REPORTTH TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON THE 9 APRIL, 2009

The following applications are submitted for your consideration. It is recommended that decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 be recorded as indicated.

INDEX PAGE

RB2008/1653 Erection of building to form combined heat and power plant at Page 31 The Old Kiveton Quarry, Dog Kennels Lane, South Anston for Kiveton Heat & Power Ltd.

RB2009/0184 Change of use from taxi firm to hot food takeaway at 64 Page 53 Kimberworth Road, Holmes for Mr. Shenwari.

RB2009/0194 Relocation of the remains of medieval cross from 22 New Page 60 Road, Dinnington at land at Falcon Square, Dinnington for Mrs. P. Cotton.

RB2009/0195 Listed Building Consent for relocation of the remains of Page 67 medieval cross from 22 New Road, Dinnington at land at Falcon Square, Dinnington for Mrs. P. Cotton.

RB2009/0226 Erection of 12 m wind turbine at Abbey Special School, Little Page 73 Common Lane, Kimberworth for Abbey Special School.

RB2009/0230 Retrospective application for non-compliance with Condition Page 82 1 (development only in accordance with specified plans) imposed by RB2008/1720 to allow bio-filters to be sited in amended position at former Templeborough Steelworks, Sheffield Road, Templeborough for Sterecycle Ltd.

RB2009/0232 Erection of 2 No. two storey buildings to form 8 No. flats at Page 90 land at Silverdales, Dinnington for Guiness NCHA.

RB2009/0233 Erection of smoking shelter at The Brooklands WMC, 110 Page 99 Rotherham Road, Maltby for Brooklands WMC.

RB2009/0237 Demolition of existing building and erection of a three storey Page 105 building comprising 6 No. apartments at 23 Clifton Terrace, Clifton for Stainton Hall Developments Ltd.

RB2009/0272 Erection of 15m wind turbine at Canklow Woods Primary Page 116 School, Wood Lane, Canklow for Canklow Woods Primary School.

REPORTTH TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON THE 9 APRIL, 2009

The following applications are submitted for your consideration. It is recommended that decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 be recorded as indicated.

RB2008/1653

Erection of building to form combined heat and power plant at The Old Kiveton Quarry, Dog Kennels Lane, South Anston for Kiveton Heat & Power Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION:

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below: a) Development plan:

(i) Regional Spatial Strategy: Policy ENV 5 Energy Policy ENV 12 Regional Waste Management Objectives.

(ii) Unitary Development Plan Policies:

(i) Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment. (ii) Policy ENV 3.2 Minimizing the Impact of Development (iii) Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution (iv) Policy UTL 3 Environmental Impact of Service Installations. (v) Policy UTL 3.4 Renewable Energy. (vi) Policy WM 1.2 Assessment of Waste Management Proposals. b) Other Material Planning Considerations:

Central Government Guidance:

(i) PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development. (ii) PPS 22 Renewable Energy (and the related Planning for Renewable Energy: A companion Guide to PPS22) (iii) PPS 23 Planning and Pollution Control. (iv) PPG 24 Planning and Noise. (v) Circular 2/99 Environmental Assessment (vi) The Energy White Paper: Our energy future - creating a low carbon economy, published in 2003. (vii) The Energy Challenge: Energy Review Report 2006, published in July 2006.

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered that, by way of the renewable energy to be generated the reduction in CO2 emissions and all the benefits associated with reduction in global warming and combating climate change, the proposal will have a positive effect on the environment.

It is further considered that by way of the potential reduction in traffic to be generated, relating to the recycling of waste material, the type of technology to be used, and the safeguard of the recommended conditions, the proposal will have no materially adverse additional effect on the amenities of the area by way of the generation of noise, fumes, traffic and any associated nuisance.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision, to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC11] Surface water from areas likely to receive petrol/oil contamination (e.g. vehicle parking areas) shall be passed through effective oil/grit interceptors prior to discharge to any sewer or watercourse. 02 [PC12] Details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any off-site work, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until such approved details are implemented. 03 [PC 24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be constructed with either:- a/ a permeable surface and associated water retention/collection drainage, or; b/ an impermeable surface with water collected and taken to a separately constructed water retention/discharge system within the site.

The area shall thereafter be maintained in a working condition. 04 [PC26] Effective steps shall be taken by the developer to prevent the deposition of mud and other material on the adjoining public highway caused by vehicles entering and leaving the site during the construction of the development. 05 [PC27*] Before the development is brought into use the car parking area shown on the approved plan shall be provided, marked out and thereafter maintained for car parking. 06 [PC44*] No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the development is first brought into use. 07 [PC97] The permission hereby granted shall relate to the area shown outlined in red on the approved site plan and the development shall only take place in accordance with the submitted details and specifications as shown on the approved plans (as set out below) except as shall be otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority (Drawing numbers 1184-01, 1184-02, 1184-03 Sht. 1, 1184-03 Sht. 2, 1184-05, and 1184- 06)(received 28th January 2009). 08 Before the development hereby approved is commenced on site, details of a scheme to attenuate the noise from the proposed fan and stack outlets to a level of not more than 5dB(A) below the lowest existing background sound level shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and that scheme shall be implemented before the development is first brought into use. 09 [PC52] No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 10 Notwithstanding the submitted plans the finished floor levels of the building shall not exceed 90.5m AOD unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 11 The use hereby permitted shall only be open for deliveries between the hours of 07-00 hrs and 18-00 hrs Mondays to Fridays, 07-00 hrs to 13-00 hrs on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays. 12 No part of the land other than that occupied by buildings shall be used for the storage of fuel or waste materials without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR11] To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 02 [PR12] To ensure that the development can be properly drained in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 03 [PR24A] To ensure that surface water can adequately be drained and to encourage drivers to make use of the parking spaces and to ensure that the use of the land for this purpose will not give rise to the deposit of mud and other extraneous material on the public highway in the interests of the adequate drainage of the site and road safety. 04 [PR26] In order to ensure the development does not give rise to problems of mud/material deposit on the adjoining public highway in the interests of road safety. 05 [PR27] To ensure the provision of satisfactory garage/parking space and avoid the necessity for the parking of vehicles on the highway in the interests of road safety. 06 [PR44] In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 07 [PR97] To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt. 08 In the interests of the residential amenities of nearby residents in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Development Plan. 09 [PR52] To ensure that appropriate materials are used in the construction of the development in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 10 For the avoidance of doubt and in accordance with the approved contour levels under RB2003/1659. 11 In the interest of the residential amenities of the nearby residents in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Unitary Development Plan. 12 In the interest of the residential amenities of the nearby residents in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Unitary Development Plan.

Informatives

1. INF 25 Protected species

Wildlife Legislation

The main piece of legislation relating to nature conservation in Great Britain is the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. This Act is supplemented by the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended), and the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 (in England and Wales).

The information provided is a summary only and is based on information provided by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) ( http://www.jncc.gov.uk/ ); for definitive information, primary sources should be consulted.

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (WCA) consolidates and amends existing national legislation in order to implement the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) and Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (Birds Directive) in Great Britain.

The WCA makes it an offence (with exception to species listed in Schedule 2) to intentionally kill, injure, or take any wild bird or their eggs or nests. Special penalties are available for offences related to birds listed on Schedule 1, for which there are additional offences of disturbing these birds at their nests, or their dependent young. The WCA also prohibits certain methods of killing, injuring, or taking birds, restricts the sale and possession of captive bred birds, and sets standards for keeping birds in captivity.

The WCA makes it an offence (subject to exceptions) to intentionally kill, injure, or take, possess, or trade in any wild animal listed in Schedule 5, and prohibits interference with places used for shelter or protection, or intentionally disturbing animals occupying such places. The Act also prohibits certain methods of killing, injuring, or taking wild animals.

The WCA makes it an offence (subject to exceptions) to pick, uproot, trade in, or possess (for the purposes of trade) any wild plant listed in Schedule 8, and prohibits the unauthorised intentional uprooting of such plants.

The WCA contains measures for preventing the establishment of non-native species which may be detrimental to native wildlife, prohibiting the release of animals and planting of plants listed in Schedule 9. It also provides a mechanism making any of the above offences legal through the granting of licences by the appropriate authorities.

The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 transpose Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (EC Habitats Directive) into national law. The Regulations provide for the designation and protection of 'European sites', the protection of 'European protected species', and the adaptation of planning and other controls for the protection of European Sites.

The Regulations make it an offence (subject to exceptions) to deliberately capture, kill, disturb, or trade in the animals listed in Schedule 2, or pick, collect, cut, uproot, destroy, or trade in the plants listed in Schedule 4. However, these actions can be made lawful through the granting of licenses by the appropriate authorities. Licenses may be granted for a number of purposes (such as science and education, conservation, preserving public health and safety), but only after the appropriate authority is satisfied that there are no satisfactory alternatives and that such actions will have no detrimental effect on wild population of the species concerned.

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW Act) 2000 provides for public access on foot to certain types of land, amends the law relating to public rights of way, increases protection for Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and strengthens wildlife enforcement legislation, and provides for better management of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

The CRoW Act improves the rights of way legislation by encouraging the creation of new routes and clarifying uncertainties about existing rights. Of particular relevance to nature conservation, the Act introduces powers enabling the diversion of rights of way to protect SSSIs.

The CRoW Act places a duty on Government Departments and the National Assembly for Wales to have regard for the conservation of biodiversity and maintain lists of species and habitats for which conservation steps should be taken or promoted, in accordance with the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Schedule 9 of the CRoW Act changes the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, amending SSSI notification procedures and providing increased powers for the protection and management of SSSIs. The provisions extend powers for entering into management agreements, place a duty on public bodies to further the conservation and enhancement of SSSIs, and increase penalties on conviction where the provisions are breached, with a new offence whereby third parties can be convicted for damaging SSSIs. To ensure compliance with the Human Rights Act 1998, appeal processes are introduced with regards to the notification, management and protection of SSSIs.

Schedule 12 of the CRoW Act amends the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, strengthening the legal protection for threatened species. The provisions make certain offences 'arrestable', create a new offence of reckless disturbance, confer greater powers to police and wildlife inspectors for entering premises and obtaining wildlife tissue samples for DNA analysis, and enable heavier penalties on conviction of wildlife offences.The following information outlines the legislation with respect to different species or groups; the information is not definative and is intended to provide general guidance only.

Bats All species of bats and their roosts are protected by UK and European legislation. Roosts are equally protected whether bats are present or not. All bat species are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and are therefore subject to the provisions of Section 9, which makes it an offence to:-

• Intentionally kill, injure or take a bat • Possess or control any live or dead specimen or anything derived from a bat • Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place used for shelter or protection by a bat • Intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.

Bats are further protected under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, which includes the absolute offence of damaging or destroying a breeding site or resting place of any bat. This absolute offence puts the onus on builders and contractors to undertake a survey prior to any work being done. Developers and environmental consultants jointly share the responsibility for designing and implementing a mitigation scheme that meets planning and licensing requirements, and in particular will ensure as far as possible the long tem future of any populations affected; such schemes should employ ‘best practice’.

Water Vole The water vole receives legal protection through its inclusion in Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in respect of Section 9(4). This protects the water vole’s place of shelter and protection, but not the water vole itself. Thus it is an offence to: • intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place which water voles use for shelter or protection, or • to disturb water voles while they are using such a place.

Legal protection does require that due attention is paid to the presence of water voles and appropriate actions are taken to safeguard the places they use for shelter or protection. Developers must also ensure that unnecessary damage is avoided; this can best be achieved by undertaking a water vole survey prior to planning any work and ensuring that appropriate mitigation measures are included in the proposals.

Great Crested Newt The great crested newt receives legal protection through its inclusion in Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and is subject to the provisions of Section 9. Great crested newts are further protected under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994. Thus it is an offence to: • Intentionally or deliberately kill, injure or take a great crested newt • Deliberately disturb great crested newts or intentionally or recklessly disturb them in a place used for shelter or protection • Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place • Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to a place used for shelter or protection • Possess a great crested newt, or any part of it, unless acquired lawfully • Sell, barter, exchange or transport or offer for sale great crested newts or parts of them.

The legislation covers all life stages; eggs, tadpoles and adult newts are all equally covered.

Breeding Birds All birds, their nests and eggs are protected by law and it is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), with certain exceptions, to: • Intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird, • Intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built, • Intentionally take or destroy the egg of any wild bird

Certain species receive increased protection; it is an offence to: • Intentionally (or recklessly in England and Wales only) disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building or is at (or near) a nest with eggs or young; or disturb the dependant young of such a bird.

Badgers Badgers and their setts are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, which makes it illegal to kill, injure or take badgers or to interfere with a badger sett. Interference with a sett includes blocking tunnels or damaging the sett in any way.

References Joint Nature Conservation Committee www.jncc.gov.uk (16 August 2007) Froglife 2001 Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook English Nature 2004 Bat Mitigation Guidelines English Nature, Environment Agency & the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit 1998 Water Vole Conservation Handbook RSPB 2001 Wildbirds and The Law English Nature 2002 Badgers and Development

2. Stopping Up/Diversions of Public Rights of Way Should the proposed development involve the diversion/stopping up of an existing definitive public right of way, you should request an application form from the Council’s Public Rights of Way Section (01709 822932) under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Applications can be made under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 section 1 for a temporary restriction of traffic on public rights of way if it is required because works are proposed to be executed on or near the path which would create a potential danger to the public. Temporary restrictions are allowed for a maximum of 6 months at any one time.

Background

The site is within an old stone quarry in which planning permission has been granted as a landfill site and waste recycling centre. The most recent planning permissions are to extend the period of operation for the landfill and waste recycling until 2019, application references RB2003/1659, and RB2003/1660 respectively.

With regard to the tipping and recycling operations in the adjacent quarry, it has recently come to the Council’s notice that the development is not in accordance with the approved plans. The tipped area has exceeded that identified in the planning permission, and the storage of skips and recycling operations are being carried out in locations different to those identified on the approved plans. Fresh applications for planning permission have therefore been requested, which must indicate the new final site levels for the tipping operation and details of all proposed plant, machinery and hardstanding, in relation to the recycling element of the operations.

In the Energy White Paper 2003 the Government made a commitment to ensure that 10% of the UK’s energy generation will come from renewable resources by 2010 and 20% by 2020. The Regional Spatial Strategy commits South Yorkshire to producing 47MW of electricity from renewable sources by 2010 and 160MW by 2021. Rotherham’s target is 11 MW by 2010 and 36MW by 2021.

Prior to submission of the application, information in relation to a screening opinion under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations 1999, was submitted to the Local Planning Authority in order for it to determine whether or not the proposal was EIA Development requiring an environmental statement.

1. The site falls within paragraph 3(a) Industrial Installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water, of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999. With regard to Column 2, the area is less than 0.5 of a hectare. The proposal does not therefore require further consideration under this paragraph.

2. The site also falls within paragraph 11(b) Installations for the disposal of waste, of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999. With regard to Column 2, the means of disposal is by incineration. In respect of paragraph 11b development it was concluded that the proposal is not of more than local importance in terms of its environmental effects; it is not located in a particularly sensitive or vulnerable location and would not have any unusually complex or potentially hazardous environmental effects. It is therefore considered that the development would not be likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its nature, size or location. Accordingly the Local Planning Authority has adopted the opinion that the development referred to is not EIA development as defined in the 1999 Regulations.

Site Description & Location

The site of application is a flat area of land within an existing disused quarry which is currently being used as a waste recycling/landfill site. To the north and east are the waste tipping and recycling uses referred to and a brick manufacturing site. To the east is Kiveton Park Steel works, whilst to the south the access road runs to Dog Kennel Hill, The Station Public House, Kiveton Park Station and the railway level crossing.

Proposal

The application is for the erection of a 2.5 MW Biomass heat and power plant within the confines of the old quarry. The application is accompanied by a design and access statement which indicates that the development will comprise a 28m by 78m steel frame building, clad in profiled steel, coloured goose wing grey with blue cornflower trim. The building would be in two parts with the storage and feed areas to the west end and the combustion and generator areas in the eastern half of the building. The storage part would be clad in natural colour concrete at the lower level. The building would be12m high to the apex, with a chimney terminating 5m above the apex. The cooling system would be located externally at the eastern end of the building.

The process entails reception of waste wood at the eastern end of the building where it is stored and loaded via a moving floor to two combustion chambers, each incinerate the wood at 850 degrees centigrade. The combustion gases then pass to a residence chamber where they are maintained at this temperature for at least 2 seconds to ensure a “clean burn” and eliminate any trace of carbon. The gases then pass through a boiler to produce steam for a turbine which turns the generator to produce electricity for the National Grid. The steam is then condensed back to water and recycled. This closed loop circuit produces a heat sink which can be used for a range of heating applications should they become available. In this respect the applicants have had discussions with Kiveton Park Steel adjacent with a view to utilising the heat at some time in the future.

Flue gases are passed through two filters to remove particulate and unwanted emissions. The Environment Agency has constant remote access to a Continual Emission Monitoring system which measures gases leaving the stack to ensure that the emission levels set by the Environment Agency are never breached.

