Agenda and minutes

Development Control and Regulation Committee - Monday, 28th June, 2021 10.00 am

Venue: Cumbria House, Botchergate, Carlisle, CA1 1RD

Contact: Nicola Harrison  Email: nicola.harrison@cumbria.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

233.

Apologies for Absence

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Mr K Hitchen and Mr D Wilson.

234.

Changes in Membership

To note any changes in membership.

Minutes:

It was noted that Mr J Mallinson replaced Mr K Hitchen as a member of the Committee for this meeting only.

235.

Disclosures of Interest

Members are invited to disclose any disclosable pecuniary interest they have in any item on the agenda which comprises

 

1          Details of any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for            profit or gain.

 

2          Details of any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the authority) made or provided within the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by you in carrying out duties as a member, or towards your election expenses.  (This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

 

3          Details of any contract which is made between you (or a body in which you have a beneficial interest) and the authority

 

(a)       Under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and

 

            (b)       Which has not been fully discharged.

 

4          Details of any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the authority. 

 

5          Details of any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the authority for a month or longer. 

 

6          Details of any tenancy where (to your knowledge)

 

            (a)       The landlord is the authority; and

 

            (b)       The tenant is a body in which you have a beneficial                                                         interest.

 

7          Details of any beneficial interest in securities of a body where

 

(a)       That body (to your knowledge) has a place of business or land in the    area of the authority; and

 

 

(b)       Either –

 

(i)      The total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one            hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or

 

(ii)     If that share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class.

 

In addition, you must also disclose other non-pecuniary interests set out in the Code of Conduct where these have not already been registered.

 

Note

 

A “disclosable pecuniary interest” is an interest of a councillor or their partner (which means spouse or civil partner, a person with whom they are living as husband or wife, or a person with whom they are living as if they are civil partners).

Minutes:

Mr J Mallinson disclosed an interest relating to the following application:

 

Highways Act 1980 Section 118 - Extinguishment of Public Footpath No 119002 in the Parish of Irthington: District of Carlisle.

 

Mr Mallinson had come to a view on the application before the meeting. As per the Public Participation Scheme for the Committee, as Local Member, Mr Mallinson was permitted to make his statement to the Committee. Mr Mallinson advised that once he had made his statement he would leave the meeting room and take no further part in consideration of the application.

236.

Exclusion of Press and Public

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any item on the agenda.

Minutes:

RESOLVED that, the press and public not be excluded during consideration of any items of business.

237.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 488 KB

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of a meeting held on 19 February 2021.

 

Minutes:

Amendments:

 

Minutes 224 – 227. The extra ‘Application Reference Number’ in the first paragraph be deleted.

 

Minute 224. Sports England be changed to Sport England.

 

Minute 224. Page 12, paragraph 5. Delete ‘the Manager’.

 

Minute 226. Page 15, paragraph 2. Line 9. Add in ‘the’ between ‘of’ and ‘surrounding’.

 

Minute 226. Page 18, paragraph 3. 1st line. 3rd word to read ‘and’. Also add in ‘out’ between ‘carried’ and ‘on’.

 

Minute 226. Page 19, 4th bullet point add ‘to’ between ‘meetings’ and ‘discuss’ also last bullet point, remove ‘and resident’

 

Minute 227. Page 21, 2nd paragraph, 2nd line. Change ‘and’ to ‘an’.

 

RESOLVED that, subject to the amendments above, the minutes of the meeting held on 19 February 2021 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

238.

CA13/29 - APPLICATION TO CORRECT MISTAKEN REGISTRATION; CL20 CALDBECK COMMON pdf icon PDF 425 KB

[Electoral Division: Caldbeck]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding CA13/29 - Application to Correct Mistaken Registration; CL20 Caldbeck Common. The report requested Members to make a decision as to whether the application should be granted, and a correction made to the Council’s register of common land.

 

The Commons Officer’s presentation included a slide showing the location, shape and size of the application land with the remainder of the Common highlighted for contextual purposes. Members’ attention was drawn to a grassy area between the stone wall and house as it was a key element of the application.

 

The Applicant’s reasons for the request to deregister the land were explained in detail and key dates in the process were reported. The Commons Officer stated that if the stone wall was in place in 1967, then the sheep from the wider common would not have been able to graze on the application land. It would therefore not be classed as waste land of the manor.

