737 31.1.2002 Planning PLANNING COMMITTEE Minutes of the Proceedings at a Meeting of the Committee Held in the Council Chamber A
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
737 31.1.2002 Planning PLANNING COMMITTEE Minutes of the proceedings at a meeting of the Committee held in the Council Chamber at South Lakeland House, Kendal, on Thursday, 31 January 2002, at 10.00 a.m. Present Councillors Mrs J.E. Jenkinson (Chairman) M.G. Alston P.E. Ball R.N. Bolton J.W. Curwen Mrs H.E. Gardner L. Hadwin Mrs P.H. Himsworth B. Jameson R. Leach J.K. Manning R. Parker E.J. Robinson W.H. Robinson R.A. Rothwell Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs J. Ewing and Mrs A.B. Barratt. 1317 MINUTES RESOLVED – That the Chairman be authorised to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 3 January 2002. 1318 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST RESOLVED – That it be noted that Councillor W.H. Robinson declared an interest in Minute 1320 (Planning Application Nos. 5/01/2223 and 5/01/3083). 1319 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUDED ITEMS RESOLVED – That the items in Part II of the Agenda be dealt with following the exclusion of the press and public. 1320 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RESOLVED – That the following applications, for which representations have been received from members of the public, in accordance with Minute 1810 (1996/97), be determined in the following manner:- 5/01/2223 OLD HUTTON & HOLMESCALES: Greaves Farm, Old Hutton. Livestock building extension. (R.T. Robinson) Note – Councillor W.H. Robinson declared an interest in this item of business and left the Council Chamber during the discussion and voting thereon. Mrs B.J. Westnutt addressed the Committee on behalf of herself, her husband and Mr and Mrs Gould and Mr and Mrs Pritchett. Their main objections to the proposal was that it would compound the visually intrusive nature of the existing buildings on the site; it would have a severe adverse impact on the amenity of nearby residents and therefore be contrary to Policy S23 of the Local Plan; and there were 738 31.1.2002 Planning alternative locations available. The Director of Amenities and Development reported that the Director of Environment and Housing had advised that it was likely that there would be odour and noise nuisance to neighbours as the proposed extension was only 130 metres away. He also stated that it had been indicated to the applicant that it would be better to reposition the extension. DEFERRED for negotiation on location. 5/01/3083 OLD HUTTON & HOLMESCALES: Greaves Farm, Old Hutton. Implement storage shed. (R.T. Robinson) Note – Councillor W.H. Robinson declared an interest in this item of business and left the Council Chamber during the discussion and voting thereon. Mrs B.J. Westnutt addressed the Committee on behalf of herself, her husband and Mr and Mrs Gould and Mr and Mrs Pritchett. Their main objections to the proposal was that it would compound the visually intrusive nature of the existing buildings on the site; it would have a severe adverse impact on the amenity of nearby residents and therefore be contrary to Policy S23 of the Local Plan; and there were alternative locations available. The Director of Amenities and Development reported that the Director of Environment and Housing had advised that he would like to see the building repositioned further to the south. The Director of Amenities and Development reported that the issues with this application were slightly less clear. Members felt that it would be beneficial to visit the site to consider alternative locations for the storage shed. DEFERRED for a site visit. 5/01/2956 LOWER HOLKER: Cark Airfield, Flookburgh. Operation of parachute centre to every Friday between April and October and additional 30 days. (Resubmission 5-01-0470) (North West Parachute Centre) County Councillor R. Mein, representing the Cartmel division, spoke in objection to the application. He felt that the quality of life of residents would be reduced if the application was approved due to the increased noise. Mr K. Wright also addressed Members and supported the views expressed by County Councillor Mein. The Committee also heard form The Rt. Rev. Hugh Lindsay who was the Chaplain at Boarbank Hall nursing home and guest house. He also spoke on behalf of Augustinian Sisters who ran Boarbank. He felt that approving an increase in flying time would upset the present balance between the interests of the Parachute Centre and the residents of Cartmel Peninsula. It could also result in disruption to the 739 31.1.2002 Planning peace of residents during the summer and he felt that any future extensions of operations would make matters even worse. Mr R. Carruthers, the applicant’s father, spoke in support of the application. He gave details of how the planes had been operated. The Committee also received a statement in support from