The applicant states that the plant would create 9 new full time jobs and generate enough electricity each year to serve 4, 347 houses, saving 8600 tonnes of C0 2 per year (2345 tonnes of carbon).

Fuel for the plant would be 30, 000 tonnes of waste wood per year brought into the site, sorted and chipped, as part of the existing adjacent waste recycling operation currently carried out within the quarry. The applicant states that this would alleviate the need to remove the wood from the site after separation, for disposal to landfill or incineration elsewhere, and thereby reduce the potential generation of 1, 500 HGV movements per year.

The grid connection is to the nearby sub station in Dog Kennel Lane.

The application is also accompanied by a Noise Assessment in accordance with BS 4142, which indicates that increases in the average noise levels of 5 decibels above the average background noise levels is normally acceptable, whilst increases of 10 decibels is likely to lead to complaints from any nearby residents. The Noise Assessment has indicated that the rating levels of sound from the development would be below the existing background noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors (i.e. the nearest houses in Dog Kennels Hill) and would therefore be unlikely to lead to complaints. With regard to the external fans details are not yet available so it is recommended that a condition be imposed on any planning permission, to restrict noise levels received at sensitive receptors to 5dB(A) below the lowest existing background noise levels.

th A public meeting was held on the 13 February 2009, where the applicants answered questions from the public regarding the proposals. The meeting was also attended by the case officer to answer questions of fact relating to the processing of the application.

A Public Footpath runs along the western edge of the site and coincides with the site access, which runs to Dog Kennel Lane.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

Regional Spatial Strategy:

Policy ENV 5 Energy

The Region will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity. Plans, strategies, investment decisions and programmes should:-

A Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and maximise the efficient use of power sources by:-

1. Requiring the orientation and layout of development to maximise passive solar heating 2. Ensuring that publicly funded housing, and Yorkshire Forward supported development, meet high energy efficiency standard. 3. Maximising the use of combined heat and power, particularly for developments with energy demands over 2MW, and incorporating renewable sources of energy where possible. 4. Ensuring that development takes advantage of community heating opportunities wherever they arise in the region, including at Immingham and near Selby 5. Providing for new efficient energy generation and transmission infrastructure in keeping with local amenity and areas of demand. 6. Supporting the use of clean coal technologies and abatement measures.

B Maximise renewable energy capacity by:-

1. Delivering at least the following Regional and Sub-Regional targets for installed grid-connected renewable energy capacity:

South Yorkshire 47MW (by 2010), 160MW (by 2021)

2. Monitoring annually planning permissions and developments against the indicative local authority targets for 2010 and 2021 set out in Table 10.2 and taking action accordingly in order to ensure the regional and sub-regional targets are exceeded 3. Promoting and securing greater use of decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy in new development, including through Development Plan Documents setting ambitious but viable proportions of the energy supply for new development to be required to come from such sources. In advance of local targets being set in DPDs, new developments of more than 10 dwellings or 1000m2 of non-residential floor space should secure at least 10% of their energy from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon sources, unless, having regard to the type of development involved and its design, this is not feasible or viable.

Policy ENV 12 Regional Waste management objectives

A Plans, strategies, investment decisions and programmes should aim to reduce, reuse, recycle and recover as much waste as possible.

B Local authorities should work with regional partners, including commerce, the Environment Agency, the waste industry, Recycling Action Yorkshire and community groups to ensure the integration of strategies and proposals for sustainable waste management.

C Local authorities should support the urgent provision of a combination of facilities and other waste management initiatives which best meets environmental, social and economic needs for their areas based on the following principles:-

1. Moving the management of all waste streams up the waste hierarchy. 2. Achieving all statutory waste management performance targets during the Plan period. 3. Managing waste at the nearest appropriate location, where necessary by seeking agreement with neighbouring authorities. 124 Draft Local Development Framework

Core strategy draft Policy PD8 states: “The Council supports the efficient and prudent use of resources and infrastructure by working with partners and stakeholders to, amongst other things, "Promote improved energy efficiency in new developments and to increase installed renewable energy capacity to meet Rotherham's indicative energy potential target of 10.6MW by 2010, and to achieve on-site provision within new developments to be specified in the Policies DPD." (It is anticipated that the figure for renewable energy capacity will be amended to 11 MW in the final adopted Core Strategy).

Unitary Development Plan Policy

The site is allocated for Industrial and Business purposes on the Unitary Development Plan. The following policies are relevant:

Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment, states that development will be required to make a positive contribution to the environment. Development which makes a positive contribution to the environment through reduction in harmful emissions, but cannot meet the requisite design standards will be considered on their merits.

Policy ENV 3.2 Minimizing the Impact of Development:-

“In considering the scale, appearance, nature and location of development and infrastructure proposals, the Council will seek to minimise adverse impact on the environment, including water resources, and to conserve and improve its quality. It will permit development which results in a significant loss of trees, woodlands, hedgerows or field boundary walls only when there is compelling justification for doing so.”

Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution:-

“The Council, in consultation with other appropriate agencies, will seek to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development and transport.

Planning permission will not be granted for new development which:-

(i) is likely to give rise, either immediately or in the foreseeable future, to noise, light pollution, pollution of the atmosphere, soil or surface water and ground water, or to other nuisances, where such impacts would be beyond acceptable standards, Government Guidance, or incapable of being avoided by incorporating preventative or mitigating measures at the time the development takes place, or (ii) would be likely to suffer poor environmental amenity due to noise, malodour, dust, smoke or other polluting effects arising from existing industries, utility installations, major communication routes or other major sources.

The Council will employ all its available powers and where appropriate will co- operate with and support other agencies, to seek a reduction in existing levels of pollution within the Borough in terms of air, water, noise, light, waste, litter and graffiti. Where concerns arise, the Council will in appropriate cases monitor or require the monitoring of levels of pollution within the Borough in terms of air, water, noise, light, waste, litter and graffiti, in furtherance of this Policy objective.”

Policy UTL 3 Environmental Impact of Service Installations:-

“The Council will seek to ensure that the utility companies and agencies avoid or, where this is not possible, minimise the adverse landscape and environmental impacts of transmission lines, installations and other similar apparatus.”

Policy UTL 3.4 Renewable Energy:-

“There will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance. The Council will assess proposals for the development of renewable energy sources against the likely environmental costs and benefits arising in each particular case”.

Policy WM1.2 Assessment of Waste Management Proposals

“In assessing development proposals for waste disposal sites and waste facilities (including waste transfer stations, incinerators, skip hire, recycling points, and waste separation units) the Council will have regard to the following criteria and considerations:-

(i) demonstrated need for the facility, (ii) suitable location in relation to the main source of waste (iii) suitable location to the transportation network, taking into account the effect that traffic movements generated by the proposal would have on the locality, and (iv) the need to avoid a proliferation of sites in a locality such as would be likely to have a detrimental impact by virtue of their cumulative effect, together with the potential impact on: (v) residential amenity, (vi) agriculture, (vii) nature conservation and heritage interests, (viii) air quality, (ix) water resources and drainage regimes, (x) public health and safety, and (xi) landscape quality. The Council will resist proposals which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of local communities, the environment, and existing and proposed land-uses due to pollution, visual intrusion and disturbance.”

Other Material Considerations

Central Government Advice:

PPS 1 Delivering Sustainable Development.

Has the core principle of sustainable development and amongst other things aims to:-

(i) Effectively protect the environment. (ii) Promote prudent use of natural resources. (iii) Protect and enhance the natural and historic environment. (iv) Address the causes and potential impacts of climate change.

The Supplementary Annex to PPS 1 “Climate Change Supplement”:

Reinforces and emphasises the importance of addressing climate change and states:

“The Government believes that climate change is the greatest long term challenge facing the world today. Addressing climate change is therefore the Government’s principle concern for sustainable development.”

“Changes in climate are likely to have far-reaching and potentially adverse, effects on our environment and society for which we need to prepare and adjust.”

“Where there is any difference in emphasis on climate change in this PPS and others in the national series this is intentional and this PPS takes precedent.”

The planning system should help to “-secure enduring progress against the UK’s emissions targets by direct influence on energy use and emissions”.

One of the “Key Principles” is to:-

“make a full contribution to delivering the Government’s climate change programme and energy policies and in doing so contribute to global sustainability.”

It goes on to say that where strategic (RSS) and local plans (LDF) have not been updated to reflect this supplementary PPS, planning authorities should have regard for this PPS as a material consideration which may supersede policies in an existing development plan.

PPS 22 Renewable Energy and the related Companion Guide ‘Planning for Renewable Energy’ give details of the Government’s new policy regarding Renewable Energy development, which must be taken into account when formulating Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks. It indicates that planning authorities should adhere to the following key principles:

(i) Renewable energy developments should be capable of being accommodated throughout England where the technology is viable and environmental economic and social impacts can be addressed. (ii) Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks should contain policies designed to promote rather than restrict development of renewable energy resources. (iii) Local Planning Authorities should set out criteria based policies that will be applied in assessing applications. Policies which rule out or constrain renewable energy development should not be included without sufficient reasoned judgement. The Government will intervene in the plan making process if constraints are considered too great or are poorly justified . (iv) Wider environmental and economic benefits of renewable energy projects whatever their scale, are material considerations that should be given considerable weight when determining planning applications, including those in Green Belt locations. Paragraph 13 indicates that the wider benefits of increased renewable energy may be contributory to a case for very special circumstances. (v) Local Planning Authorities should not make assumptions about technical and commercial feasibility of renewable energy projects. (vi) Local Planning Authorities should not reject proposals because output is small. (vii) Local Planning Authorities should foster community involvement and applicants should engage in active consultation before planning applications are submitted. (viii) Development proposals should demonstrate benefits as well as how any impacts have been minimised.

In relation to biomass projects PPS 22 states that generation plants should be located as close as possible to the source of fuel.

Further advice from Central Government strongly supports renewable energy development.

The Energy White Paper: Our energy future - creating a low carbon economy, published in 2003, sets out the Government's policies in response to future challenges to energy. The first challenge is identified as climate change and the need to put the country on a path towards a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions; the second challenge is the decline of the country's indigenous energy supplies and the problems of security of supply; the third challenge is the need to update much of the country's energy infrastructure over the next two decades.

The Energy Challenge: Energy Review Report 2006, published in July 2006, is the latest statement of Government policy on energy. The main changes to the 2003 White paper are a commitment to nuclear power and to clean coal technology. The report also gives a renewed commitment, specifically at Annex D, to the need for renewable energy.

PPS 23 Planning and Pollution Control.

States that pollution which may affect health is a material consideration. It also states that the Pollution Control Authority must be satisfied that the potential release can be adequately controled, and amongst other things take into consideration the possible impact of potentially polluting development, and any envoironmental benefits such as creation of new jobs, the need to limit and where possible reduce green house gas emmissions, and take account of potential effects of climate change.

PPG 24 Planning and Noise.

Indicates that the impact of noise can be a material consideration when determining planning applications. It also acknowledgees that development which creates new jobs and essential infrastructure will generate noise, and that the planning system should not place unjustifyable objects in the way of such developments. It also states that noise should be taken into consideration in terms of its character as well as level.

Publicity

The application was first submitted in October 2008, and publicity carried out comprising advertisement on site and in the press and letters sent to nearby residents. Subsequent to the commencement of publicity the application was found to be deficient in terms of the content and ownership certificate, and consequently invalidated. On receipt of the additional information required the consultation exercise was repeated, and letters sent to all residents who had previously made representations, on the original submission.

91 letters of representation were received in relation to the original submission. Points raised are:-

(i) Noise from the plant. (ii) Traffic generated and consequent noise, fumes and highway danger. (iii) Unsuitability of existing highway network. (iv) Fumes from the plant. (v) Where will fuel supply come from after recycling plant has closed. (vi) Stopping up of public footpath.

A further 106 letters of objection were received in relation to the revised submission, reiterating all the above referred to issues

Letters were received letters from Todwick Parish Council, and Councillor I. St John, objecting to the proposal.

Points raised were:-

(i) Poor road access. (ii) Local resistance to further accessing via either Wales or Todwick with the consequence that lorries will pass through South Anston. (iii) Points out that one of the joint applicants is the owner of Park Farm. (iv) There is an existing planning approval for a similar development in Shieroaks.

A letter was also received from The Right Honourable Kevin Barron MP, who drew the Council’s attention to the concerns of his constituents.

Eleven requests to speak at the meeting have been received including Todwick Parish Council, Councillor I. St John, Councillor D. Hughes, Councillor Sharp and Councillor Fenoughty.

Consultations

Transportation Unit:-

"The proposed development was the subject of an enquiry in May 2008 which was accompanied by a "Planning Support Statement". At that time, the enquirers pointed out that some 30,000 tonnes of low grade waste wood per annum would be transported to the plant by walking floor bulkers with a 22 tonne capacity. If averaged out over a year this equates to 3.7 loads per day or 7.4 movements. The supporting statement pointed out that these vehicles will utilise B6059 Dog Kennels Lane, A57 and the M1 Motorway which is the same route as those lorries which serve the existing operations at the site. The statement pointed out also that the site access to B6059 was ..." via a full highway specification HGV splay... and is consistent with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges". This statement, which refers to the visibility available at the site access, is erroneous since the available sight lines do not accord with current standards. Notwithstanding this, I do not consider the additional vehicular traffic likely to exit via this access (3-4 HGV's per day) to represent a material adverse impact in road safety terms, bearing in mind the established vehicular activity at this access. Indeed, planning permission was granted in April 2004 (RB2004/359) for the storage of skips, handling and re-cycling of inert and non inert waste material at Kiveton Park Quarry. Condition No. 8 allows for a maximum of 30 HGV's to enter or leave the site per day (60 movements).

With regard to the suitability of the local highway network to cater for this vehicular activity, the Transportation Unit is aware of long standing complaints from residents of South Anston regarding the alleged unsuitability of the road network to cater for such traffic. In this respect, I would point out that the Council has to manage and develop a road user hierachy for all forms of transport, amongst other things to promote economic development in the Borough. A road hierachy has therefore been established, Motorways at the top, A Class roads, B Class roads, C Class roads then unclassified and residential estate roads. Roads through South Anston/Kiveton Park are Class B and capable of accommodating traffic with other than local origin. They already carry a significant amount of traffic, including HGV's and are considered capable of catering for the traffic likely to be generated by the current proposal in terms of capacity and road safety. 5 No. personal injury accidents have been recorded along the B6059 through the village of South Anston in the past 5 years, none of which involved HGV's. Statistically, this does not constitute a bad record and does not justify opposition to the proposal.

With regard to the current planning application, the agents have now confirmed that there will in fact be no additional HGV movements generated by the proposal since the waste wood will be transported to the site as part of the previous planning permission, RB2004/359, which currently allows up to 60 No. vehicle movements per day.This reinforces the Transportation Units view that the proposal, if implemented, will have little, if any, adverse impact in highway terms.

With regard to traffic conditions in South Anston generally, various issues were raised at the Rother Valley South Traffic Working Group meeting on 10th February 2009. These have been considered by the Transportation Unit who have responded to the issues raised. Whilst the majority of requests made by residents cannot be acceded to, the Transportation Unit will continue to monitor traffic conditions.

Director of Environmental Health:-

The development itself will be permitted and controlled by the Environment Agency and as such there will be specific conditions the applicants will have to adhere to regarding air quality, land pollution and noise pollution. The noise assessment states that the average background noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive receptors are:

33-47dB(A) weekdays 33-40dB(A) weekday nights and 35-49dB(A) Sundays

The predicted noise level of the development at the nearest noise sensitive receptors is stated at 20dBA which is well below the current background noise levels and therefore in accordance with advice in BS 4142 and complaints not likely, as a result of the development.

As the unit is to be built inside the quarry all buildings that contain noise sources and any noises sources outside will be shielded by the quarry walls which is the best sound attenuation measures you can have due to the thickness and density of the walls. Consequently predicted noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors are low.

It is therefore considered that subject to conditions to control site deliveries and stock piling of fuel, that there would be no disamenity from the development by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution impact.

Environment Agency:-

“No objections. The pollution risks will be addressed through an Environmental Permit. Furthermore, other proposals for sites in the vicinity have in the past resulted in complaints from residents of South Anston regarding the impact of additional HGV movements within the village and along Dog Kennels Lane. I do not consider the proposed increase in vehicular movements resulting from the current proposal to adversely impact on road safety in these locations.”

Highways Agency:-

No objections, given the location of the site and small magnitude of the impact of the development.

Waste Strategy Manager:-

No objections. Confirms that the proposal will support the proximity principle in dealing with waste a local level.

Fire Safety Officer:-

No objections subject to access in accordance with the Building Regulations and the provision of a water supply for fire fighting purposes.

Ecology Officer:-

No objections. Points out that there is a vegetated area nearby and consequently a precautionary approach should be taken with regard to potentially protected species and breeding seasons.

An informative is attached in the report.

South Yorkshire Police:-

Recommend that the developer achieve the standards in the police accredited “Secured by Design” scheme. It is also recommended that the applicant liaise with South Yorkshire Police regarding details of securing the site.