 

Members were advised about the location of the wall in 1900 and 1974 when it had been moved to enclose the application land. It was highlighted that the key date was 1967 and whether the wall had been moved prior to that date. Members were informed of witness testimonies that suggested the wall was moved and built in the early 20th century. The Commons Officer advised that he did not doubt those statements.

 

Member’s attention was drawn to the objection of the Open Spaces Society. It was explained that Schedule 2, Paragraph 7(2) (b) stated that land could only be deregistered where the provisional registration of the land was not referred to a Commons Commissioner. It was noted that this usually happened when someone objected to part of the provisionally registered land. A Court of Appeal decision in 1985 had ruled that an objection to any part of the land puts in issue the entire registration so, no part of the land could be deregistered under that part of the Act.

 

It was reported that although there was an objection made against 2 small pieces of land several miles from the application land, it was misguided as the 2 pieces of land were not actually part of the provisional registration. The Commons Officer concluded that the reasoning given within the 1985 Court of Appeal decision could not apply.

 

The Commons Officer considered that on balance, all elements of the criteria had been satisfied and recommended that the Application Land was removed from the register of common land.

 

A member asked if the stone wall in question was built in the 18th Century. The Commons Officer explained that in order to assess if the land was wasteland of the Manor, the key date to focus on was 1967. The Commons Officer considered that the wall was moved before 1967 so the date when the majority of the stone wall was built, was inconsequential to consideration of the application.

 

It was moved by Mr Markley  ...  view the full minutes text for item 238.

239.

CA13/32 - APPLICATION TO CORRECT NON - REGISTRATION OF COMMON LAND; LAND AT BRISCO, CARLISLE pdf icon PDF 395 KB

[Electoral Division: Dalston and Burgh]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Ca13/32 - Application to Correct Non - Registration of Common Land; Land at Brisco, Carlisle. The report asked Members to make a decision as to whether the application should be granted, and a correction made to the Council’s register of common land.

The officer presentation included a slide showing the application land highlighted within the context of Brisco Common. A photograph showed the currently registered land with the application land highlighted for members.

Key dates in the application process were reported and an explanation of Paragraph 2 of Schedule 2 to the Commons Act 2006 was given. The claims of the Open Spaces Society (the Applicant) were detailed for members. The Applicant claimed that the Application Land had been omitted from registration as part of the register unit CL48 Brisco Common and the Application Land qualified for registration as common land as it was not land covered by a building or within the curtilage of a building. The evidence submitted by the Applicant was detailed for members.

 

The Commons Registration Officer explained the process relating to the Notice of Application, the representations that had been received and the Applicant’s replies to the representations. After having considered the evidence from the Applicant, the Commons Registration Officer considered that, on the balance of probabilities, the Application met the statutory criteria for registrationas it was not at any time finally registered as common land or as a town or village green under the Commons Registration Act 1965.

 

She advised that the Application Land was land subject to the 1915 Scheme for the regulation of commons in the parish of St. Cuthbert Without and was land to which Part 1 of the Commons Act 2006 applied. She considered that the Application complied with formal requirements contained in the 2014 Regulations and, regulation 14(3) of Schedule 4 to the Regulations as the Application Land was not covered by any buildings or within the curtilage of a building.

 

The Commons Registration Officer expressed her satisfaction that none of the points made would preclude the registration of the Application Land as common land and theapplication satisfied the criteria set out in the 2006 Act and the 2014 Regulations.  She recommended that the Committee add the Application Land to the Register of Common Land as part of unit CL48 Brisco Common.

 

There were no questions from members and no debate on this item.

 

It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr McEwan that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 16 members in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. Therefore it was, 

RESOLVED  that, the Committee accepts the application and resolves to  amend the common land register on the grounds that the land in question was not at any time finally registered as common land or as a town or village green under the Commons Registration Act  ...  view the full minutes text for item 239.

240.

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 119 APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 311006 PARISH OF BROUGHAM pdf icon PDF 1 MB

[Electoral Division: Penrith Rural]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Highways Act 1980 Section 119 Application to Divert Public Footpath no 311006 Parish of Brougham. The report advised that an application had been received by the County Council to divert a section of public footpath no 311006 at Whinfell Forest, Center Parcs. The report asked members to reach a decision as to whether or not a diversion order should be made.