Ms Alison Magee who was a local resident and a sky diver. She stated that she had raised a lot of money for charities by jumping with the Parachute Centre and that the new plane was a lot quieter. Mr J. Siddle also spoke to the Committee on behalf of 13 residents who lived close to Cark airfield. They felt that noise was the overwhelming problem and it would be exacerbated during periods of good weather. The economical benefits to the local economy were marginal but the effect on residents was considerable. Mr Siddle also felt that it would be difficult to apply conditions which could control the noise and flight paths and stated that the existing informal agreement was not honoured. He concluded by stating that the airfield was in a peaceful, rural area and that the character of the area had changed for the worse. In response, the applicant, Mr M. Carruthers felt that the number of objections which had been received were not significant in relation to the population of the area. He stated that the increase in flying time would be less than 20% and that the noise levels had diminished considerably during the last twelve months. He also pointed out the benefits to the local community and that the Centre had helped to raise over £50,000 in the last year alone for different charities. He stated that the application had the support of the Chief Executive of the Cumbria Tourist Board. The Director of Amenities and Development advised the Committee that the objectors who had addressed them had shared the same views as the written objections which had been received. He confirmed that the Cumbria Tourist Board and the Lakeland Leisure Park both supported the scheme. He also clarified that the applicant had advised that the 30 extra days which had been applied for included the existing 14 days which the Centre already had permission for. The applicant had also supplied information about the actual number of days which had been used for flying purposes and this had indicated that over the preceding four years only 56% of the permitted days had actually been used due to weather conditions. Based on this trend, if the application was approved, although 163 days would be permissible, flying would only take place on 93 days. The applicant had also stated that the reason for the extra days was that they wished to run an Instructors’ course and that most time would be spent in the classroom. The Director advised Members that there was a difference between visiting the site and listening to the noise during a jump and actually living within the local community. He referred to the Director of Environment and Housing’s comments which had been detailed in his 740 31.1.2002 Planning written report. There were no objections to the current process at the airfield as the existing agreement was working but the Environment and Housing Directorate was not able to monitor activity at the airfield as no flying was taking place at the moment. The Director of Amenities and Development felt that it could prove beneficial if the Centre and members of the local community discussed outstanding issues. Members felt that there was merit in considering granting planning permission subject to conditions regarding setting up a proper mechanism to consider community views, restricting the number of days and insisting upon “clear break” periods during periods of operation. It was also felt to be expedient to ask the Development Portfolio Holder to ask that the Director of Environment and Housing be involved in negotiations with the local community. The Director of Amenities and Development to grant on the negotiation of an improved timescale for operation, arrangements for a Consultation Committee and protection for the resident population. Note – Councillors L. Hadwin, M. Alston, R. Parker, R. Leach and Mrs P. Himsworth requested that, under Standing Order 16.6, their votes against in respect of the above resolution be recorded. 5/01/3190 KENDAL: Land adjacent Ferndene, Caroline Street, Kendal. Dwelling. (Conservation Area) (Mrs Ann Barnett) Mr P. Fearnyough advised the Committee that the proposed dwelling was to be sited at the bottom of his garden and would be very visible from his home. This would detrimentally effect the privacy and seclusion he enjoyed and result in overlooking. He referred to discrepancies with the plans and the possible effect on a retaining wall. Members were also told that trees, covered by Tree Preservation Orders, would need to be felled to enable the scheme to go ahead. In response Mr P.Wilson advised that careful consideration of the views of neighbours had been taken into account. He stated that the proper procedure would be applied to the effected trees. DEFERRED for a site visit. 5/01/3214 URSWICK: The Swan, Little Urswick. Conversion of existing garage to store, erection of double garage, use of first floor as letting bedrooms and conversion of loft into owner’s accommodation.