Public Rights of Way Officer:-

Points out that there is an existing definitive footpath, which coincides with the western site boundary to the quarry, and runs along side the vehicular access to the site. Concern has been expressed should there be any additional traffic generated along this route.

Appraisal

The site of application is within an existing disused quarry on land allocated for Industrial and business purposes in the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that “If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.” It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in principle.

The main other issues to be considered in relation to this application are:-

(i) The renewable energy benefits of the proposal. (ii) The traffic generated by the development. (iii) The design and location of the building. (iv) Pollution from the proposal. (v) The life of the plant.

(i) The renewable energy benefits of the proposal.

PPS 22 Renewable Energy strongly advocates the use of energy from renewable sources, indicating that its production is a material consideration carrying significant weight in relation to planning applications. Having regard for the above and advice in PPS 22, significant weight must be afforded to the production of energy from a renewable resource, the reduction in harmful emissions, and the wider environmental benefits in terms of combating climate change.

The applicant has indicated that the proposal will reduce harmful emissions by some 8,600 tonnes of CO2 per year (2, 345 tonnes of carbon) and serve 4,347 dwellings with renewable energy, (based on emissions from a fossil fuel fired power station).

Paragraph 13 of PPS 22 Renewable Energy attaches significant weight to the increased production of renewable energy. This advice is reflected in Policies R12 (a) and ENV 5 of the Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber which identifies specific commitments for installed renewable energy capacity of 47MW for South Yorkshire by 2010 and 160 MW by 2021, the targets for Rotherham being 11MW by 2010, and 36MW by 2021. In addition, Policy UTL 3.4 Renewable Energy of the Unitary Development Plan states that there will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of energy from renewable resources, unless the development will cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

The Technical Annex of the Companion Guide to PPS 22 indicates that Dry Biomass converters which use crops, waste wood or other bio degradable waste are classed as carbon neutral, insofar as the carbon released when the fuel is burned is the same as that absorbed when the crop was grown, so when it is used instead of fossil fuels a net reduction in carbon emissions is therefore achieved.

It is therefore considered that the renewable energy benefits of the proposals are significant, and that the proposals comply with both Regional Spatial Strategy and Unitary Development Plan Policies in this respect.

The wider benefits of pollution free renewable energy in combating climate change must carry considerable weight in relation to the proposals under consideration.

(ii) The traffic generated by the development.

The application site is adjacent an existing landfill and waste recycling use within an existing disused quarry. Fuel for the proposed generator would come from that recycling use in the form of chipped wood. This would remove the need for the separated wood to be move to alternative sites for disposal, thereby potentially saving 1, 500 HGV movements per year. In this respect PPS 22 states that traffic is minimised by ensuring that generation plants are located in as close proximity as possible to the sources of fuel that have been identified.

It is therefore considered that the amount of additional traffic generated by the proposal would be very limited and would have no materially adverse effect in highway safety terms. The Transportation Unit and Highways Agency concur with this view.

With regard to the definitive footpath adjacent the site access, the Public Rights of way Officer has expressed concern should there be any additional traffic along this route. It is not considered that there would be any significant increase in vehicular traffic to the site as a result of the development, and consequently considered that there would be no materially adverse effect on highway safety as a result of the proposed development.

It is further considered that the proposed generator would have a positive effect on the environment by the production of carbon neutral renewable energy, and reduction in the potential number of HGV journeys. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Regional Spatial Strategy Policies ENV 5 Energy and ENV 12 Regional Waste Management Objectives, and Policies ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment, ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution, and UTL 3.4 Renewable Energy, of the Unitary Development Plan and advice in PPS 1 Delivering Sustainable Development, PPS 22 Renewable Energy, The Energy White Paper: Our energy future - creating a low carbon economy, published in 2003.The Energy Challenge: Energy Review Report 2006, published in July 2006.

(iii) The design and location of the building.

The proposed building would be some 28m by 78m by 12m to the apex, with a chimney stack projecting some 5m above the apex. The building is relatively utilitarian being intended to house an industrial process. However, the general massing is broken up by the entrance doors and the different materials. Additionally, it would be located within an existing former quarry, and would not be readily visible from outside the site. Policy ENV 3.1 notes that development that makes a positive contribution to the environment through a reduction in harmful emissions will in any event be considered on their merits. It is therefore considered that the proposed building would be in accordance with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan.

(iv) Pollution from the proposal.

The process burns the recycled wood at 850 degrees centigrade and holds the combustion gases at that temperature for at least 2 seconds to ensure removal of all carbon. The emissions are then filtered to remove particulates before being released into the atmosphere. The resultant ash is reused within the adjacent recycling plant either within road aggregate or as a soil conditioning agent. Water from the boiler used to drive the turbine is recycled. With regard to noise, an assessment under BS 4142 was submitted with the application and found that the proposed development would not result in any increase in the existing background noise levels of the area. With regard to the extraction fans, no final details of the plant are available at the present tome. Consequently should planning permission be granted it is recommended that an appropriate condition is attached to attenuate the effects to an acceptable level. Having regard for these factors it is considered that the proposal will have no adverse effect on the amenities of the area by way of noise, or fumes, and would be in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Unitary Development Plan. The Director of Environmental Health concurs with this view.

(v) The life of the plant.

The proposals in their current form rely on recycled fuel from the existing waste transfer station and tipping operation which currently has a life of 10 years. After that time there is a potential for the logistics of the fuel supply to change and become less sustainable insofar as it may have to come from other sources not in the immediate vicinity. However, this must be considered in the light of the importance and weight given to the production of energy from renewable resources in the above referred to policy and advice, and in the light of the following:-

(i) The site is allocated for industrial purposes and consequently the principle would still be acceptable. (ii) The removal of the waste tipping and recycling uses in the future would have the potential to result in a significant reduction in HGV traffic to the site as a whole. (iii) The renewable energy to be generated in the meantime. (iv) The renewable energy which would still be produced post 2019. (v) The reduction in CO2 emissions and all the benefits associated with reduction in global warming and combating climate change.

It is therefore considered that the proposal will have a positive effect on the environment, sufficient to outweigh a future possible reduction in the sustainability of the plant by the future loss of an immediately adjacent fuel supply.

Human Rights:-

Generalised environmental concerns do not engage Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which is concerned with an individual’s right to enjoy life in his own home. Notwithstanding this the right under Article 8 or Article 1 of the First Protocol is not absolute and can be made to yield to the greater public good. Any interference under Article 8 would be justified on the basis that, there is a legal authorisation for the interference (Town and Country Planning Act 1990), which pursues the legitimate aim of the economic well – being of the country,(here by the preservation of the environment, by the positive effects of the production of pollution free energy from a renewable source and the saving of emissions of carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen) and the protection of the rights of others (here the landowner/applicant ) set against any forms of pollution generated, i.e. noise, fumes and traffic generation and any potential impact on the amenities of residents in the locality. Any interference in the context of the foregoing it is submitted would be necessary and proportionate.

Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights states:

"Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.”

The courts have held that diminution in value of property is outside the scope of Article 1 of the First Protocol as well as not being a material planning consideration.

Therefore, it is considered that there is no infringement of Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol in this instance.

Conclusion

The material considerations in relation to the proposal are the principle of the development, the effect on the amenities of the area, and the wider benefits of combating climate change. The site is allocated for industrial purposes in the Unitary Development Plan and it is considered that there would not be a significant increase of traffic relating to the recycling of waste material. It is considered that there would be benefits in support of the proposals including:-

(i) Significant contribution to the savings in carbon dioxide emissions (8,600 tonnes, which equates to 2, 345 tonnes of carbon per year) though this may reduce depending on the mix of fuel types in the generation industry. (ii) The production of electricity from a renewable carbon neutral source. (iii) The electricity generated is likely to be the equivalent of supplying 4, 347 households per year. (iv) The wider benefits attributable to the combating of climate change which would have a far more significant impact on the landscape and ecology than the proposed development.

Advice from Central Government strongly supports renewable energy development.

The Supplementary Annex to PPS 1 “Climate Change Supplement” reinforces and emphasises the importance of addressing climate change and states:

“The Government believes that climate change is the greatest long term challenge facing the world today. Addressing climate change is therefore the Government’s principle concern for sustainable development.”

“Changes in climate are likely to have far-reaching and potentially adverse, effects on our environment and society for which we need to prepare and adjust.”

Having regard for all the above it is considered that the proposals will result in significant environment benefits and it is recommended that permission be granted.

RB2009/0184

Change of use from taxi firm to hot food takeaway at 64 Kimberworth Road, Holmes for Mr. Shenwari.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan

UDP Policies

EC5 ‘Mixed Use Areas’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered that the proposed change of use would be acceptable in land use terms as the proposed use falls within the list of acceptable uses in this Mixed Use Area as outlined within Chapter 7 of the UDP.

It is further considered that the proposed use will not result in any additional material detriment to the amenities of neighbouring domestic and commercial premises by way of noise, smell, litter and general disturbance, and that due to the marked out parking lay-bys on either side of Kimberworth Road the impact on highway safety would not be significant.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC56] All cooking fumes shall be exhausted from the building via a suitable extraction and/or filtration system. This shall include discharges at a point not less than one metre above the highest point of the ridge of the building or any such position as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. The extraction/filtration system shall be maintained and operated in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications, details of which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to installation and it shall thereafter be operated effectively during cooking. All systems shall take into account the document 'Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems' published by DEFRA January 2005. 02 [PC57] The use hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a litter bin has been provided on the forecourt to/within the said building for use by the customers of the said premises. 03 The use hereby permitted shall only be open to customers or for deliveries between the hours of 10:00am and Midnight.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR56] So as to ensure correct dispersion of cooking odours to avoid disamenity to the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 02 [PR57] In the interests of visual amenity and to reduce the problem of litter and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 03 [PR73] In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

Informatives

The granting of this planning permission does not authorise any signage to be erected related to the development. Such signage is controlled by the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and a separate application for advertisement consent may be required.

Background

There has been one previous planning application submitted relating to the application property, this is summarised below:

RB1998/0592 – Change of use of premises to taxi booking office – Granted conditionally.

Site Description & Location

The application site is located on the southern side of Kimberworth Road close to its junction with Devonshire Street in the Masbrough area of the Borough.

The application building is the end property in a row of 10 two-storey terraced properties which run from south-east to north-west. The row of terraced properties have various commercial premises at ground floor, including a sandwich shop, an Italian restaurant, 2 hairdressers, a taxi booking office and a takeaway selling kebabs, pizza etc. and at first floor some of the properties appear to have residential flats.

Within the row of terraced properties, two of the units are currently vacant, including the one to which this application relates.

To the north-west of the application site there is a new three-storey building attached to an existing three-storey building both of which have business premises at ground floor and a residential above.

On the opposite side of Kimberworth Road is the large Rotherham Bus Garage which is at a lower level than the road and screened from views from Kimberworth Road by a metal fence and an area of heavy dense planting.

On both sides of the carriageway of Kimberworth Road are marked parking lay-bys.

Proposal

The applicant is seeking consent for the change of use of the vacant ground floor of No. 64 Kimberworth Road to a hot food takeaway. The ground floor was last used as a Taxi booking office.

All alterations to the building will be internal.

The applicant has stated that the premises will employ approximately 3 full time and 5 part-time staff members, including delivery drivers. The use is proposed to be open between the hours of 10:00am and Midnight, seven days a week.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The application site is allocated within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as a Mixed Use Area. The site is within Mixed Use Area 16 – Midland Road.

The proposed change of use shall be assessed against the following UDP Policies:

EC5 ‘Mixed Use Areas’ which states that ‘Within Mixed Use Areas shown on the Proposals Map, a variety of land uses will be acceptable; the particular uses appropriate to each area and any limitations or requirements pertaining to these uses or their location being set out within Chapter 7 of this Written Statement’. Paragraph 7.3.45 within Chapter 7 of the UDP states that development proposals in this Mixed Use Area (MU16 –Midland Road) falling within Use Classes A3, B1, B2, B8, C1, D1, and D2 will be acceptable in principle. It should be noted that given that the UDP was adopted in 1999 the Use Classes outlined within paragraph 7.3.45 are from the Use Classes Order 1987, and within the 1987 Order, Class A3 included restaurants, pubs, wine bars and take-aways.

ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ which seeks to ensure that all development makes a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to, amongst other things, relationship to the locality.

ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ states that the Council will seek to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development. Planning permission will not be granted for development which is likely to give rise to noise, pollution of the atmosphere or to other nuisances where such impacts would be beyond acceptable standards.

Publicity

The application has been advertised in the local press on 27 February 2009, by way of a site notice on the corner of Kimberworth Road and Devonshire Street, while all neighbouring properties have been notified in writing. No letters of representation have been received.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have no objections.

Environmental Health have no objections subject to conditions being attached to any approval relating to the extraction of cooking fumes and the provision of a litter bin on the forecourt to the application building.

The Architectural Liaison Officer has no objections to the plans.

Appraisal

The main considerations in determining this application are considered to be:-

• Principle • Impact on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties • Highway Issues

Principle

The application site is within an area allocated for Mixed Use within the adopted UDP Proposals Map and it forms part of the Mixed Use Area known as MU16 – Midland Road. The UDP states that within this particular Mixed Use Area development proposals falling within Use Classes A3, B1, B2, B8, C1, D1 and D2 will be acceptable in principle. It should be noted that given the UDP was adopted in 1999 the list of Use Classes outlined above are from the Use Classes Order 1987, and within the 1987 Order, Class A3 included restaurants, pubs, wine bars and takeaways, whereas take- aways are now classed within Use Class A5.

With the above in mind it is considered that from a land use perspective the proposed use is appropriate and acceptable as it would fall within the Mixed Use menu for this area as set out within Chapter 7 of the UDP. Accordingly, the proposed hot food takeaway would be in compliance with the requirements outlined within Policy EC5 ‘Mixed Use’ of the adopted UDP.

In addition, the proposed change of use would be in keeping with the requirements of UDP Policy ENV3.1 insofar as the proposed takeaway would be in relation to the locality given that there is already a takeaway in the row of commercial premises and it would not have a detrimental effect on the occupiers of the existing residential premises at first floor.

Impact on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Turning to amenity issues and the potential impact on the occupiers of neighbouring domestic and commercial premises, the Council’s Environmental Health department have indicated that given the site is located in close proximity to existing commercial and domestic premises there is a potential for disamenity from noise, odours and litter generated by the premises while operational. However, they have stated that should planning permission be granted they recommend that a condition should be attached requesting details of suitable extraction and/or filtration system to ensure cooking fumes are exhausted from the premises and a condition should be attached requesting the provision of a litter bin on the forecourt to/within the said building.

In addition, the applicant has indicated that the proposed use will be open between the hours of 10:00am and Midnight, which will not have an additional adverse effect on the residential amenity of occupiers of neighbouring residential properties given that the Italian restaurant and the other takeaway in this row of commercial premises open late at night.

Therefore, with the above in mind it is considered that the proposed change of use, providing the conditions are adhered to, will have no additional material detriment to the amenities of neighbouring domestic and commercial premises by way of noise, smell, litter and general disturbance, and as such the provisions of UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ will be satisfied.

Highway Issues

With regard to the impact of the change of use on the highway, it is considered that by virtue of the marked out parking lay-bys along both sides of Kimberworth Road there are plenty of on-street parking spaces that would not impinge on other highway uses or block the carriageway at busy times.

Therefore, the proposed change of use would not have any adverse impact on the highway safety of other uses; in addition the Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the development from a highways perspective.

Conclusion

Having taken into account all of the above it is considered that the proposed change of use would be acceptable in land use terms as the proposed use falls with the list of acceptable uses in this Mixed Use Area as outlined within Chapter 7 of the UDP.

In addition the proposed use will not result in any additional material detriment to the amenities of neighbouring domestic and commercial premises by way of noise, smell, litter and general disturbance, and that due to the marked out parking lay-bys on either side of Kimberworth Road the impact on highway safety would not be significant.

Accordingly, the proposal would comply with the relevant UDP Policies and is recommended for approval, subject to recommended conditions.

RB2009/0194

Relocation of the remains of medieval cross from 22 New Road, Dinnington at land at Falcon Square Dinnington for Mrs. P. Cotton.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan Local Planning Policy UDP Policy ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings UDP Policy ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’ UDP Policy ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’

b) Other relevant material planning considerations Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment

2. For the following reasons:

From the information submitted and from records held, it is considered that the existing position of the cross was most likely not its original position. It is noted that it is difficult to see the cross from the road from where it is currently sited, and as it is close to a brick and concrete wall, this does not enhance the setting of the cross. The proposed site for the relocated cross has a more prominent position and allows the cross to be seen in the public domain. It is therefore considered that the moving of the cross would not result in any harm to its special character.