 

The officer presentation included a map showing a plan of the section of footpath in question. The Countryside Access Officer explained that a number of long term blockages to the entrance of Whinfell Forest Holiday Park at the Center Parcs site near Penrith had been brought to the County Council’s attention. The Applicant had made two requests to address the obstructions. Members were advised that this application and Agenda item 9 (to extinguish footpath 311007) were closely linked but they had to be determined as separate applications.

The Countryside Access Officer explained the current route of the footpath, adding that it passed through the edge of a car park and through a small forestry plantation which was overgrown. A photograph of this was shown to the Committee. Members were informed that the public already tended to divert on to the proposed diversion alignment and the new route would be waymarked for clarity and convenience for the footpath users. Costs would be borne by the Applicant and there had been no objections during the consultation process.

The Countryside Access Officer considered that the proposed diversion would provide a safer and more convenient route to the existing definitive alignment and met the appropriate legal tests.

The Chair referred to the length of time Center Parcs had been open and asked how the development had been granted planning permission without the footpath being diverted as part of the planning permission. The Countryside Access Officer considered that the footpath must not have been identified as an issue at the time planning permission was granted. He explained that footpath users had complained about the obstructions so the County Council had approached the landowner in order to make the diversion. He stressed that this was a complicated legal case which, if someone objected, could result in a Public Inquiry. He considered this to be the best way to resolve the issues and hoped the public would concur with the course of action being taken.

The Countryside Access Officer clarified that the decision made on this application would not impact on the Committee’s decision at Agenda item 9 (to extinguish footpath 311007).

A member referred to the number of long term blockages and suggested that the landowner may have been purposely trying to block the route. He felt that diverting the route was rewarding the landowner. A request was made for the Countryside Access Officer to provide the history of the long term blockages of the route. The Countryside Access Officer presented a slide showing three routes and highlighted the main  ...  view the full minutes text for item 240.

241.

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 118 APPLICATION TO EXTINGUISH PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 311007 PARISH OF BROUGHAM pdf icon PDF 1 MB

[Electoral Division: Penrith Rural]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

This proposed extinguishment of footpath 311007 was determined before Agenda item 8 Highways Act 1980 Section 199 Application to Divert Public Footpath no 311006 Parish of Brougham.

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Highways Act 1980 Section 118 Application to Extinguish Public Footpath no 311007 Parish of Brougham.  The report advised that an application had been received by the County Council to extinguish public footpath no 311007 at Whinfell Forest, Center Parcs in the parish of Brougham. The report asked that members reach a decision as to whether or not an extinguishment order should be made.

The officer presentation included a slide showing a map identifying the location of the footpath to be extinguished. The Countryside Access Officer explained that the County Council had been alerted to a number of long-term blockages of public rights of way at the entrance to the Whinfell Forest holiday park Center Parcs site near Penrith. A photograph showed the location of the current footpath and how it was obstructed by a tall fence at two points. Between the points, the route passed through a car park, over a motor trafficked access road and through a small area of woodland.

The Applicant had applied to extinguish the footpath as it was not needed due to there being an equally convenient alternative to the North (public footpaths 311004 and 311006). The alternative route was identified for members. It was noted that all costs would be borne by the Applicant and no objections had been raised during the consultation process.

The Countryside Access Officer considered that footpath 311007 was not needed as there was an equally safe and convenient alternative route close by, the alternative route was safer and was as convenient as the existing route, the path was not needed and it met all the legal tests.

A member noted that the Countryside Access Officer had considered that the footpath was not needed. However, the member thought that the footpath was not needed as it could not be used by the public so this was not a sound argument. The Countryside Access Officer explained that it was not relevant whether the path was obstructed. He stated that there was a good, alternative route and members should consider if it was a reasonable one. He considered this to be the case.

It was questioned whether the alternative route would be more convenient to the landowner or the public. The Countryside Access Officer confirmed it would be as convenient for the public.

A member with knowledge of the local area advised on the significant security at the site. He thought that someone had made an error when the planning application for Center Parcs was determined twenty years ago but deemed the alternative route to be convenient.

A member asked what the implications would be of not extinguishing the footpath. The Countryside Access Officer explained the work to be undertaken in order for the route to be useable.

