded by Councillor Richard FitzHerbert and

 

RESOLVED

(unanimously)

That, in accordance with Rule of Procedure 13, the meeting continue for a further 30 minutes to enable the business on the agenda to be concluded.

 

30/22

Application No. 22/00298/FUL pdf icon PDF 226 KB

Erection of 1 no. dwellinghouse at Heather View, Whitelea Lane, Tansley.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation showing details of the application and photographs of the site and surroundings.

 

The Committee visited the site prior to the meeting to allow Members to appreciate the proposal in the context of its surroundings.

 

Consultation responses were set out in section 5 of the report.

 

In accordance with the procedure for public participation, Mr Andrew Stock (Agent) spoke in support of the application.

 

During debate it was moved by Councillor Sue Burfoot and seconded by Councillor Peter O’Brien that planning permission be refused due to concerns that the materials proposed for the development did not match those used in the construction of the adjacent property. This was put to the vote, the voting was as follows:

 

Voting:

 

For

Against

Abstention

 

 

4

7

1

 

The Chairman declared the motion FALLEN.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Tom Donnelly, seconded by Councillor Stuart Lees and

 

RESOLVED

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report.

Voting:

 

For

Against

Abstention

 

 

7

3

2

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

31/22

Appeals Progress Report pdf icon PDF 84 KB

To consider a status report on appeals made to the Planning Inspectorate.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Jason Atkin, seconded by Councillor Richard FitzHerbert and

 

RESOLVED

(unanimously)

That the report be noted.