Given that the plinth was originally erected in Falcon Square with a view to allowing the relocation of the cross, it is considered that the erection of the cross in this location would not adversely affect the architectural and historic character of the Conservation Area, and would continue to preserve and enhance the character of the Conservation Area. In addition, it is not considered that the cross would have an adverse impact on the setting of other listed buildings in the locality.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC03] No development shall take place within the application site until the applicant and their agents or successors in title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 02 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the position, design, and materials of protective railings to be constructed on the exterior of the plinth. The protective railings shall be completed within one week of the relocation of the cross and shall be retained and maintained for the lifetime of the development.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR03] To ensure that any archaeological remains are recorded or preserved in accordance with UDP Policies ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’, ENV2.2 ‘Interest Outside Statutorily Protected Sites and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 02 In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Informatives

The applicant should be aware that a licence will be required for the location of the cross within the public highway. Please contact Robert Stock on 01709 822928 for details.

Background

There is no planning history for this site. An application for Listed Building Consent for the relocation of the remains of the medieval cross to land at Falcon Square, Dinnington (RB2009/0195) is also being considered on this Agenda.

Site Description & Location

The site which is the current location of the cross is a modern residential bungalow situated in a residential area in Dinnington. Sited on the driveway, approximately 19 metres from the highway of New Road are the remains of a medieval stone cross which is Grade II listed. The cross is positioned between two modern bungalows and against a brick and concrete wall.

The site to which the cross is proposed to be relocated to is a small public square close to St Leonard’s Church in Dinnington. The Square is within the Dinnington Conservation Area, close to the Grade II listed building of Hall Farmhouse and is block paved with a number of small planters and trees. In the centre of the square is a small plinth which is currently empty.

Proposal

This application is for the relocation of the remains of a medieval cross for Mrs P Cotton. The cross is currently located in the grounds of 22 New Road, Dinnington, a residential property and it is proposed to relocate the cross to a plinth in the centre of Falcon Square, Dinnington.

Research submitted by the applicant in the Design and Access Statement suggests that the cross has been located in its present position as far back as 1850, althoughth it may have been repositioned into its current location sometime in the early 19 century. Previous research carried out suggests that Falcon Square may have been the original resting place of the cross.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The current site of the cross is within an area allocated as residential within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

The site to which the cross is proposed to be relocated to is within an area allocated as Community Facilities and within the designated Dinnington Conservation Area within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

UDP Policies:

Policy ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings’ aims to resist development which harms a building’s special interest except in exceptional circumstances where works can be proved to secure the long term preservation of the building.

Policy ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’ aims to protect the setting and historical context of listed buildings by resisting development which detrimentally affects the setting of a listed building or is harmful to its curtilage structures.

Policy ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ states that the Council will not permit development which would adversely affect the architectural and historic character of the Conservation Area.

ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development is not at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design and layout and landscaping.

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15) states “Authorities should have special regard to the desirability of preserving any listed building or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, and should pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of any conservation area”.

Paragraph 2.17 of PPG15 states “the setting of individual listed buildings very often owes its character to the harmony produced by a particular grouping of buildings (not necessarily all of great individual merit) and to the quality of the spaces created between them. Such areas require careful appraisal when proposals for development are under consideration”. It goes on to state “in some cases, setting can only be defined by a historical assessment of a building’s surroundings”.

Publicity

The application was publicised by neighbour notification, site notice and by press advertisement.

Two letters of objection have been received (one from a local resident and one from the Dinnington and District History Society) stating the following:-

• Falcon Square is not a safe and suitable location as the cross would be vandalized and possibly destroyed; • A better location could be found including the Church, the graveyard off Nursery Road or Coronation Garden, Laughton Road; • The operation should be carried out by qualified archaeologists who would be able to establish whether there are other remains in the immediate vicinity of the cross. • Damage could be caused to the monument during its removal; • The owners of the site should be responsible for the removal which will be offset by the higher value of their property once it is removed; • Planning permission should have never been granted for the residential development so close to the cross; • Following its removal the cross should have a protective fencing around it; • Once moved a plaque should be installed stating the date it was moved, where from and some of the history for the cross; • Not enough time has been given to consultees for them to be able to comment fully on the proposals.

A right to speak request has been received for this application for a representative from St Leonard’s Church, Dinnington.

A copy of all letters of representation will be available in the Member’s Room prior to the Meeting.

Consultations

The Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposal but note that as the proposed location of the cross is in the public highway, and the application has been made by a member of the public, a licence must be granted for the location of the structure in the public highway. The Transportation Officer notes that it is unusual for a member of the public to apply for and be granted a licence due to insurance/public liability constraints.

The Conservation Officer has stated that there is no reason from a conservation point of view why the application for the removal of the cross from this domestic garden to a public location close to the church should not be approved.

South Yorkshire Archaeology Service (SYAS) state it does seem likely that the present location of the cross is not original and that it was moved here some tie prior to the publication of the first edition of the OS County Series Map in 1854. For this reason SYAS do not object to the proposal to move the cross from its present location. They would expect some kind of archaeological monitoring to be carried out while work is underway, which could be secured by condition.

English Heritage have stated that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of the Local Planning Authority’s own conservation advice.

Appraisal

The determination must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise S38(6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The main considerations in the determination of this application are:-

• The effect on the setting and historical character of the medieval cross by its relocation. • The effect on the character and appearance of the Dinnington Conservation Area and the setting of the nearby listed buildings.

The effect on the setting of the medieval cross by its relocation: Of crucial importance for this application is to establish if the cross is in its original position or not. The advice from South Yorkshire Archaeological Service (SYAS) is that it is likely that the present locationst of the cross is not original and that it was moved to its present location prior to the 1 Edition O.S. map being published in 1854.

As no information has been submitted to contradict the guidance from SYAS, on the balance of probability it is considered that the existing position of the cross was most likely not its original position. It is noted that it is difficult to see the cross where it is currently sited, and as it is close to a brick and concrete wall, this does not enhance the setting of the cross. The proposed site for the relocated cross has a more prominent position and allows the cross to be seen in the public domain. It is therefore considered that the relocation of the cross would not result in any harm to the special character of the cross and would accord with Policies ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings’ and ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and the guidance set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment.

The comments from the objectors are noted with regard to possible vandalism. It is therefore recommended that a condition of any approval be that railings should be erected around the exterior of the plinth to protect the cross from possible vandalism. This is in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ which seeks to ensure that development is not at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area.

The effect on the Conservation Area and the setting of other listed buildings: It is noted that the plinth in Falcon Square to which the cross is to be relocated is within the Dinnington Conservation Area. Policy ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ states that the Council will not permit development which would adversely affect the architectural and historic character of the Conservation Area.

Given that the plinth was originally erected in Falcon Square with a view to allowing the relocation of the cross, it is considered that the erection of the cross in this location would not adversely affect the architectural and historic character of the Conservation Area, and would continue to preserve and enhance the character of the Conservation Area in accordance with Policy ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. In addition, it is not considered that the cross would have an adverse impact on the setting of other listed buildings in the locality.

Conclusion

Given the information set out above, it is considered that the proposal complies with all relevant local and national planning policy and as such planning permission should be granted subject to conditions.

RB2009/0195

Listed Building Consent for relocation of the remains of medieval cross from 22 New Road, Dinnington at land at Falcon Square, Dinnington for Mrs. P. Cotton.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT LISTED BUILDING CONSENT

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan Local Planning Policy UDP Policy ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings UDP Policy ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’

b) Other relevant material planning considerations Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment

2. For the following reasons:

From the information submitted and from records held, it is considered that the existing position of the cross was most likely not its original position. It is noted that it is difficult to see the cross from the road where it is currently sited, and as it is close to a brick and concrete wall, this does not enhance the setting of the cross. The proposed site for the relocated cross has a more prominent position and allows the cross to be seen in the public domain. It is therefore considered that the moving of the cross would not result in any harm to the special character of the cross.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant listed building consent. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC03] No works shall take place within the application site until the applicant and their agents or successors in title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 02 No works shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the position, design, and materials of protective railings to be constructed on the exterior of the plinth. The protective railings shall be completed within one week of the relocation of the cross and shall be retained and maintained thereafter.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR03] To ensure that any archaeological remains are recorded or preserved in accordance with UDP Policies ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’, ENV2.2 ‘Interest Outside Statutorily Protected Sites and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 02 In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Informatives

The applicant should be aware that a licence will be required for the location of the cross within the public highway. Please contact Robert Stock on 01709 822928 for details.

Background

There is no planning history for this site. A planning application for the relocation of the remains of the medieval cross from 22 New Road, Dinnington (RB2009/0194) is also being considered on this Agenda.

Site Description & Location

The site which is the current location of the cross is a modern residential bungalow situated in a residential area in Dinnington. Sited on the driveway, approximately 19 metres from the highway of New Road are the remains of a medieval cross. The cross is positioned between two modern bungalows and against a brick and concrete wall.

The site to which the cross is proposed to be relocated to is a small public square close to St Leonard’s Church in Dinnington. The Square is within the Dinnington Conservation Area, close to the Grade II listed building of Hall Farmhouse and is block paved with a number of small planters and trees. In the centre of the square is a small plinth which is currently empty.

Proposal

The site which is the current location of the cross is a modern residential bungalow situated in a residential area in Dinnington. Sited on the driveway, approximately 19 metres from the highway of New Road are the remains of a medieval stone cross which is Grade II listed. The cross is positioned between two modern bungalows and against a brick and concrete wall.

Research submitted by the applicant in the Design and Access Statement suggests that the cross has been located in its present position as far back as 1850, althoughth it may have been repositioned into its current location sometime in the early 19 century. Previous research carried out suggests that Falcon Square may have been the original resting place of the cross.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The current site of the cross is within an area allocated as residential within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

The site to which the cross is proposed to be relocated to is within an area allocated as Community Facilities and within the designated Dinnington Conservation Area within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

UDP Policies

Policy ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings’ aims to resist development which harms a building’s special interest except in exceptional circumstances where works can be proved to secure the long term preservation of the building.

Policy ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’ aims to protect the setting and historical context of listed buildings by resisting development which detrimentally affects the setting of a listed building or is harmful to its curtilage structures.

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15) states “Authorities should have special regard to the desirability of preserving any listed building or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, and should pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of any conservation area”.

Paragraph 2.17 of PPG15 states “the setting of individual listed buildings very often owes its character to the harmony produced by a particular grouping of buildings (not necessarily all of great individual merit) and to the quality of the spaces created between them. Such areas require careful appraisal when proposals for development are under consideration”. It goes on to state “in some cases, setting can only be defined by a historical assessment of a building’s surroundings”.

Publicity

The application was publicised by neighbour notification, site notice and by press advertisement.

Two letters of objection have been received (one from a local resident and one from the Dinnington and District History Society) stating the following:-

• Falcon Square is not a safe and suitable location as the cross would be vandalized and possibly destroyed; • A better location could be found including the Church, the graveyard off Nursery Road or Coronation Garden, Laughton Road; • The operation should be carried out by qualified archaeologists who would be able to establish whether there are other remains in the immediate vicinity of the cross. • Damage could be caused to the monument during its removal; • The owners of the site should be responsible for the removal which will be offset by the higher value of their property once it is removed; • Planning permission should have never been granted for the residential development so close to the cross; • Following its removal the cross should have a protective fencing around it; • Once moved a plaque should be installed stating the date it was moved, where from and some of the history for the cross; • Not enough time has been given to consultees for them to be able to comment fully on the proposals.

A right to speak request has been received for this application for a representative from St Leonard’s Church, Dinnington.

A copy of all letters of representation will be available in the Members’ Room prior to the Meeting.

Consultations

The Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposal but note that as the proposed location of the cross is in the public highway, and the application has been made by a member of the public, a licence must be granted for the location of the structure in the public highway. The Transportation Officer notes that it is unusual for a member of the public to apply for and be granted a licence due to insurance/public liability constraints.

The Conservation Officer has stated that there is no reason from a conservation point of view why the application for the removal of the cross from this domestic garden to a public location close to the church should not be approved.

South Yorkshire Archaeology Service (SYAS) state it does seem likely that the present location of the cross is not original and that it was moved here some tie prior to the publication of the first edition of the OS County Series Map in 1854. For this reason SYAS do not object to the proposal to move the cross from its present location. They would expect some kind of archaeological monitoring to be carried out while work is underway, which could be secured by condition.

English Heritage have stated that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of the Local Planning Authority’s own conservation advice.

Appraisal

The main consideration in the determination of this application is:-

• The effect on the setting and historical character of the medieval cross by its relocation

Of crucial importance for this application is to establish if the cross is in its original position or not. The advice from South Yorkshire Archaeological Service (SYAS) is that it is likely that the present locationst of the cross is not original and that it was moved to its present location prior to the 1 Edition O.S. map being published in 1854.

As no information has been submitted to contradict the guidance from SYAS, on the balance of probability it is considered that the existing position of the cross was most likely not its original position. It is noted that it is difficult to see the cross where it is currently sited, and as it is close to a brick and concrete wall, this does not enhance the setting of the cross. The proposed site for the relocated cross has a more prominent position and allows the cross to be seen in the public domain. It is therefore considered that the relocation of the cross would not result in any harm to the special character of the cross and would accord with Policy ENV2.6 ‘Alterations to Listed Buildings’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and the guidance set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment.

The comments from the objectors are noted with regards to possible vandalism. It is therefore recommended that a condition of any approval be that railings should be erection around the exterior of the plinth to protect the cross from possible vandalism. This is in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ which seeks to ensure that development is not at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area.

Conclusion Given the information set out above, it is considered that the proposal complies with all relevant local and national planning policy and as such listed building consent should be granted subject to conditions.

RB2009/0226

Erection of 12 m wind turbine at Abbey Special School, Little Common Lane, Kimberworth for Abbey Special School.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan (i) RSS Policy ENV5 – Energy

(ii) UDP Policies ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’

b) Other relevant material planning considerations PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’

2. For the following reasons:

Although the development represents a departure from both national and local Green Belt policy, it is considered that the need to find sources of renewable energy, the provision of which is encouraged in national, regional and local policy constitutes a very special circumstance to clearly outweigh the harm caused by the inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

It is further considered that the proposed 12 metres high wind turbine by way of its siting, height, design and location would not adversely impact upon the openness of the Green Belt or the general locality, nor given its small scale nature and siting some 400 – 500 metres from the nearest residential units would it unduly impact upon the amenities of nearby residential occupiers through increased noise disturbance, or shadow flicker and reflected light issues. As such the proposal would accord with the adopted Unitary Development Plan policies and national and local guidance.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Informative

01 The Council’s Ecologist has indicated that Bat records are held for the local area within 1km of the proposed wind turbine location and there is the potential for bat and bird species to suffer harm or disturbance from wind turbines. They have requested that regular monitoring be undertaken of bat and/or bird strike casualties. This monitoring should be included in the operational monitoring of the site and any casualty information should be submitted to the Rotherham Biological Records Centre and to Natural England.

Background

There have been a number of planning applications for extensions and alterations to the school and within in its grounds in recent years, although none of the previous have any relevance to the current proposal.

Site Description & Location

Abbey Special School is located up a long single carriageway access track from Farm View Road. The track runs by the northern boundary of Winterhill School to the east of Abbey School.

The site of the proposed turbine is located near the top of a hill from a long rise from the south-west where the M1 Motorway is at the bottom of the valley. The M1 is 1km away from the site. The area is surrounded by agricultural land to the west by about 1.5km with 3 outlying farm buildings and dwellings, to the south by agricultural land. To the east is a park area which extends to Kimberworth and the nearest residents are 570m away in this direction on Farm View Road. To the north is the rest of the school playing fields followed by another field of unknown use before a residential area on Watson Glen 500m away. The nearest residential properties are 400m away to the north-east on Farm View Road.

Proposal

The proposed development is for the installation of a Wind Turbine mounted on a 12 metres high mast to the south-west of Abbey School approximately 30 metres from the nearest school building. The generator tower will be a free standing structure of galvanised steel, with the turbine itself a white colour.

The aim of the proposal is to provide green energy for the school, act as an educational tool for the pupils and to raise public awareness of renewable energy in the local area.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The application site is within a Green Belt location as designated within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP), the proposed development shall be assessed against the following policies:

Regional Spatial Strategy

RSS Policy ENV5 ‘Energy’ states that the Region will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increase in renewable energy capacity and decisions should help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and maximise the efficient use of power sources.

Unitary Development Plan Policies

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ states

‘In the Green Belt, development will not be permitted except in very special circumstances for purposes other than agriculture, forestry, recreation, cemeteries and other uses appropriate to a rural area. The construction of new buildings inside the Green Belt is inappropriate unless it is for the following purposes:

(i) agriculture and forestry (ii) essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries and other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it, (iii) limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings, and (iv) limited infilling in existing villages.’

Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ states that development will be required to make a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to, amongst other things, relationship to the locality, height, materials, site features, screening and landscaping.

Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ seeks to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with developments and planning permission will not be granted for new development which is likely to give rise to, amongst other things, noise pollution.

Policy UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’ states that there will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

Other Material Considerations

National Planning Policies

PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that ‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations…’.

PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ states that increased development of renewable energy resources is vital to facilitating the delivery of the Government’s commitments on both climate change and renewable energy. Although, it further states that, when located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development, which may impact on the openness of the Green Belt. Careful consideration will therefore need to be given to the visual impact of projects and very special circumstances that clearly outweigh any harm by reason of inappropriateness should be demonstrated. Such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources.