A member thought  ...  view the full minutes text for item 241.

242.

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 118 - EXTINGUISHMENT OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 119002 IN THE PARISH OF IRTHINGTON: DISTRICT OF CARLISLE pdf icon PDF 1 MB

[Electoral Division: Houghton and Irthington]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Highways Act 1980 Section 118 - Extinguishment of Public Footpath no 119002 in the Parish of Irthington: District of Carlisle. The report advised that the County Council had made an Order under Section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 on 10 November 2020 to extinguish public footpath no 119002 in the parish of Irthington District of Carlisle however, objections had been received to the making of the Order. Approval was being sought on whether or not to refer the Order to the Secretary of State for confirmation.

The officer presentation included a plan identifying the location of footpath 119002. The Countryside Access Officer reported that at the meeting on 9 October 2020, the Committee had resolved that an Order be made to extinguish public footpath no 119002. No adverse comments had been received to the informal consultation carried out and the path was considered not needed for public use. The Order was made on 10 November 2020 and advertised on 13 November 2020.  However, since the Order was made, eight objections had been received within the statutory period, together with a letter put forward by the Ramblers head office in support of the objection submitted by the local representative, received after the objection period had ended. Members could accept or reject the recommendation and if rejected, the Order would then be referred to the Secretary of State for confirmation which would likely result in a Public Inquiry.

 

The Countryside Access Officer had considered the 8 objections and applied the relevant legal tests. His recommendation was for the County Council to use its discretion for the Order not to be referred to the Secretary of State for confirmation.

Members’ attention was drawn to the update sheet (published on the County Council’s website and circulated to members before the meeting). The Countryside Access Officer referred to the additional paragraph relating to this item and stated that this was a long standing historical issue, where the exact line of the Definitive Map had remained disputed and not yet successfully concluded. It was noted that despite objectors’ comments, it had not been shown that the owners of The Rigg were at fault and were working with the County Council to resolve the issue. Members were reassured that negotiations were taking place to agree a suitable diversion of the footpath in order for the right of way to be opened up for use. Officers were seeking agreement on the most appropriate route with all affected parties and a further report on the matter would be submitted to members in due course.

A member asked about a suitable diversion. The Countryside Access Officer talked about historical efforts to resolve the issue. A diversion had been suggested in the past but this had not been pursued. However, it was currently considered that an extinguishment order was not appropriate and work was now underway with the landowner to identify a suitable footpath diversion.

After it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242.

243.

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 119 APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 339025 PARISH OF LAZONBY pdf icon PDF 1 MB

[Electoral Division: Penrith North]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Highways Act 1980 Section 119 Application to Divert Public Footpath no 339025 Parish of Lazonby. The report advised that an application had been received by the County Council to divert a section of public footpath no 339025 at Garthfolds in the parish of Lazonby. The report asked members to reach a decision as to whether or not a diversion order should be made.

The officer presentation included a map showing the location of the footpath and an aerial photograph showing the current recorded route of the footpath which crossed open pasture before joining a farm access track passing through the yard between the farm buildings. The Applicant landowner had applied to divert the footpath for reasons of privacy and security and the proposed new footpath would follow a slightly shorter more direct route and offered good views. The Applicant would cover all costs and there had been no objections during the consultation period. The Countryside Access Officer stated that the proposed diversion met the appropriate legal tests and would be made in the interest of the landowner.

A member asked if there would be animals grazing on the diverted route. The Countryside Access Officer confirmed there would be animals on the diverted route but from a health and safety point of view, this would be safer than walking through a farmyard.

A member commented that the farmyard did not look well used.

Mrs Carrick stated that she would not take part in the vote. She explained that the farm was used by the community and schools. She had been present at a Parish Council where the matter of the gate had been discussed and stated that generally, local people were satisfied with the diverted route.

It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr Turner that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 in favour of the motion, 0 against, 0 abstentions. Mrs Carrick did not vote on this item. It was,

RESOLVED that, Pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g) (iii) of the County Council’s Constitution, an order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert a section of public footpath no 339025 in the parish of Lazonby shown A-B to a new route A-C-D-E-F-G as shown on the plan at Appendix A and that all necessary action be taken to confirm the order.

244.

