Agenda and minutes

Any information received after the agenda has been published, relevant to the Applications on the agenda to be considered by the Committee, will be published here.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Stokes, Councillor Lane and Councillor Martin.

Councillor Winslade was in attendance as a substitute. 

Councillor Todd declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in item 5.2, in that she knew Mr Branston, one of the speakers in attendance.

         The minutes of the meeting held on 20 March 2012 were approved as a true and accurate record.

There were no declarations of intention from any Member of the Committee to make representation as Ward Councillor on any item within the agenda.

The Chairman addressed the Committee and stated that, with Committee’s approval, it was proposed to take item 5.2 first. The Committee agreed to the proposal.

The proposal was to fell a mature sycamore tree, protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The tree was located on the grass area abutting the public footway at the front of a detached property with gardens fronting onto 24 Atherstone Avenue.

The Landscape Officer addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the proposal. The applicant had sited that the tree roots had damaged drains and man holes, lifted block paving slabs and that the branches were potentially a threat to school children. The evidence had been supplied in the form of a report provided from a drainage company. The report highlighted the damaged caused, the causes of that damage and the costs of repairs. The tree was in good structural order with no defects and there was no arboricultural justification for felling the tree. The tree offered high amenity value, this being the main reason for the TPO being placed on the tree in the first instance alongside a number of other trees situated along Atherstone Avenue.

In order for a TPO tree to be approved for felling, the applicant was required to provide evidence in support of the proposal; this had been done so via a Drainage Engineers report. Having assessed this report, it was in the opinion of the Landscape Officer that the findings had not categorically demonstrated that the tree itself was causing the damage. An outline of other possible causes were given to the Committee and it was advised that once repair had been undertaken on the pipes, due to the nature of those repairs, this would prevent future root ingress into those pipes. In respect of all other points of concern raised within the Drainage Engineers report, all could be addressed without the need to fell the tree. The recommendation was therefore one of refusal.

The Committee was invited to ask questions of the Landscape Officer, key points were highlighted and discussed as follows:

·      The tree was in the region of 50 to 60 years old and had the potential to live to 250 years plus, dependent on growing conditions and pressures exerted on it in future;

·      The tree would grow to a height that it needed to sustain itself, it would not just continue to grow;

·      The tree did have the potential to grow a further 5 to 10 metres;

·      There were smaller and more appropriate species of tree which could be planted outside houses;

·      There had been no other trees with TPOs removed in the area in recent years;

·      If consent to be felled was granted, this could set a precedent for felling other trees in the area;

·      Replacing the tree with a more appropriate species could be considered;

·      It was unknown whether sycamore trees were indigenous to the country;

·      Just because a tree was high, this did not automatically make it dangerous;

·      The recent dry conditions could have exacerbated the situation with the trees.

Following questions to the Landscape Officer, concern was expressed by Members at the prospect  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The application site was formed by a large detached single storey store building which was permitted under application reference 03/01334/FUL with a lawful storage and distribution use (Class B8).  The site lay to the rear of No. 789 Lincoln Road, a vacant shop unit.  The surrounding area was characterised by a mixture of uses, with residential dwellings to the south east, commercial buildings to the north east and a car sales unit directly opposite.  Access was currently gated and situated between Nos. 785 and 789 Lincoln Road with an area of hardstanding surrounding the building, used for car parking. This part of Lincoln Road had recently been altered to restrict on-road parking. 

The application sought planning permission for a change of use of the site from B8 storage and distribution, to a 24 hour taxi call office.  The proposal would only be for the use of employees taking calls and would not be open to members of the public, or be a base for taxis.

The Area Manager, Development Management addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the proposal. The main issues for consideration were highlighted, those being the impact on residential amenity and highways implications. The recommendation was one of approval.

With regards to the impact on residential amenity, a petition had been submitted signed by all those residents living in the immediate vicinity. Two further letters of objection had been submitted and objections had also been raised by the Millfield and New England Regeneration Partnership (MANERP). Due to the nature of the proposal, in that it was not to be used as a taxi base, just for taking calls, it was in the view of Officers that the impact on residential amenity could be mitigated by conditions, as outlined in the report and the update report.

Highways had raised no objections to the proposal as the site had an established access and the proposal would not increase the number of vehicle movements.  

Members’ attention was drawn to additional information contained within the update report. As previously outlined, there was an amendment to condition C2 requested which would ensure that no private hire vehicles would frequent the site, apart from once a week to drop off takings, and not outside the hours of 08.00 to 18.00. An additional condition had also been requested stating that no more than six members of staff were to work from the site. 

Mr Gary Akehurst, an objector, addressed the Committee and responded to questions from Members. In summary the concerns highlighted to the Committee included:

·         The vision of drivers would be obscured due to a low wall at the front of the premises;

·         There were a number of children that walked in front of the premises on their way to school. An amendment to the time for the taxi drivers to be able to drop off their takings was therefore sought, this to be 09.00 in the morning instead of 08.00;

·         There was no time specified for drivers being allowed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The site area was approximately 0.6 ha, grassed and formerly part of the Honeyhill Primary School Site, currently used as a Community/Children’s Centre.  The site was enclosed to the south and west by a mature hedge and trees.  There was a foot/cycle path directly to the west, a recreation ground to the east and Honeyhill Community Complex to the north. The surrounding character was predominantly residential and was comprised of Development Corporation housing, circa 1970s, built as part of the New Town Development for Peterborough.

The application sought permission for residential development comprising 12 x 2-bed and 9 x 3-bed, two storey affordable dwellings with associated parking.  The site would be accessed off Paston Ridings. 

The Area Manager, Development Management addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the proposal. The main issues for consideration were highlighted, those being the policy context and the principle of development, the design and layout of the scheme, the impact on neighbouring and residential amenity, highway implications, open space, landscaping implications, the impact on the historic environment, contamination and the S106 contribution. The recommendation was one of approval.

Members’ attention was drawn to additional information contained within the update report. It was highlighted that a revision to condition C7 was sought, should the Committee be minded to approve the application.

Following questions to the Area Manager, Development Management it was commented that the application was extremely well thought out and very impressive. A motion was put forward and seconded to approve the application, subject to a revision to condition C7 as detailed in the update report and an amendment to condition C3. The motion was approved unanimously.

RESOLVED: (Unanimously) to approve the application, as per Officer recommendation, subject to:

1.      The conditions numbered C1 to C2, C4 to C6 and C8 to C21 as detailed in the committee report;

2.      The revision to condition C3 to state:

‘No development shall take place/commence until a programme of archaeological work including a Written Scheme of Investigation and evaluation by trial trenching has been submitted to, and approved by, the local planning authority in writing’. 

3.      The amended condition C7 as detailed in the update report.

          Reasons for the decision:

Subject to the imposition of the conditions, the proposal was acceptable having been assessed in the light of all material considerations, including weighting against relevant policies of the development plan and specifically:

-        This was an allocated housing site in the Local Development Framework Site Allocations Proposed Submission Document and would provide efficient and effective use of land and was in accordance with the spatial strategy for the location of residential development;

-          The scale and design of the development would respect the character and appearance of the surrounding area;

-          The development made adequate provision for the residential amenity of the future occupiers of the properties;

-          The development would not result in any adverse impact on the amenity of occupiers of existing neighbouring dwellings;

-          The proposal provided adequate parking provision for the occupiers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.