Publicity

The application was advertised by way of a notice within the local press, several site notices posted around the site on nearby residential estates and the neighbouring school were notified in writing. No comments have been received.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have no objections.

Environmental Health has no objections.

Early Years Childcare has not yet responded.

Ecology have no objections but wish that the School keep a record of bat and bird strike casualties and inform Rotherham Biological Records Centre and Natural England.

Civil Aviation Authority have requested that we consult directly with Doncaster Sheffield Airport, the Ministry of Defence and National Air Traffic Services Limited (NATS) as they may be a potential impact upon the operation of and those associated with Doncaster Sheffield Robin Hood Airport.

Doncaster Sheffield Robin Hood Airport has not yet responded.

NATS Safeguarding has no objection to the proposal.

Ministry of Defence have no objections.

OFCOM have stated that we should inform Hutchinson 3G, Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Services, Kcom, T-Mobile, CSS and Joint Radio Company for further information:

Hutchinson 3G have not responded.

Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Services have not responded.

Kcom have not responded.

T-Mobile has not responded.

CSS have no objections.

Joint Radio Company has not responded.

Appraisal

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that ‘If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.’

This application relates to the erection of a 12 metres high wind turbine in the corner of Abbey Special School’s existing playing fields which is allocated as Green Belt within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

The main issues that are considered relevant and appropriate in the determination of this application are:

• Principle of installing a wind turbine within the Green Belt • Very special circumstances • Impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt • Impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings • Highway Issues

Principle of installing a wind turbine within the Green Belt

National Planning objectives are centred on sustainable development. The Government has set a target of 10% of UK energy to be generated from renewable sources by 2010. Indeed, this is also supported by RSS Policy ENV5 which states that the Region will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increase in renewable energy capacity and decisions should help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and maximise the efficient use of power sources. The wider environmental and economic benefits of renewable energy are material planning considerations. PPS22 advises that Local Planning Authorities take a proactive approach to small scale wind projects where power can be dedicated to on site use, as it is proposed here. The companion guide to PPS22 states that proactive support is required from Local Planning Authorities, who may find that leading by example, can encourage the development of further renewable energy schemes.

In principle there is strong support for renewable energy schemes. Policy UTL3.4 of the UDP states that there will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources.

It is important to ensure that there are no impacts arising from the installation of a wind turbine of sufficient weight to warrant a refusal of the planning application.

Although the general principle of a wind turbine is supported by national, regional and local plan policies, the application site is within a Green Belt location. Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ of the UDP states that construction of new buildings within the Green Belt is inappropriate development unless it is essential for the use of agriculture or forestry, essential facilities for outdoor sport or outdoor recreation, limited extensions to existing dwellings or infilling in existing villages. The proposal is therefore inappropriate development in the Green Belt, as such the proposal does not accord with the designation of the UDP.

PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that ‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations…’.

The Town and Country Planning Green Belt Direction 2005 directs that any development which would have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt, and the Local Planning Authority does not propose to refuse permission, shall be referred to the First Secretary of State before a decision is made. In this respect, it is considered that due to the relatively small scale size of the turbine it is not considered that the application be referred to the department of Communities and Local Government as a departure in this instance.

Very Special Circumstances

Policy ENV1 Green Belts indicates that inappropriate development in the Green Belt will not be allowed unless there are very special circumstances.

Paragraph 3.2 of PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that ‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. In view of the presumption against inappropriate development, the Secretary of State will attach substantial weight to the harm to the Green Belt when considering any planning application or appeal concerning such development’.

In this instance it is considered that the inappropraite development of a wind turbine in the Green Belt is outweighed by very specail circumstances, in particular the policy set out within PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’.

PPS22 strongly advocates that the use of energy from renewable sources, indicating that its production is a material consideration carrying significant weight in relation to planning applications, and may constitute very special circumstances in relation to development in Green Belt areas.

Having regard to the above and the advice in PPS22, particularly paragraph 13, significant weight must be afforded to the production of energy from a renewable resource, the reduction in harmful emissions, and the wider environmental benefits in terms of combating climate change. It is therefore considered that there are very special circumstances in this instance, by way of producing renewable energy for the school, which clearly outweighs the harm caused by inappropriate development, and any other identified harm such that the development can be permitted in the Green Belt.

Impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt

With regard to the proposals impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt, it is acknowledged that the site is slightly elevated in the landscape and is surrounded in the immediate locality by open fields with some residential properties approximately 400 – 500 metres away. However, it is considered that the installation of a single wind turbine of 12 metres high will have no impact on the openness of the area as a whole. Furthermore, the turbine will only be visible from a few directions in Kimberworth and will be sufficiently far away not to be contentious. Whilst the turbine would be visible from the south-west, this is at a distance which is very unlikely to limit and damage the openness of the area.

Impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings

The proposed turbine is considered to be of a relatively small scale. It is considered that although the turbine would be sited near the top of a raised area of the site with open fields surrounding it and very little screening, the proposed turbine would have minimal impact on the visual amenity of area. This is due to the fact that the trees which are to the north-west of the site and to the north-east of the school should block the turbine from sight from most properties on Farm View Road which are some 440 metres away. As such and given the distance between the turbine and these properties the impact on them from a visual perspective will be minimal. In addition, there is an electricity pylon in fairly close proximity to the turbine which is a much larger and taller structure than the proposed wind turbine which is more akin to a telegraph pole. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed wind turbine would be in accordance with the requirements of UDP Policy ENV3.1 which seeks to ensure that development makes a positive contribution to the environment.

Turning to the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties, it is considered that with regard to Shadow Flicker it is a rare event that can occur when the sun is directly behind the rotating blades of a wind turbine from the perspective of an observer or dwelling. However, this only happens for short periods at dusk and dawn and at certain times of the year. This is generally considered not an issue with small turbines; Shadow Flicker is generally accepted to only occur at distances up to 10-times that of the rotor diameter. In this instance that is 90 metres way, in which there are no dwellings, roads or buildings in relation to Abbey School. Accordingly, the proposed wind turbine would not give rise to any disamenity caused by Shadow Flicker.

In terms of noise generation and the impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers, the proposed wind turbine by virtue of its siting would be approximately 400 metres from the nearest domestic properties on Farm View Road to the north-east of the site. The audible impact on neighbouring properties and uses of local rights of ways would be minimal, as the submitted noise report indicates that the perceived noise from the turbine at the nearest neighbouring property some 400 metres away would be in the region of 8.6dB to 23.2dB for wind speeds of 5 to 10m/s respectively (site average wind speed is 5.6 ms-1 at 10 metres above ground level). This level of noise will be indistinguishable from the level of background noise (including the M1 Motorway and general noises heard around the site at present) as it can be generally taken that there will be no noise complaints where the turbines specific noise is 10dBA less than background, which happens at a distance of 70-190 metres depending on wind speed.

The Council’s Environmental Health department have stated that the school itself is located away from residential properties, the nearest residential property being located on Farm View Road. In addition, there are no main roads in the vicinity or the site and the proposed location of the wind turbine is approximately 100 metres away from the main school buildings. In light of the above and taking into consideration the size and location of the wind turbine, Environmental Health would envisage no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise or environmental impact and as such raise no objections to the proposal.

Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development would satisfy the requirements detailed within UDP policy ENV3.7 which only supports developments which do not give rise to any noise pollution.

Highway Issues

It is not considered that the turbine would have a material impact on highway safety particularly as it would be sited a good distance away from surrounding highways and would therefore not have an impact on highway visibility issues and road safety.

Conclusion

Although the development represents a departure from both national and local Green Belt policy, it is considered that the need to find sources of renewable energy, the provision of which is encouraged in national, regional and local policy constitutes a very special circumstance to clearly outweigh the harm caused by the inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

It is further considered that the proposed 12 metres high wind turbine by way of its siting, height, design and location would not adversely impact upon the openness of the Green Belt or the general locality, nor given its small scale nature and siting would it unduly impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of nearby residential properties through increased noise disturbance, shadow flicker, or reflected light issues. As such the proposal would accord with the adopted national, regional and local planning policies and is therefore recommended for approval.

RB2009/0230

Retrospective application for non-compliance with Condition 1 (development only in accordance with specified plans) imposed by RB2008/1720 to allow bio- filters to be sited in amended position at former Templeborough Steelworks, Sheffield Road, Templeborough for Sterecycle Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan

UDP Policies

EC1.1 ‘Safeguarding Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’

2. For the following reasons:

The proposals comply with UDP Policy EC1.1 which supports proposals that ‘safeguard the viability of established Industrial and Business Areas, including those which seek to improve buildings, infrastructure and the environment’. In this regard it is considered that the development represents an efficient use of land which will assist in bringing a business site back into economic use.

The site is within an established industrial area and as such the re-siting of the bio-filters by virtue of there size, scale, height, land levels and siting does not have an significant impact on the visual amenity of the streetscene and surrounding area and as such will be in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

In addition, the bio-filters act as an odour control system which will reduce all odour emissions from the existing waste treatment site, as such the proposal will help alleviate any disamenity to surrounding commercial and industrial sites due to odour in keeping with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 Within 3 months of this permission the bio-filters structure hereby approved shall be painted or stained in a colour to match the existing building immediately to the north of the bio-filters and shall be so maintained. 02 That in all other respects the conditions and requirements of planning permission RB2008/1720 shall continue to apply and the development shall be carried out in accordance therewith.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 02 To defined the extent and duration of the development for the avoidance of doubt.

Informatives:

01 The applicant is remainded that with regard to the access to A6178 Sheffield Road that some of the works approved under application RB2008/0361 have not been implemented (4.5 metres x 120 metres visibility splays) and this work needs to be carried out in accordance with the previous planning permission.

Background

A number of planning applications have been made in relation to Industrial uses on the site.

Relevant planning applications are listed as follows:

RB1988/1962 = Erection of plant for the recovery of ferrous metals by magnetic separation and air-cleaning and size reduction by fragmentation – Granted – 16 March 1989

RB2007/0798 – Application for site remediation works and backfilling the former arc furnace bay – Granted – 16 August 2007

RB2007/0154 – A Certificate of Lawful Use was granted on 10 May 2007. Members will note that the certificate confirmed that the site may be lawfully used for Class B2 and confirmed that the:

‘use of land and buildings for waste treatment for the purposes of recycling by the application of steam, temperature and pressure within sealed autoclave vessels and subsequent sorting with not less than 80% being processed into a product together with ancillary storage of processed materials within the site’ fell within Class B2.

This permission however did not restrict the maximum throughput of waste/materials; therefore the only current restriction on this is governed by the Environment Agency in the form of the Waste Management Licence.

RB2008/0361 – Application to enable improvements to be made to the visibility at the site entrance – Granted – 7 April 2008

RB2008/0682 – Application to erect modular offices and an amenity block a weighbridge gatehouse, boundary fencing and exterior lighting – still under consideration by RMBC

RB2008/1720 – Extension to existing waste reception/recycling building, erection of two-storey office building and fibre processing building, re-siting of weighbridges and gatehouse and installation of associated ancillary – Granted Conditionally – 8 January 2009

Condition 1 of the above permission relating to the development being constructed in accordance with the approved design and layout on the plans submitted.

The current application is seeking consent for the re-siting of the approved bio-filters under RB2008/1720 from along the western elevation of the existing building to the front of the existing building parallel with Sheffield Road and non-compliance with Condition 1 under RB2008/1720.

Site Description & Location

The site is located to the north of Sheffield Road in Templeborough, approximately 2Km south-west of Rotherham Town Centre and 1.5Km east of M1 junction 34 near Meadowhall. The site extends to approximately 3 hectares and lies approximately 6 metres below road level.

The site was previously used as an arc furnace at the former steelworks and now comprises of a large industrial building which fronts Sheffield Road and measures approximately 123 metres by 23 metres.

The Magna Science centre abuts the site to the east and north, whilst to the south, across Sheffield Road there is a large industrial warehouse. To the west are commercial buildings within Sheffield. The wider area supports many large industrial units, with a number of new industrial/business premises currently under construction.

The site is accessed to the west from Phoenix Road which almost immediately joins the A6178 Sheffield Road (classified) to the south.

Proposal

This retrospective application is for the re-siting of the bio-filters approved under application RB2008/1720. The bio-filters approved under the last application were to be sited along the western elevation of the existing building. The current application is seeking the bio-filters to be sited to the south elevation of the existing building, parallel with Sheffield Road.

The applicant has indicated that the intention was for the bio-filters to sit alongside a new extension of the building. The construction works of the previously approved development are not due to commence for some time, whilst the company assesses its exact requirements for new plant and machinery.

There is concern from the applicant that to construct the bio-filters in their originally proposed position would result in potential difficulties regarding construction of the new building, whilst avoiding damage to the filters.

The new location was sought to ensure that the filters would be unaffected by any future development works. Consequently an area along the front of the building was identified as being suitable for a number of reasons.

The structure which houses the bio-filters is 35 metres in length and 5 metres wide and 3.5 metres high from ground level, however given the land levels only 1 metre would be visible from Sheffield Road.

The applicant has already located the bio-filters to the revised position, due to pressure from the Environment Agency for the bio-filters to be installed, as odour control is still an issue on site. In addition, Improvement Condition 1 (IC1) page 14 of Sterecycle’s new Environment Permit requires them to report back on the operational efficiency of the odour control system (bio-filter) by 30 April 2009 and in order to achieve this, the bio- filters must be operational by the end of March.

Environmental Impact

It was considered the development fell within paragraph 10 (b), Urban Development Projects, of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999. With regard to column 2, the site exceeds 0.5 hectare area threshold and therefore consideration was given as to whether this particular development would be likely to have significant effects on the environment. Consideration was given to the proposal under Schedule 3 of the Regulations and it was felt that the development would be of no more than local importance in terms of environmental effects; it is not located in a particularly sensitive or vulnerable location and would not have any unusually complex or potentially hazardous effects. The Council accordingly adopted the opinion that the development was not EIA development as defined in the 1999 Regulations as it would not be likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its nature, size and location.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The land use allocation for the site as detailed within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) is Industry and Business. The material policies relevant to the applications determination are as follows:

Policy EC1.1 ‘Safeguarding Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ articulates that ‘the Council will support proposals which safeguard the viability of established industrial and business areas, including those which seek to improve buildings, infrastructure and the environment’.

Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ seeks to ‘ensure that all development makes a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to architectural style, relationship to locality, scale, density, height, massing, quality of materials, site features and local vernacular characteristics’.

Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ seeks to ‘minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development’.

Publicity

The application was advertised in the local press on 6 March 2009 and by way of a site notice which was posted to the front of the site on a lamppost. In addition neighbouring businesses were notified in writing.

One letter of support has been received from the Magna Trust who has stated that at present the operation of Sterecycle is having a negative impact on Magna’s operation. They further state that Sterecycle have tried to work with Magna but we have visitors commenting about the smell both inside and outside. Therefore, they have indicated that they would like the application to be granted so that we can get back to concentrating on our core businesses without the possibility of a negative impact from our neighbours.

A copy of the letter will be available in the Members’ Room prior to the Meeting.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have no objections.

Environmental Health envisages no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution.

Yorkshire Water has no objections.

Appraisal

The application is seeking retrospective permission for the re-siting of a building to house bio-filters to reduce odour emissions from the current waste recycling plant.

Under RB2008/1720 the bio-filter structure was to be located alongside the western elevation of the building; however the applicant has indicated that the construction of the other extensions under the aforementioned permission would damage and affect the structure, therefore a new location was sought.

With regard to this application the principal of the structure has already been established under the previous decision, as such it is considered that the only considerations that need to be addressed in determining this application are:

• The impact of the bio-filter structure on the visual amenity of the streetscene; • The impact of the bio-filter structure on the amenity of neighbouring industrial/commercial premises; and • Highway Issues

The impact of the bio-filter structure on the visual amenity of the streetscene

The bio-filter structure is 35 metres in length and 5 metres wide and 3.5 metres high, while the elevation of the existing Sterecycle building is 123 metres in length. The structure is sited approximately 2 metres below the level of Sheffield Road and is of a flat roof form.

At present the structure is white and is clearly visible from Sheffield Road against the background of the large green building immediately to the rear of the structure. Therefore, it is considered appropriate to attach a condition to any approval ensuring that in 3 months the structure is either painted or stained in a colour to match the existing Sterecycle building. This will help to minimise the impact of the structure in the streetscene as it will blend into the existing building.

Therefore, with the above in mind it is considered that the re-siting of the bio-filter structure by virtue of its size, scale, height, materials, colour and siting together with land levels has no significant impact on the visual amenity of the streetscene in this locality. Accordingly, the structure is considered to be in compliance with the requirements outlined within UDP Policy ENV3.1 which seeks to ensure that all development makes a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to scale, height, siting, materials and relationship with the locality.

The impact of the bio-filters on the amenity of neighbouring industrial/commercial premises

At present the site has problems with odour, which is having a negative impact on the amenity of neighbouring industrial and commercial premises and in particular the Magna Centre which abuts the Sterecycle site.