WILDLIFE & COUNTRYSIDE ACT 1981 - SECTION 53 APPLICATION TO ADD A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN THE PARISH OF ARLECDON and FRIZINGTON: DISTRICT OF COPELAND pdf icon PDF 3 MB

[Electoral Division:Cleator Moor East and Frizington]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 - Section 53 Application to Add a Public Right of Way in The Parish of Arlecdon and Frizington: District of Copeland. The report advised that an application had been received to add a bridleway at Yeathouse Farm in the parish of Arlecdon and Frizington to the Council’s Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way. Members were asked to decide on whether to proceed with the next stage of the process by making a legal Order.

The officer presentation included a map showing where the additional route would be located. The Countryside Access Officer explained that the application had been received in October 2007 and was accompanied by 10 user evidence forms claiming to have used the route for pleasure over a period ranging from 34 to 72 years. Recently, officers had tried to contact all the original claimed users but only one of the original 10 had been able to confirm their user evidence.

The claimed route was explained and it was noted that no objections had been received during the consultation process. The ownership of the land had passed from the County Council to the current landowner who had has since dedicated an alternative public bridleway on the land which provided a link to join the National Cycle Network Route 71 (also known as the Coast to Coast).

 

The Countryside Access Officer had inspected and assessed the available evidence on this case and did not believe that it carried sufficient weight to show that a public right of way was reasonably alleged to exist. He advised that application be rejected.

 

There were no questions from members and no debate on this application.

 

It was moved by Mr Hamilton and seconded by Mr McEwan that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 15 members in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. Mr Betton was not in the room for the entirety of this item and therefore did not vote. It was,

RESOLVED that, the application to add a section of right of way at Yeathouse Farm in the parish of Arlecdon and Frizington be rejected.

245.

Application Reference No. 1/20/9015. Proposal: Retrospective planning application for screening and crushing of inert material from excavation and demolition sites. Location: Tarnside, Tarnside Farmhouse, road leading from Farlam to north of Springwell Farm via Tarnside Farm, Farlam, near Carlisle, CA8 1LA pdf icon PDF 351 KB

[Electoral Division:Corby and Hayton]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 1/20/9015. Proposal: Retrospective planning application for screening and crushing of inert material from excavation and demolition sites. Location: Tarnside, Tarnside Farmhouse, road leading from Farlam to north of Springwell Farm via Tarnside Farm, Farlam, near Carlisle, CA8 1LA.

The Planning Officer guided members through the application. He advised that a representation had been received from Dr N Hudson MP on behalf of a resident. This had not been presented to members as it would have identified an individual.

Members were informed that the operator had ceased the screening and crushing of inert material as soon as a complaint had been made and submitted a retrospective planning application. A map and photographs of the site were presented. The access road to the site and how well the site was screened was explained.  Photographs showing the site from various viewpoints and access to the site were presented. Information about the number of expected traffic movements was provided. The Planning Officer considered that a Noise Survey was not required. A three year trial was deemed appropriate in order for there to be an adequate period of time to assess the operation. The Planning Officer stated that the conditions attached to the planning permission would address the concerns of the community.

A member asked why the hours of operation in the planning permission were longer than those suggested by the Parish Council. The Planning Officer explained that operational hours for agricultural machinery and activity were not restricted. He considered the proposed conditions to be appropriate but members could amend them if they felt it appropriate.

In response to a member asking if a 7am start time to crush material was appropriate, the Planning Officer concluded it was fair as it would afford the operator flexibility. It was highlighted that if this became an issue it could be revisited when the three year trial permission expired.

In referring to Carlisle City Council’s comments about dust and wheel cleaning, a member asked if there would be hazardous waste amongst the material being crushed. The Planning Officer advised that this matter, if it occurred, would be addressed by the Environment Agency.

A member commented on the size of the crusher adding that it would not be louder than an agricultural crusher. He had visited the site for 30 minutes and only one tractor had passed the site and the road was not littered.

After a member asked whether there were any restrictions on noise and times of use for agricultural vehicles, the Planning Officer confirmed there were none.

Attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which had been published on the County Council’s website and circulated to members before the meeting. This referred to an amendment to condition 4 as there had been a drafting error.

It was moved by Mr Markley and seconded by Mr McEwan that the recommendation as set out in the report and with the amended Condition  ...  view the full minutes text for item 245.