The bio-filters will reduce all odour emissions to the satisfaction of the relevant authorities and the new building provides total enclosure enabling a better control of all potential emissions and the bio-filters will ensure that all odours are neutralised on site.

It is considered that the bio-filters will help to significantly reduce odour emissions from the site, ensuring that there is no significant loss of amenity to neighbouring industrial and commercial premises. This is further backed up by the Council’s Environmental Health who has indicated that they envisage no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution impact.

Therefore, it is considered that, given the bio-filters act as an odour control system which will help reduce all odour emissions from the site will be in accordance with the requirements of UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ which seeks to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with the development.

Highway Issues

With regard to the structure’s impact on the highway, although the structure would be to the front of the site close to the site’s access, it is considered that given its height and land levels it does not have any impact on the visibility of any highway user when exiting the site. The Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposal from a highways perspective.

Conclusion

Having taken into account all of the above it is considered that the re-siting of the bio- filter structure by virtue of, its size, scale, height, land levels and siting does not have a significant impact on the visual amenity of the streetscene and the surrounding area and as such is in compliance with the provisions of ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. Furthermore, given the bio-filters act as an odour control system which will reduce all odour emissions from the existing waste treatment site, the proposal will help alleviate any disamenity to surrounding commercial and industrial sites due to odour, as such the proposal is in keeping with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. As such the re-siting of the bio-filter is recommended for approval.

RB2009/0232

Erection of 2 No. two storey buildings to form 8 No. flats at land at Silverdales, Dinnington for Guiness NCHA.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan Local Planning Policy: UDP Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, Bed-sitting Rooms and Houses in Multiple Occupation’ UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’

b) Other relevant material planning considerations Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing

2. For the following reasons:

The site is within the existing residential allocation within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan, therefore the principle of residential development is acceptable.

The proposal involves the erection of 2no two storey buildings with the appearance of two pairs of semi detached dwellings. The predominant house type in this locality is traditional terraced properties although there are a small number of semi detached properties in the streetscene, and as such the proposal is considered to be acceptable in its location.

The buildings are proposed to be of a contemporary design with modern fenestration and constructed of brickwork and render. Given that there is a mixture of render and brickwork to other properties within the street scene, it is considered that the design and appearance of the proposed buildings would be acceptable in their location.

This proposal allows for a small amount of residential amenity space to the rear of these buildings, with Juliet balconies provided for the first floor flats. Given this, it is considered the proposal provides an acceptable residential environment for its occupiers.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the site shall be served via a dropped crossing facility and not a radius. 02 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be constructed with either; a/ a permeable surface and associated water retention/collection drainage, or b/ an impermeable surface with water collected and taken to a separately constructed water retention/discharge system within the site. The area shall thereafter be maintained in a working condition. 03 [PC27] Before the development is brought into use the car parking area shown on the approved plan shall be provided, marked out and thereafter maintained for car parking. 04 Prior to the commencement of development, details of cycle parking facilities shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the Council’s Cycle Parking Guidelines and the approved details shall be implemented before the development is brought into use. 05 [PC94] Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing how the use of sustainable/public transport will be encouraged. The agreed details shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. 06 [PC12] Details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any off-site work, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until such approved details are implemented. 07 [PC38C] Prior to commencement of development, a detailed landscape scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The landscape scheme shall be prepared to a minimum scale of 1:200 and shall clearly identify through supplementary drawings where necessary: -The extent of existing planting, including those trees or areas of vegetation that are to be retained, and those that it is proposed to remove. The extent of any changes to existing ground levels, where these are proposed. -Any constraints in the form of existing or proposed site services, or visibility requirements. -Areas of structural and ornamental planting that are to be carried out. -The positions, design, materials and type of any boundary treatment to be erected. -A planting plan and schedule detailing the proposed species, siting, quality and size specification, and planting distances. -A written specification for ground preparation and soft landscape works. The programme for implementation. -Written details of the responsibility for maintenance and a schedule of operations, including replacement planting, that will be carried out for a period of 5 years after completion of the planting scheme.

The scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved landscape scheme and in accordance with the appropriate standards and codes of practice within a timescale agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 08 [PC38D] Any plants or trees which within a period of 5 years from completion of planting die, are removed or damaged, or that fail to thrive shall be replaced within the next planting season. Assessment of requirements for replacement planting shall be carried out on an annual basis in September of each year and any defective work or materials discovered shall be rectified before 31st December of that year. 09 [PC44*] No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the development is first occupied. 10 [PC52] No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 11 [PC93] The windows on the elevation of the first floor west and east elevations serving the Lounge/Dining Rooms shall be non openable and glazed with obscure glass as agreed with the Local Planning Authority and shall not at any time be glazed with clear glass without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 In the interests of highway safety. 02 [PR24B] To ensure that surface water can adequately be drained and that mud and other extraneous material is not deposited on the public highway and that each dwelling can be reached conveniently from the footway in the interests of the adequate drainage of the site, road safety and residential amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’. 03 [PR27] To ensure the provision of satisfactory garage/parking space and avoid the necessity for the parking of vehicles on the highway in the interests of road safety. 04 In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 05 [PR94] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 06 [PR12] To ensure that the development can be properly drained in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 07 [PR38C] To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

08 [PR38D] To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’. 09 [PR44] In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 10 [PR52] To ensure that appropriate materials are used in the construction of the development in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 11 [PR93] In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties.

Informative 01 Access for fire appliances should be in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document B volume 1 part B5 section 11.

02 The scheme should be built to achieve Secured by Design (SBD) certification. More information on SBD including lists of approved door and window suppliers and advice on how those not on the list can achieve the required standard, can be found at www.securebydesign.com

• The exterior areas, and especially the car park area should be suitably illuminated using white light that offers an even spread across the site. • The entry doors and gates should be fitted with an access control system that allows the residents to see and hear callers before determining whether to grant them access or not. • The vehicle access gates to the parking area should be secured in such a way that residents alone can gain access beyond, and that these gates are high enough (at least 1.8m) to prevent them from being easily scaled by would be offenders. • The boundary treatment is to be brick walls. Topped with metal railings. The railings should be secured to the outer face of the brick walls to prevent the wall being used as a step to help clear the railings. This arrangement should also help prevent the wall being used as an impromptu bench. • The plants on the rear boundary should be thorny and set outside any fence to help keep people outside, away from the fence. 03 INF 11A Control of working practices during construction phase (Close to residential) It is recommended that the following advice is followed to prevent a nuisance/ loss of amenity to local residential areas. Please note that the Council’s Neighbourhood Enforcement have a legal duty to investigate any complaints about noise or dust. If a statutory nuisance is found to exist they must serve an Abatement Notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Failure to comply with the requirements of an Abatement Notice may result in a fine of up to £20,000 upon conviction in Rotherham Magistrates' Court. It is therefore recommended that you give serious consideration to the below recommendations and to the steps that may be required to prevent a noise nuisance from being created.

(i) Except in case of emergency, operations should not take place on site other than between the hours of 08:00 – 18:00 Monday to Friday and between 09:00 – 13:00 on Saturdays. There should be no working on Sundays or Public Holidays. At times when operations are not permitted work shall be limited to maintenance and servicing of plant or other work of an essential or emergency nature. The Local Planning Authority should be notified at the earliest opportunity of the occurrence of any such emergency and a schedule of essential work shall be provided.

(ii) Heavy goods vehicles should only enter or leave the site between the hours of 08:00 – 18:00 on weekdays and 09:00 – 13:00 Saturdays and no such movements should take place on or off the site on Sundays or Public Holidays (this excludes the movement of private vehicles for personal transport).

(iii) Best practicable means shall be employed to minimise dust. Such measures may include water bowsers, sprayers whether mobile or fixed, or similar equipment. At such times when due to site conditions the prevention of dust nuisance by these means is considered by the Local Planning Authority in consultations with the site operator to be impracticable, then movements of soils and overburden shall be temporarily curtailed until such times as the site/weather conditions improve such as to permit a resumption.

(iv) Effective steps should be taken by the operator to prevent the deposition of mud, dust and other materials on the adjoining public highway caused by vehicles visiting and leaving the site. Any accidental deposition of dust, slurry, mud or any other material from the site, on the public highway shall be removed immediately by the developer.

Background

There is no planning history for this site.

Planning permission for a pair of semi detached properties was granted in 2006 on adjacent land (RB2006/2369) and these properties have since been built.

Site Description & Location

The application site is a vacant piece of land located within a residential area. The site has been created by the demolition of a pair of semi detached houses and is currently overgrown. The predominant house type in the streetscene is traditional terraced properties although there are a small number of semi detached dwellings. To the rear of the site is an access road that serves properties on both Silverdales and Leicester Road.

Proposal

The application is for the erection of 2no two storey buildings to form 8no social rented flats. The buildings are proposed to be constructed to have the appearance of two semi detached properties. Each flat will have 2no bedrooms with communal grounds to the rear. Parking provision will be provided with access between the two properties with 8no parking spaces to be provided.

The Design and Access Statement submitted with the application notes that the scheme will attain Secure by Design Accreditation.

The applicant carried out pre-application consultations with local residents via a public consultation event. The applicant notes that no objections were raised by any of the residents who attended who generally viewed the proposals favourably due to the fact that they utilise a vacant infill plot which has been created following the demolition of properties a number of years previously which has now become overgrown and is visually unappealing.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

UDP Policies

Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, Bed-sitting Rooms and Houses in Multiple Occupation’ allows for the creation of flats provided that this does not interfere with the amenity of existing residents and adequate provision is made for off street parking.

Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ encourages best practice in housing layout and design to enhance the quality of the residential environment.

Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development is not at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design and layout and landscaping.

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1) states that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area should not be accepted.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing states development should be well integrated with and complement neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access.

Publicity

The application was publicised by neighbour notification and by site notice. No comments or representations have been received.

Consultations

The Council’s Transportation Unit have raised no objections to the proposals subject to a number of conditions including details of the access and the provision of cycle parking facilities.

The Council’s Police Architectural Liaison Officer has suggested that the scheme should be built to Secured by Design Standards.

The Council’s Neighbourhoods (Housing) section are in support of the proposals as this is a scheme in partnership with Neighbourhood Investment Services.

The Council’s Neighbourhoods (Environmental Health) section have no objections to the proposals subject to informatives regarding the control of dust and noise on the site.

South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue state that access for fire appliances should be in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document B volume 1 part B5 section 11.

Appraisal

The determination must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise S38(6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The main considerations to be made in the assessment of this application are:

• The principle of the development. • The size and scale of the proposed buildings. • Design and appearance of the proposal. • Impact of the development on the surrounding properties. • The residential amenity of the future residents. • Highway implications.

The principle of the development:-

The site is within the existing residential allocation within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, Bed-sitting Rooms and Houses in Multiple Occupation’ allows for the creation of flats provided that this does not interfere with the amenity of existing residents and adequate provision is made for off street parking. Therefore the erection of 8no flats in this location is in accordance with the site’s allocation and the principle of residential development is acceptable, subject to details.

The size and scale of the buildings:-

The proposal involves the erection of 2no two storey buildings. These have been designed in such a way that their appearance is of two pairs of semi detached dwellings. The predominant house type in this locality is traditional terraced properties although there are a small number of semi detached properties in the streetscene, most notably on the land adjacent to this site, for which planning permission was granted in 2006. The proposed properties would be built in line with the properties either side on the street. As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable in its location, in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

Design and appearance of the proposal:-

The buildings are proposed to be of a contemporary design with modern fenestration and constructed of brickwork and render. This mixture of materials is proposed to allow the development to fit in with the existing buildings. Given that there is a mixture of render and brickwork to other properties within the street scene, it is considered that the design and appearance of the proposed buildings would be acceptable in their location, in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

Impact of the development on the surrounding properties:-

Small windows serving the Lounge/Diner areas are proposed on the first floor side elevations. Given the location of these windows facing onto the neighbouring properties, there is potential for overlooking of neighbouring properties to the detriment of their residential amenity. However, given that these are secondary windows serving the Lounge/Diner, it is recommended that as a condition of any approval, these windows be non opening and fitted with obscure glazing, to be retained for the lifetime of the development. This is considered to overcome any concerns with regard to overlooking. Subject to this condition, it is considered that the proposal would not result in any significant harm to the residential amenity of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, Bed-sitting Rooms and Houses in Multiple Occupation’.

The residential amenity of future residents:-

Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ encourages best practice in housing layout and design to enhance the quality of the residential environment. This proposal allows for a small amount of residential amenity space to the rear of these buildings, with Juliet balconies provided for the first floor flats. Given this, it is considered the proposal would provide sufficient residential amenity for the occupiers of the development and as such complies with the guidance as set out in Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’.

Highway implications:-

With regard to access arrangements, the Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposal, subject to conditions including details of the access and the provision of cycle parking facilities, and it is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in any significant harm to the highway network. It is also considered that the provision of 8no. parking spaces would provide sufficient parking for this development, in accordance with Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, Bed-sitting Rooms and Houses in Multiple Occupation’.

Conclusion

It is considered that the proposal complies with the relevant local and national policies as set out above, and as such it is recommended that the application be granted with conditions.

RB2009/0233

Erection of smoking shelter at The Brooklands WMC, 110 Rotherham Road, Maltby for Brooklands WMC.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

Unitary Development Plan i. Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment ii. Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution iii. Policy HG1 Existing Housing Areas

2. For the following reasons:

The Council considers that the proposal represents an acceptable form of development that subject to the recommended conditions, will not have an adverse effect on the visual amenities of the area by way of its scale, size and design and position; and will not have any materially detrimental effect on the residential amenity of the occupiers of the adjacent properties in terms of noise and disturbance.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC52] No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR52] To ensure that appropriate materials are used in the construction of the development in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Background

A previous retrospective application (RB2008/0149) for the existing smoking shelter was refused on 8 May 2008 following a Planning Board site visit and enforcement action was authorised to remove the shelter. No appeal against the Enforcement Notice was submitted and the time period to remove the shelter expired on 8 August 2008. However, the applicant appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the refusal to grant planning permission though that appeal was subsequently dismissed on 13 January 2009. The applicant was requested to remove the shelter, though the current application was submitted on 26 February 2009 and it was not considered appropriate to pursue the removal of the shelter until the current application is determined.

Site Description & Location

The Brooklands Working Mens Club is located on the south side of Rotherham Road and the land to the rear slopes down towards Maltby Dike. A large car park covers the western half of the site and an outdoor seating area is located to the rear of the building. The seating area is set back approximately 9 metres from the eastern boundary and over 40 metres from the western boundary.

The site is located within a predominately residential area and is flanked by dwellings to the east and west. On the opposite side of Rotherham Road are more residential properties in addition to a public house and an ambulance station. Beyond the rear boundary is open Green Belt land including the Maltby Dike.

Proposal

The proposal is to relocate the existing smoking shelter to the rear of the club from its existing position for which planning permission has been refused. The shelter is to be positioned approximately 7m to the west of its existing position and rotated through 90 degrees to face the rear of the building. It would be approximately 16m from the boundary with the nearest residential property at 116 Rotherham Road. The existing polycarbonate sheeting to the rear of the shelter is to be replaced with timber boarding.

The applicant has submitted a Design and Access Statement in support of the application.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The site is allocated as residential in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. The following policies are relevant;

Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment applies to this application and states that: “Development will be required to make a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to architectural style, relationship to the locality, scale, density, height, massing, quality of materials, site features, local vernacular characteristics, screening and landscaping, together with regard to the security of ultimate users and their property”.

Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution states that “The Council, in consultation with other appropriate agencies, will seek to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development and transport”

Policy HG1 Existing Housing Areas asserts that proposals will only be permitted where they “have no adverse effect on the character of the area or on residential amenity”

Publicity

All relevant neighbours were informed by letter on 2 March 2009. One letter of objection has been received from Mr Clough, the occupier of 116 Rotherham Road. His comments can be summarised as follows;

• Location of proposed shelter is stated as being approx. 16 metres from his boundary, he does not consider that this is accurate enough. • The Planning Inspector concluded that the existing shelter at 9m distance was too close to their boundary. The proposed replacement although it will now face away from his property is still too close. • Wishes to see the shelter located further away from his boundary.

A copy of the letter will be available in the Member’s Room prior to the meeting.

A request to speak at the Planning Board meeting has been received from Mr. Clough.

Consultations

The Council’s Transportation Unit has been consulted and confirm that they no objections to the proposal in highway terms.

Environmental Health have submitted the following comments:-

“I have read the above application for which we still have an open noise case regarding noise from the beer garden/smoking shelter. The complainants have the out of hours number to report instances to be witnessed by officers.

The revised planning application for the smoking shelter appears to better as the shelter will be moved closer to the premises which will shield a proportion of the shelter away from the neighbouring properties. The poly sheeting in the smoking shelter is to be replaced with timber which will obviously help to reduce the noise levels from the shelter itself. Noise disamenity from this is likely to affect neighbouring properties if the noise is not controlled adequately by management.

In light of the above, if planning permission is to be granted then the following informatives should be included:

• In view of the above the applicant must be made aware that at all times effective management is utilised in order to control noise from the use of the outside smoking area from customers.

• Greater staff visibility through glass collecting so that staff are able to inform patrons to keep the noise levels down whilst conducting their duties.”

Appraisal

The application relates to an existing Working Men’s Club which has an established use in this location and is on a classified road with a number of residential properties surrounding it. The property has a large car park to the west and a beer garden with seating areas to the rear. The previous retrospective application for the existing smoking shelter was refused and this application proposes to re-site the shelter further away from the boundary with the nearest residential property.

It is considered that there are two issues to be taken into account in assessing this proposal, the first being the design and appearance of the smoking shelter in relation to its surroundings, and the second being the impact of the use of the shelter on the residential amenity of adjacent occupiers.

With regard to the design and appearance of the shelter, it is a simple structure and the use of timber sheeting to the rear will improve the appearance of the shelter when viewed from the adjacent Green Belt land. The proposal is considered to comply with Policy ENV3.1 in terms of its design and appearance and is not considered to be detrimental to the character and appearance of the existing property or the locality.

Turning to the issue of residential amenity, the previously submitted retrospective application for the existing shelter was refused due to its siting close to the boundary with No. 116 Rotherham and the complaints that had been received by Environmental Health in relation to late night noise and disturbance arising from the use of the shelter. Furthermore the Planning Inspector in dismissing the appeal concluded that it was the close proximity of the shelter to the rear garden of 116 Rotherham Road which was causing problems. He considered that the most practical solution would be to relocate the shelter such that it did not face 116 Rotherham Road and was sited further away from this property.

It is considered that the current application has addressed these issues and the proposed siting and orientation of the shelter is considered to be acceptable in terms of minimising the impact on the residential amenity of the occupiers of 116 Rotherham Road. As such the proposal is considered to comply with policies HG1 and ENV3.7 in regard to its effect on residential amenity and control of noise pollution.

Objections have again been raised by the occupier of 116 Rotherham in response to this new application in relation to the siting of the shelter which the objector considers is still too close to his property boundary and will result in noise disturbance to the detriment of his residential amenity. In considering the objections raised it should be noted that the siting of the smoking shelter is within the rear beer garden which currently has several benches for the use of patrons of the club, some of which are in closer proximity to the residential property than the proposed shelter. From time to time some disamenity from noise and disturbance from users of the beer garden would be likely to affect nearby residents particularly during the summer months. Taking into account the existing boundary treatment between the club and the adjacent residential property which consists of dense conifer hedging and the existing use of the rear garden it is not considered that the new position of the proposed shelter would result in any increase in terms of noise and disturbance to the occupiers of the adjacent property.

Environmental Health have been consulted in regard to this application and they consider that the revised planning application for the smoking shelter appears to be better and has no objections subject to the recommended informative relating to the appropriate management of the shelter by the Working Men’s Club.

Conclusion

The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its design and location and it is considered that the relocation of the shelter will reduce the impact on the residential amenity of the adjacent occupier.

RB2009/0237

Demolition of existing building and erection of a three storey building comprising 6 No. apartments at 23 Clifton Terrace, Clifton for Stainton Hall Developments Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan

(i) RSS

Policy H1 ‘Provision and Distribution of Housing’; Policy H2 ‘Managing and Stepping Up the Supply and Delivery of Housing’; Policy T1 ‘Personal Travel Reduction and Modal Shift’.

(ii) Local Planning Policy

UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ UDP Policy HG4.3 ‘ Windfall Sites’; UDP Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, bed-sitting rooms and houses in multiple occupation’; UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’.

b) Other relevant material planning considerations

PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ PPS3 ‘Housing’ PPG13 ‘Transport’

Supplementary Planning Guidance 3 ‘Infill Residential Development’

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered the proposed residential development, including demolition of existing buildings, is acceptable in land use terms and will co-exist satisfactorily with the adjoining land uses.

Furthermore the proposal by virtue of its scale, mass, form, fenestration, orientation and position in relation to properties along Sherwood Crescent would not be detrimental to the living conditions of those occupiers.

It is also considered that on balance the proposal would by virtue of its design, siting, scale, height, massing and its relationship to the locality would be an acceptable addition to the area. The proposed three storey building would therefore not be out of keeping with the character of surrounding residential properties.

The revised scheme addresses the concerns and reason for objection in the earlier refused application (RB2006/0493).

In conclusion the proposal would be in accordance with relevant UDP Policies, SPG guidance and PPS1 and PPS3, and as such the proposal is recommended for approval.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC 24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be constructed with either:-

a/ a permeable surface and associated water retention/collection drainage, or; b/ an impermeable surface with water collected and taken to a separately constructed water retention/discharge system within the site.

The area shall thereafter be maintained in a working condition. 02 [PC27*] Before the development is brought into use the car parking area shown on the submitted plan shall be provided, marked out and thereafter maintained for car parking. 03 [PC94] Prior to the commencement of development hereby approved, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing how the use of sustainable/public transport will be encouraged. The agreed details shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. 04 Six secure cycle parking spaces shall be provided within the site before the development is occupied.

05 [PC93] The windows on the elevation of the building facing No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace (north-east facing elevation) shall be glazed with obscure glass as agreed with the Local Planning Authority and shall not at any time be glazed with clear glass without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority. 06 [PC92] Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of contamination on site arising from Japanese Knotweed and give details of how it will be treated on the site and its disposal in accordance with Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Such approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timeframe approved by the Local Planning Authority. 07 [PC12] Details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any off-site work, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until such approved details are implemented. 08 [PC38C] Prior to commencement of development, a detailed landscape scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The landscape scheme shall be prepared to a minimum scale of 1:200 and shall clearly identify through supplementary drawings where necessary: -The extent of existing planting, including those trees or areas of vegetation that are to be retained, and those that it is proposed to remove. The extent of any changes to existing ground levels, where these are proposed. -Any constraints in the form of existing or proposed site services, or visibility requirements. -Areas of structural and ornamental planting that are to be carried out. -The positions, design, materials and type of any boundary treatment to be erected. -A planting plan and schedule detailing the proposed species, siting, quality and size specification, and planting distances. -A written specification for ground preparation and soft landscape works. The programme for implementation. -Written details of the responsibility for maintenance and a schedule of operations, including replacement planting, that will be carried out for a period of 5 years after completion of the planting scheme.

The scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved landscape scheme and in accordance with the appropriate standards and codes of practice within a timescale agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 09 [PC38D] Any plants or trees which within a period of 5 years from completion of planting die, are removed or damaged, or that fail to thrive shall be replaced within the next planting season. Assessment of requirements for replacement planting shall be carried out on an annual basis in September of each year and any defective work or materials discovered shall be rectified before 31st December of that year. 10 [PC41] All tree works shall be carried out in accordance with B.S.3998: 1989. The schedule of all tree works shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority before any work commences and no tree work shall commence until the applicant or his contractor has given at least seven days notice of the intended starting date to the Local Planning Authority. The authorised works should be completed within 2 years of the decision notice otherwise a new application for consent to carry out any tree work will be required. 11 [PC52] No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR24B] To ensure that surface water can adequately be drained and that mud and other extraneous material is not deposited on the public highway and that each dwelling can be reached conveniently from the footway in the interests of the adequate drainage of the site, road safety and residential amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’. 02 [PR27] To ensure the provision of satisfactory garage/parking space and avoid the necessity for the parking of vehicles on the highway in the interests of road safety. 03 [PR94] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 04 In the interest of encouraging the use of sustainable modes of transport. 05 [PR93] In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties. 06 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 07 [PR12] To ensure that the development can be properly drained in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 08 [PR38C] To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’. 09 [PR38D] To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’. 10 [PR41] To ensure the tree works are carried out in a manner which will maintain the health and appearance of the trees in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’. 11 [PR52] To ensure that appropriate materials are used in the construction of the development in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Informatives:

INF 11A It is recommended that the following advice is followed to prevent a nuisance/ loss of amenity to local residential areas. Please note that the Council’s Neighbourhood Enforcement have a legal duty to investigate any complaints about noise or dust. If a statutory nuisance is found to exist they must serve an Abatement Notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Failure to comply with the requirements of an Abatement Notice may result in a fine of up to £20,000 upon conviction in Rotherham Magistrates' Court. It is therefore recommended that you give serious consideration to the below recommendations and to the steps that may be required to prevent a noise nuisance from being created.

(i) Except in case of emergency, operations should not take place on site other than between the hours of 08:00 – 18:00 Monday to Friday and between 09:00 – 13:00 on Saturdays. There should be no working on Sundays or Public Holidays. At times when operations are not permitted work shall be limited to maintenance and servicing of plant or other work of an essential or emergency nature. The Local Planning Authority should be notified at the earliest opportunity of the occurrence of any such emergency and a schedule of essential work shall be provided.

(ii) Heavy goods vehicles should only enter or leave the site between the hours of 08:00 – 18:00 on weekdays and 09:00 – 13:00 Saturdays and no such movements should take place on or off the site on Sundays or Public Holidays (this excludes the movement of private vehicles for personal transport).

(iii) Best practicable means shall be employed to minimise dust. Such measures may include water bowsers, sprayers whether mobile or fixed, or similar equipment. At such times when due to site conditions the prevention of dust nuisance by these means is considered by the Local Planning Authority in consultations with the site operator to be impracticable, then movements of soils and overburden shall be temporarily curtailed until such times as the site/weather conditions improve such as to permit a resumption.

(iv) Effective steps should be taken by the operator to prevent the deposition of mud, dust and other materials on the adjoining public highway caused by vehicles visiting and leaving the site. Any accidental deposition of dust, slurry, mud or any other material from the site, on the public highway shall be removed immediately by the developer.

Background

There have been a number of previous permissions relating to this site, none of the permissions relating to the application site have been implemented. The planning history can be summarised as follows:

RB2001/1052 – Conversion and two storey side extension to dwelling to form 6 flats – Granted Conditionally

RB2003/0338 - Conversion of Sherwood House Sherwood Crescent into 5 flats and erection of a two storey block of 4 flats within its garden, and erection of two storey block of 6 flats – Granted Conditionally

RB2006/0493 - Demolition of existing building and erection of a four storey building to form 8 no. apartments – Refused for the following reason:

“The proposal by virtue of its scale, mass, form, fenestration, orientation and position in relation to properties along Sherwood Crescent would be detrimental to the living conditions of those occupiers by virtue of the unacceptable overbearing, overshadowing, overlooking relationship and loss of privacy that would result.”

Site Description & Location

The application site consists of No. 23 Clifton Terrace; a large, two storey, derelict detached dwelling set back from Clifton Terrace by approximately 30 metres. The area to the front of the dwelling, fronting Clifton Terrace is overgrown and is unkempt in appearance. Clifton Terrace itself is a cul-de-sac which serves a number of residential properties as well as Rotherham Industrial Plastic Company and provides access for servicing to the rear of Commercial properties on Wellgate.

The site is bounded to the north by a relatively recent development of three storey apartments which lie at a slightly higher level and No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace; a pair of two storey semi-detached dwellings. To the south is a single storey Church building, whilst to the west and at a distance of approximately 9.5 metres is the rear of terraced houses on Sherwood Crescent. Directly opposite the site are traditional Victorian terraced properties of two storeys in height.

Proposal

This application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and the erection of a new building to form 6no. flats.

The proposed building is three storeys in height with a steeply sloping hipped roof, to the front elevation is a two storey gable feature forming the entrance to the flats. The position of the proposed building is relatively central within the site and set back from Clifton Terrace by approximately 20 metres.

A parking area providing 7 parking spaces including 1 space for No. 21 Clifton Terrace (which is also in the same ownership as the applicant) is positioned adjacent to Clifton Terrace, to the front of the building. In addition pedestrian access is provided from the site to both No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace to the north. The site layout plan shows a communal amenity space to the rear of the building.

The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement and an Arboricultural Survey.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

(a) Development Plan

(i) RSS

Policy H1 ‘Provision and Distribution of Housing’; Policy H2 ‘Managing and Stepping Up the Supply and Delivery of Housing’; Policy T1 ‘Personal Travel Reduction and Modal Shift’.

(ii) Local Planning Policy

The site is allocated in the current Unitary Development Plan for Residential Use. The following policies of the UDP are considered to be relevant:

Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’: “Development will be required to make a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design…”

Policy HG4.3 ‘ Windfall Sites’: “The Council will determine proposals for housing development not identified in Policies HG4.1 and HG4.2 in light of their: (i) location within the existing built up area and compatibility with adjoining land uses; and (ii) compatibility with other relevant policies and guidance.”

Policy HG4.8 ‘Flats, bed-sitting rooms and houses in multiple occupation’: “The Council will permit the creation of flats, bed-sitting rooms and houses in multiple occupation provided that a concentration of these forms of accommodation does not seriously interfere with the amenities of existing residents and adequate provision is incorporated into any development to accommodate off street parking for residents.”

Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’: “The Council will encourage the use of best practice in housing layout and design in order to provide developments which enhance the quality of the residential environment and provide a more accessible residential environment for everyone.”

Other Material Considerations

PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ PPS3 ‘Housing’ PPG13 ‘Transport’

Supplementary Planning Guidance 3 ‘Infill Residential Development’

Publicity

The application was advertised by way of a site notice posited on 6 March 2009. In addition neighbouring properties were notified of the proposals in writing on 3 March 2009.

One letter of objection has been received from a neighbour at No. 22 Clifton Terrace, the main concern being that an existing right of way is retained and unhindered during any construction works.

One right to speak has been received from an objector.

A copy of all letters of representation will be available in the Member’s Room prior to the Meeting.

Consultations

Transportation Unit – No objections subject to conditions.

Environmental Health – No objections subject to conditions.

Appraisal

The determination must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise S38(6) PCPA 2004.

The main considerations in the determination of this planning application are:

• The principle of residential development of the site; • The design of the proposed development and impact upon the character and visual amenity of the locality; • The impact upon residential amenity; • Highway Safety.

Principle of residential development

It is considered that the residential development of this site to provide 6 residential units will contribute to the housing figures set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber and in line with RSS policies H1 which aims to improve and increase appropriate accommodation for all households. This site is previously developed and evidence of the previous use is still evident, the proposed development also, therefore contributes to the prioritisation of housing development on brownfield land as set out in RSS Policy H2.

The site is allocated within the Unitary Development Plan for residential use and the site has previously been granted planning permission for residential development (although it should be noted that this permission has now expired).

Policy HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ is relevant and it is considered that the proposal is in line with this Policy. The site lies within a predominantly residential area where adjoining use would be compatible with the proposed development, and in principle, it is considered that the residential development of this site is acceptable subject to compliance with relevant policy criterion.

The density of the development is extremely low at 7.8 dwellings per hectare, whilst PPS3 indicates that 30 dwellings per hectare may be used as an indicative minimum it is considered that the site constraints in this instance indicate that the maximum level of accommodation has been provided on this site.

Design and Impact upon the character and visual amenity of the locality

The site at present is in a derelict state; the existing building has its windows boarded and the land around the premises is overgrown and subject to fly tipping. The general condition of the building and site are considered to be detrimental to the locality which is predominantly residential in nature.

It is considered that the demolition of the existing property and redevelopment of this site in itself would be beneficial to the character of the area and therefore the main consideration is whether the proposed building is appropriate in position, scale and nature for its location.

The existing building which occupies this site is set extremely well back (by approximately 30 metres) from Clifton Terrace. Combined with its unkempt appearance, the position of the building fails contribute in a strong way to the street scene of Clifton Terrace, which aside from the application site, already lacks strong architectural features.

The proposed development is considerably larger in scale than the existing building, both in terms of its footprint and height and the scale of the proposed building together with its position approximately 10 metres further forward will result in the proposed building being more visually dominant on this site than the existing property.

Policy ENV3.1 requires development to make a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design taking into account architectural style, scale, density, height, massing, site features and local vernacular characteristics. The proposed development is three storeys in height with a steeply sloping hipped roof and two storey gable feature to the front elevation. As mentioned above, Clifton Terrace does not have a strong architectural character and whilst the majority of the surrounding traditional properties are two storey in height, there are varying roof forms including hips, gables and dormer windows. In addition, the land levels around the site mean that, in particular No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace and the block of flats to the north of the application site lie at a significantly higher level. It is also noted that the recently constructed block of flats, adjacent to the application site are two and a half storeys in height, with dormer windows overlooking the application site.

The steeply sloping hipped roof of the proposed development aims to reduce the overall massing of the building given that it is three storeys in height and the design of the building, whilst modern in character has regular fenestration and horizontal emphasis similar to the existing buildings in the vicinity.

In light of the lack of a strong architectural character in the immediately surrounding area, the presence of various roof styles and land levels which result in surrounding properties which are two storeys lying at a higher level, it is considered that the design of the proposed development at three storeys in height would be acceptable on this site.

The siting of the building closer to Clifton Terrace provides an architecturally stronger development which will be visible within the street scene and enables the development to be seen in the context of the block of apartments to the north of the site.