246.

Application Reference No. 2/21/9001. Proposal: Installation of tribute sculpture and plaque on pedestrianised area in the vicinity of Workington Railway Station. Location: Workington Railway Station, Belle Isle Place, Workington, CA14 2XE pdf icon PDF 455 KB

[Electoral Division: St. Michaels, Workington]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 2/21/9001. Proposal: Installation of tribute sculpture and plaque on pedestrianised area in the vicinity of Workington Railway Station. Location: Workington Railway Station, Belle Isle Place, Workington, CA14 2XE. 

The Lead Officer - Development Control guided members through the application. Photographs of the station and a map of the area showing the location where the sculpture would be positioned were presented. The dimensions of the sculpture and plaque were reported and members were informed about the newly pedestrianised area and access to the station was described. Issues taken into consideration such as visual impact and impact on the highway or pedestrian safety were detailed for members. The Lead Officer - Development Control thought the sculpture and plaque would be a positive feature in the location.

It was confirmed that maintenance of the statue and plaque would be undertaken by the County Council.

Mr Morgan, as a former employee of the steelworks decided to abstain from the vote.

It was moved by Mr Turner and seconded by Mr Bingham that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A member stated that the addition of the sculpture and plaque would be welcomed by the public.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 in favour of the motion, 0 against and 1 abstention. It was,

RESOLVED that, Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report

247.

Application Reference No. 4/21/9001. Proposal: Installation of 2 classrooms and link corridor. Location: Mayfield School, Red Lonning, Whitehaven, CA28 8UG pdf icon PDF 833 KB

[Electoral Division: Hillcrest and Hensingham]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 4/21/9001. Proposal: Installation of 2 classrooms and link corridor. Location: Mayfield School, Red Lonning, Whitehaven, CA28 8UG.

The Planning Officer guided members through the application. A map was shown where the school was located and the history of the development of the school was outlined for members. Slides were shown of the elevation of the buildings, of the internal views and how the classrooms would look. The size of the classrooms and corridor was reported. Members’ attention was drawn to the drop off area. The planning assessment was detailed. The school’s Travel Plan was reported and details were outlined about the increasing number of children at the school and the associated impact on transport provision and car parking on Red Lonning. The Planning Officer highlighted that the School Travel Plan needed to be urgently addressed. Photographs of the school, play area and secured parking area were presented.

There were no questions on this application.

After moving the recommendation as set out in the report, Mr Morgan agreed that addressing the matter of the School Travel Plan was urgent. He referred to a piece of Scrutiny work undertaken on the compliance with conditions attached to Planning Permissions.

Mr English seconded the motion.

A member welcomed that the school’s extra need for accommodation would now be met.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. It was,

RESOLVED that, planning permission be granted subject to conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report

248.

Application Reference No. 5/21/9001. Proposal: Erection of a 3m high fence and installation of a permeable surface to form a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) and resurfacing of existing tarmac area. Location: Sandside Lodge SEN School, Springfield Road, Ulverston, LA12 OEB pdf icon PDF 575 KB

[Electoral Division: Ulverston East]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 5/21/9001. Proposal: Erection of a 3m high fence and installation of a permeable surface to form a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) and resurfacing of existing tarmac area. Location: Sandside Lodge SEN School, Springfield Road, Ulverston, LA12 OEB.

The Planning Officer guided members through the application. A map showing the area of development in addition to residential dwellings and school sites was presented. An aerial photograph of the site was shown. A site plan showing the proposed MUGA location and existing trees and access points was presented. Photographs of the boundary wall, planted areas, the proposed fencing and tennis court views were shown.

Members’ attention was drawn to the Update sheet which had been published on the County Council’s website and circulated to members before the meeting. This included representations from Ulverston Town Council and Local Member Mark Wilson who supported the proposal. The Planning assessment was detailed for members.

The Planning Officer considered the MUGA to be well sited to meet need and there would not be any adverse effects relating to the proposed development.

There were no questions and no debate on this application.

It was moved by Mr McEwan and seconded by Mr Markley that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. It was,

RESOLVED that, Planning Permission is granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

249.