The impact of the development upon residential amenity

Policy HG4.8 refers to the development of flats, bed-sitting rooms and houses in multiple occupation and states that:

“The Council will permit the creation of flats, bed-sitting rooms and houses in multiple occupation provided that a concentration of these forms of accommodation does not seriously interfere with the amenities of existing residents…”

Although there is another block of flats directly to the north of the application site, the majority of properties in the vicinity are houses. On this basis, it is not considered that the proposed development of 6 flats would result in a concentration of flat development which would be detrimental to the amenity of existing residents.

The closest residential properties to the application site are those at No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace and No.s 28 and 30 Sherwood Crescent.

In relation to those properties on Sherwood Crescent, the rear elevation of No.s 28 and 30 lie approximately 9 metres (at the closest point) from the rear elevation of the derelict property at No. 23 Clifton Terrace. Whilst the height of the building is increased from two storeys to three storeys and there are bedroom windows in the rear elevation of the proposed building, the distance from the neighbouring properties at No. 28 and 30 and the proposed building has been increased from 9 metres to 19 metres. In addition, the overbearing rear elevation of 23 Clifton Terrace will be replaced with a landscaped amenity area directly to the rear of Nos 28 and 30 Sherwood Crescent.

In relation to No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace, the distance from these properties to the proposed building is between 16.6 metres and 17.2 metres. The only windows on the side elevation of the building facing No.s 21 and 22 Clifton Terrace are small kitchen windows which a condition will ensure will be glazed with obscure glazing.

With the above in mind it is considered that the proposal by virtue of its scale, mass, form, fenestration, orientation and position in relation to properties along Sherwood Crescent would not be detrimental to the living conditions of those occupiers by virtue of the unacceptable overbearing, overshadowing, overlooking relationship and loss of privacy.

Highway Safety

Turning to highway safety the proposal is acceptable in highway and transportation terms subject to conditions in respect of parking layout, surfacing of vehicular areas, the submission of measures to promote sustainable/public transport modes and the provision of 6 no secure cycle spaces being imposed.

Conclusion

It is considered the proposed residential development, including demolition of existing buildings, is acceptable in land use terms and will co-exist satisfactorily with the adjoining land uses. In addition it is considered that on balance the proposal would by virtue of its design, siting, scale, height, massing and its relationship to the locality would be an acceptable addition to the area and the proposed three storey building would not be out of keeping with the character of surrounding residential properties.

It is also considered that the revised scheme addresses the concerns and reason for objection in the earlier refused application.

Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with relevant UDP Policies, SPG guidance and PPS1 and PPS3, and as such the proposal is recommended for approval.

RB2009/0272

Erection of 15 m wind turbine at Canklow Woods Primary School, Wood Lane, Canklow for Canklow Woods Primary School.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

Reason for Refusal

01 The Council consider that the development, if implemented would be located in an area that was formerly usable playing field capable of accommodating part of a pitch and associated run-off. Therefore, the proposal would be in conflict with Sport England’s Playing Field Policy which seeks to ensure that development which would lead to the loss of all or part of a playing field or which would prejudice its use, should not normally be permitted because it would permanently reduce the opportunities for participation in sporting activities.

Background

There have been a number of planning applications submitted for the school in recent years these are summarised below:

RB2001/1272 – Extension to form sports hall with associated changing facilities (application under Regulations 3&9A of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992) – Granted conditionally – 25 October 2001

RB2002/0598 – Erection of building to provide crèche facilities (application under Regulations 3 & 9A of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992) – Granted conditionally – 24 May 2002

RB2008/0051 – Demolition of existing school and erection of new primary school with nursery facilities (Application under Regulations 3 & 9A of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992) – Granted conditionally – 20 March 2008

RB2009/0293 – Formation of car park (Application under Regulations 3 & 9A of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992) – currently undetermined

Site Description & Location

Canklow Woods School is located on Wood Lane to the east of Centenary Way which is a busy dual carriageway between Brinsworth and the Town Centre. At present the school approved under RB2008/0051 is being constructed while classes continue within the original school before it gets demolished.

The wind turbine itself is proposed to be positioned at the NE corner of the playing field, approximately 140 metres from the existing school and approximately 106 metres from the new school building. The area is surrounded by woods and park land to the south- east and south-west and residential properties to the north. There is a large industrial estate to the north-west. The nearest residential properties are located 140 metres away on Wood View Place to the north in a residential estate.

Proposal

The proposal is for the installation of a Wind Turbine mounted on a 15 metres high mast to the east of both the existing and new school buildings.

The mast will be galvanised steel with the turbine itself a white colour. The aim of the installation is to provide green energy for the school, act as an educational tool for the pupils and to raise public awareness of renewable energy in the local area.

The proposed site for the turbine has been chosen to both maximise the performance and to minimise the visual impact. The visual impact will be lessened by the trees to the north and east of the site.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The site of the proposed wind turbine is within a Green Belt location as designated within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP), the proposed development shall be assessed against the following policies:

Regional Spatial Strategy

RSS Policy ENV5 ‘Energy’ states that the Region will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increase in renewable energy capacity and decisions should help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and maximise the efficient use of power sources.

Unitary Development Plan Policies

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ states

‘In the Green Belt, development will not be permitted except in very special circumstances for purposes other than agriculture, forestry, recreation, cemeteries and other uses appropriate to a rural area. The construction of new buildings inside the Green Belt is inappropriate unless it is for the following purposes:-

(v) agriculture and forestry (vi) essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries and other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it, (vii) limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings, and (viii) limited infilling in existing villages.’

Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ states that development will be required to make a positive contribution to the environment by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to, amongst other things, relationship to the locality, height, materials, site features, screening and landscaping.

Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ seeks to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with developments and planning permission will not be granted for new development which is likely to give rise to, amongst other things, noise pollution.

Policy UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’ states that there will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

Other Material Considerations

National Planning Policies

PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that ‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations…’.

PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ states that increased development of renewable energy resources is vital to facilitating the delivery of the Government’s commitments on both climate change and renewable energy. Although, it further states that, when located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development, which may impact on the openness of the Green Belt. Careful consideration will therefore need to be given to the visual impact of projects and very special circumstances that clearly outweigh any harm by reason of inappropriateness should be demonstrated. Such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources.

Sport England’s Playing Field Policy

The Policy states that ‘Sport England will oppose the granting of planning permission for any development which would lead to the loss of, or would prejudice the use of, all or any part of a playing field, or land last used as a playing field or allocated for use as a playing field in an adopted or draft deposit local plan, unless, in the judgement of Sport England, one of the Specific circumstances applies’.

Publicity

The application has been advertised by way of a notice in the local press and a site notice posted on a lamppost to the front of the school and the neighbouring school were notified in writing. No comments have been received at the time of writing the report.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have no objections to the scheme.

Environmental Health have stated that they envisage no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution impact and as such would raise no further comment.

Early Years Childcare has not responded.

Robin Hood Airport has not responded at the time of this report.

Civil Aviation Authority have advised that there is a potential impact upon the operation of and those associated with Robin Hood Airport and recommend that the Airport licensee is provided the opportunity to comment upon the application along with the National Air Traffic Services Limited and the Ministry of Defence.

NATS Safeguarding has not responded at the time of writing this report.

Ministry of Defence have not responded at the time of writing this report.

OFCOM have not responded.

Sport England have raised objection to the application as the proposed location of the wind turbine is on an area that was formerly usable playing field capable of accommodating part of a pitch and associated run-off.

Appraisal

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that ‘If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.’

This application relates to the installation of a 15 metres high wind turbine in the north- east corner of Canklow Woods Primary School’s existing playing fields which is allocated as Green Belt within the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

The main issues that are considered relevant and appropriate in the determination of this application are:

• Principle of installing a wind turbine within the Green Belt • Very special circumstances • Impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt • Impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings • Impact of the development on the school playing field • Highway Issues

Principle of erecting a wind turbine within the Green Belt

National Planning objectives are centred on sustainable development. The Government has set a target of 10% of UK energy to be generated from renewable sources by 2010. Indeed, this is also supported by RSS Policy ENV5 which states that the Region will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increase in renewable energy capacity and decisions should help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and maximise the efficient use of power sources. The wider environmental and economic benefits of renewable energy are material planning considerations. PPS22 advises that Local Planning Authorities take a proactive approach to small scale wind projects where power can be dedicated to on site use, as it is proposed here. The companion guide to PPS22 states that proactive support is required from Local Planning Authorities, who may find that leading by example, can encourage the development of further renewable energy schemes.

In principle there is strong support for renewable energy schemes. Policy UTL3.4 of the UDP states that there will be a presumption in favour of proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources.

It is important to ensure that there are no impacts arising from the installation of a wind turbine of sufficient weight to warrant a refusal of the planning application.

Although the general principle of a wind turbine is supported by national, regional and local plan policies, the application site is within a Green Belt location. Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ of the UDP states that construction of new buildings within the Green Belt is inappropriate development unless it is essential for the use of agriculture or forestry, essential facilities for outdoor sport or outdoor recreation, limited extensions to existing dwellings or infilling in existing villages. The proposal is therefore inappropriate development in the Green Belt, as such the proposal does not accord with the designation of the UDP.

Paragraph 3.2 of PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that ‘Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. In view of the presumption against inappropriate development, the Secretary of State will attach substantial weight to the harm to the Green Belt when considering any planning application or appeal concerning such development’. In light of the above it is considered that the principle of a wind turbine in a Green Belt locaiton would result in inappropraite development and unless there are very special circumstances the proposal would be in direct conflict with the provisions of PPG2.

The Town and Country Planning Green Belt Direction 2005 directs that any development which would have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt, and the Local Planning Authority does not propose to refuse permission, shall be referred to the First Secretary of State before a decision is made. In this respect, it is considered that due to the relatively small scale size of the turbine it is not considered that the application be referred to the department of Communities and Local Government as a departure in this instance.

Very Special Circumstances

Policy ENV1 Green Belts indicates that inappropriate development in the Green Belt will not be allowed unless there are very special circumstances.

Paragraph 3.2 of PPG2 Green Belts, states that ‘Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist, unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness or any other harm is clearly outweighed by other circumstances.’

PPS22 Renewable Energy strongly advocates that the use of energy from renewable sources, indicating that is production is a material consideration carrying significant weight in relation to planning applications, and may constitute very special circumstances in relation to development in Green Belt areas.

Having regard to the above and the advice in PPS22, particularly paragraph 13, significant weight must be afforded to the production of energy from a renewable resource, the reduction in harmful emissions, and the wider environmental benefits in terms of combating climate change. It is therefore considered that there are very special circumstances in this instance, by way of producing renewable energy for the school, which clearly outweighs the harm caused by inappropriate development, and any other identified harm such that the development can be permitted in the Green Belt.

Impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt

With regard to the proposed wind turbines impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt, it is acknowledged that the site is slightly elevated in the landscape and there are some direct views from the Industrial Estate on the opposite side of Centenary Way and from some properties on the eastern edge of Brinsworth some 620 metres away, while there will be partial views of the turbine from some properties on Wood View Place, Wood Terrace and Rother Road to the north. However, it is considered that the installation of a single wind turbine at 15 metres high will have no impact on the openness of the area as a whole and will be sufficiently far enough away from residential properties to not be contentious. In addition, given the size, siting, tree- screening to the north and east and distance from properties in Brinsworth to the west and Canklow to the north it is unlikely that the turbine will limit the openness of the area or impact on views of occupiers of nearby properties.

Impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area and the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings

The proposed turbine is considered to be of a relatively small scale. It is considered that although the turbine would be sited near the top of a raised area of the site with some views from nearby residential properties, the proposed turbine would have minimal impact on the visual amenity of area. This is due to the fact that the trees which form part of Canklow Woods are located directly to the north and east of the site of the turbine which when viewed from across the landscape from Brinsworth will help the turbine blend into the scenery and landscape. Furthermore, the proximity of a telecoms mast that is approximately 30m high and 500m to the north-east poses a much larger and taller structure than the proposed wind turbine on a 15m mast. It is considered that the pylon will dwarf the wind turbine and will result in the wind turbine, which is more akin to a telegraph pole, to not be an obstruction of the skyline.

The residents most likely to see the turbine are going to be located on Wood View Place, Wood Terrace and Rother Road to the north and will be sufficiently far away (at least 140m) not to be contentious, while properties in Brinsworth are over 600m away and again the location of the turbine will not have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the surrounding area or on the amenity of nearby dwellings. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed wind turbine would be in accordance with the requirements of UDP Policy ENV3.1 which seeks to ensure that development makes a positive contribution to the environment.

Turning to the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties, it is considered that with regard to Shadow Flicker it is a rare event that can occur when the sun is directly behind the rotating blades of a wind turbine from the perspective of an observer or dwelling. However, this only happens for short periods at dusk and dawn and at certain times of the year. This is generally considered not an issue with small turbines. Shadow Flicker is generally accepted to only occur at distances up to 10-times that of the rotor diameter. In this instance shadow flicker will not be an issue due to the position of the turbine. Any flicker from the setting sun will only be visible from the area of land in between the upper limit of the playing pitch and the perimeter fence. Beyond the perimeter fence the area continues to rise and is heavily wooded hence can be discounted in terms of shadow flicker. In terms of flicker from sunrise the area in which flicker may be registered is beyond the goal line due to the turbine position and the impact of Shadow Flicker on the football when in use would be minimal.

In terms of noise generation and the impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties, the nearest domestic property is 140m away to the north-east on Wood View Terrace. The audible impact on neighbouring properties and users of local rights of way is minimal as outlined within the submitted noise report. The report indicates that the perceived noise level from the turbine at the nearest neighbouring property some 140m away would be 34dBA for wind speeds of 8m/s (site average wind speed is 4.7ms-1) with a background noise level of 43dBA, as such the noise level of the turbine will be lower and thus indistinguishable from the level of background noise. Accordingly, it can be generally taken that there will be no noise complaints where the turbine’s specific noise is 10dBA less than background, which happens at a distance of 40-75m depending on wind speed.

Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development would satisfy the requirements detailed within UDP policy ENV3.7 which only supports developments which do not give rise to any noise pollution.

Impact of the development on the school playing field

Sport England have stated that the site forms part of, or constitutes a playing field as defined in the 1996 Statutory Instrument No. 1817, in that it is on land that has been used as a playing field within the last five years, and the field encompasses at least one playing pitch of 0.4 ha or more. They have considered the application in light of its playing fields policy, which states that ‘Sport England will oppose the granting of planning permission for any development which would lead to the loss of, or would prejudice the use of, all or any part of a playing field, or land last used as a playing field or allocated for use as a playing field in an adopted or draft deposit local plan, unless, in the judgement of Sport England, one of the specific circumstances applies’. The aim of the policy is to ensure that there is an adequate supply of pitches to satisfy the current and estimated future demand for pitch sports within the area and seeks to protect all parts of the playing field from development and not just those which, for the time being, are laid out as pitches.

In addition to the above Sport England have stated that an access track has been created along the northern boundary of the playing field and a spoil heap along the length of the eastern boundary and extending approximately 32 metres into the playing field, both of which are the result of development of the replacement school but does not form part of the approved planning permission for the new school. As a result approximately 0.4 hectares of the functional playing field has been lost to apparently unauthorised development. It should be noted that a planning application has been requested seeking retrospective permission for the soil heap and this will be submitted in due course.

With regard to the above Sport England have objected to the application, as the location of the wind turbine is on an area that was formerly usable playing field capable of accommodating part of a pitch and associated run-off. Sport England has stated that should the soil heap and access track be removed and the site restored and the wind turbine repositioned to the far north east or north west of the site so as to minimise the impact on the playing field, they may withdraw the objection. It is further considered that once the soil heap is removed and restored back to its previous state the part of the field where the turbine is located can be used in the future as part of a playing field and there are other sites away from the playing field are that can be used.

In light of the above it is considered that the development, if implemented would be located in an area that was formerly usable playing field capable of accommodating part of a pitch and associated run-off. Therefore, the proposal would be in conflict with Sport England’s Playing Field Policy which seeks to ensure that development which would lead to the loss of all or part of a playing field or which would prejudice its use, should not normally be permitted because it would permanently reduce the opportunities for participation in sporting activities.

It should be noted that a copy of Sport England’s comments have been forwarded to the Government Office for the Yorkshire Region in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Playing Fields)(England) Direction 1998 and should the Council be minded to grant planning permission for this development the application will need to be referred to the Government Office under this direction.

Highway Issues

It is not considered that the turbine would have a material impact on highway safety particularly as it would be sited a good distance away from surrounding highways and would therefore not have an impact on highway visibility issues and road safety.

Conclusion

Although the development represents a departure from both national and local Green Belt policy, it is considered that the need to find sources of renewable energy, the provision of which is encouraged in national, regional and local policy constitutes a very special circumstance to clearly outweigh the harm caused by the inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

However, notwithstanding the above it is considered that the proposed wind turbine by virtue of its location in an area that was formerly usable playing field capable of accommodating part of a pitch and associated run-off and the subsequent objection from Sport England represents an inappropriate development in this location that would be in conflict with Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy and would have an inappropriate impact on the existing and future use of the playing fields for sport pitches. Therefore the proposed development is recommended for refusal for the reason outlined above.