Application Reference No. 6/21/9002.Proposal: Replacement of existing glazed atrium roof structure over the conference room with an insulated flat roof with access margin incorporating a glazed atrium of a smaller size; and formation of a new door opening within an existing window opening to the first floor corridor [amended description]. Location: The Nan Tait Centre, Abbey Road, Barrow-In-Furness, LA14 1LG pdf icon PDF 559 KB

[Electoral Division: Hindpool]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 6/21/9002.Proposal: Replacement of  existing  glazed  atrium  roof  structure  over  the  conference  room  with  an  insulated  flat  roof with access margin incorporating a glazed atrium of a smaller size; and formation of  a  new  door  opening  within  an  existing  window opening  to  the  first  floor corridor [amended description]. Location: The Nan Tait Centre, Abbey Road, Barrow-In-Furness, LA14 1LG.

The Planning Officer guided members through the application. A site plan was shown along with isometric drawings of the Nan Tait Centre. Photographs of the existing atrium roof were shown. A slide showed the existing and proposed floor and roof plans and sections. It was reported that County Council and Barrow Borough Council officers had worked together to improve the design and reduce the impact of the proposed roof structure and new access door. The Planning Officer talked members through the planning assessment. Interventions would not be visible from public vantage points outside the building so would not affect the character or appearance of the Central Barrow Conservation area. He stated that he was satisfied that the interventions would not be visible from public vantage points outside the building so would not affect the character or appearance of the Central Barrow Conservation area. He considered the wider public benefits of the scheme outweighed the modest level of less than substantial harm arising to the Grade 2 Listed Building as a result of the loss of a small amount of relatively insignificant historic fabric.

The configuration of doors in the building was raised by a member who then asked if additional doors would be part of the development. The Planning Officer talked the Committee through the door configuration.

Another member asked whether there would be sufficient ventilation for the conference room should the new roof structure be granted planning permission. The Planning Officer undertook to raise this with the County Council’s Property Team.

It was moved by Mr Hamilton and seconded by Mr McEwan that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 members in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. It was,

RESOLVED that, Planning Permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

250.

Application Reference No. 6/21/9003. Proposal: Replacement of Roof Covering to the Muse Building. Location: Dowdales Secondary School, Nelson Street, Dalton-in-Furness, LA15 8AH pdf icon PDF 529 KB

[Electoral Division: Dalton North]

 

To receive a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

A report was considered from the Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure regarding Application Reference No. 6/21/9003. Proposal: Replacement of Roof Covering to the Muse Building. Location: Dowdales Secondary School, Nelson Street, Dalton-in-Furness, LA15 8AH.

The Planning Officer guided members through the application. A map was presented showing the development’s location and the context of the site. A number of photographs were shown of the current external elevations of the Muse Building and Ashburner House as was imagery of the proposed new synthetic slate roof covering.

Members’ attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which was published on the County Council’s website and circulated to members before the meeting. This recorded that Local Member, Ben Shirley supported the application.

The Planning Officer talked members through why the proposed new roof covering had been selected.

There were no questions on this item.

A member stated that this work needed to commence at pace as the tiles were brittle and would split in cold weather.

It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr McEwan that the recommendation as set out in the report be agreed.

A vote was cast as follows: 14 in favour of the motion, 0 against and 0 abstentions. It was,

RESOLVED that, Planning Permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

251.

Applications Determined Under Delegated Powers pdf icon PDF 166 KB

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

 

To note that these are applications that have recently been determined by the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure in accordance with the schemes of delegation.

Minutes:

RESOLVED that, the list of applications determined under delegated powers be noted.

252.

Applications Proposed to be Determined Under Delegated Powers pdf icon PDF 305 KB

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

 

To note that these applications that have been submitted to the County Council but are not ready/appropriate for presentation to the Committee of for determination under delegated powers and/or have been recently withdrawn or determined as invalid or not requiring planning permission etc.

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED that, the list of applications proposed to be determined under delegated powers be noted.

253.

forward plan pdf icon PDF 261 KB

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

 

To consider a report from the Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

 

To note the Committee’s Forward Plan.

Minutes:

The Forward Plan for the Committee was noted.

254.

Date and time of next meeting

The next meeting will be held on 10 August 2021 at 10.00am.

Minutes:

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on 10 August at 10.00am.

255.

Update sheet for 28.6.21 meeting pdf icon PDF 10 KB