Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council Planning Regulatory Board

ROTHERHAM METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING BOARD

Thursday, 27 September 2007 Start Time:- 9.00 a.m. for Visit Start Time:- 10.05 for Meeting At Town Hall, Moorgate Street, Rotherham

AGENDA

1. To determine if the following matters are to be considered under the categories suggested, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1972.

2. To determine any items which the Chairman is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

3. Declarations of Interest (Page 1)

(A form is attached and spares will be available at the meeting)

4. Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Regulatory Board held on 13th September, 2007 (herewith) (Pages 2 - 18)

5. Deferments/Site Visits (information attached) (Pages 19 - 20)

6. Visit of Inspection (report herewith) (Pages 21 - 34)

7. Development Proposals (report herewith) (Pages 35 - 128)

8. Report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service (herewith) (Pages 129 - 188)

9. Updates

Page 1 Agenda Item 3

ROTHERHAM METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD

MEMBERS’ DECLARATION OF INTEREST

Your Name (Please PRINT):

Meeting at which declaration made:

Item/Application in which you have an interest:

Date of Meeting:

Time Meeting Started:

Please tick ( / ) which type of interest you have in the appropriate box below:

1. Personal You may stay in the room.

2. Personal/Prejudicial You will usually need to withdraw from the meeting room whilst the item is under discussion.

Please give your reason(s) for you Declaring an Interest:-

(Please continue overleaf if necessary)

N.B. It is up to a Member to determine whether to make a Declaration. However, if you should require any assistance, please consult the Legal Representative/Committee Clerk prior to the meeting.

Signed:- …………………………..………………………….

(When you have completed this form, please hand it to the Committee Clerk.)

Page 2 Agenda Item 4 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 21P

PLANNING BOARD 13th September, 2007

Present:- Councillor Pickering (in the Chair); Councillors Akhtar, Atkin, Billington, Littleboy, McNeely, Nightingale, G. A. Russell, R. S. Russell, Smith, Turner, Wardle and Whysall.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Austen, Dodson, Kaye, License and Robinson.

61. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no Declarations of Interest reported.

62. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD HELD ON 30TH AUGUST, 2007

Resolved:- That theth minutes of the meeting of the Planning Regulatory Board held on 30 August, 2007, be approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman.

63. DEFERMENTS/SITE VISITS

Resolved:- That consideration of the following applications (contained within the Development Proposals report) be deferred pending a visit of inspection to the site, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman approving arrangements:-

RB2006/2278 and RB2006/2279 – Requested by the Councillor Pickering, Chairman of the Planning Board, to allow Members to look at the implications and impact of this development upon the protected Turkey Oak Tree within this site.

64. VISITS OF INSPECTION

Before the formal meeting of the Planning Board, Members of the Board made visits of inspection to the sites of the following applications and the decisions recorded are set out below:-

(a) Two storey rear extension to replace existing single storey extension at 64 Josephine Road, Holmes (RB2007/0910)

In accordance with the right to speak procedures, the following people attended the meeting and spoke about this application:-

Mr. S. Ahmed (Applicant) Mr. Durden (Objector)

Resolved:- That the Planning Board declare that it was not favourably

Page 3 22P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

disposed towards the application on the grounds that this extension was too close to the neighbouring property thus causing a detrimental impact on the residents’ amenity by way of loss of light and outlook, but the Director of Planning and Transportation Service, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Board, be authorised to determine the reasons for refusal.

(b) Extension to existing shop building, siting of storage container, formation of 3 No. jet wash bays and alterations to pumps and tanks at Bankside Service Station, Wortley Road, Kimberworth (RB2007/1257)

In accordance with the right to speak procedures, the following people attended the meeting and spoke about this application:-

Mr. A. Westman (Applicant) Mr. P. Davison (Objector) Mrs. Butcher (Objector) Mrs. D. Mills (Objector)

It was noted that the applicant had given an undertaking to improve the environmental management of the site with the provision of litter bins and appropriate signage.

Resolved:- That planning permission be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes and subject to the following conditions:-

1. Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition.

2. 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 5127/01,02,03 (Rev B) (20) Received 2nd July, 2007.

3. The Jet Wash facilities, hereby permitted, shall only be open to customers between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 8.00 p.m.

4. Before the development is brought into use, a screen wall 3 metres in height, in brickwork to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority, shall be erected between the points marked X and Y on the attached plan and shall thereafter be retained.

Reasons:-

Page 4 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 23P

1. 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 road safety.

2. To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans.

3. In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

4. To provide an effective screen in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

(c) Two storey and single storey side and front extension, detached outbuilding to form garage and stable and new boundary wall at Ella Rose Cottage, Scoles Lane, Scholes (RB2007/0954)

Resolved:- That consideration of this application be deferred pending further investigation by the Council’s Arboriculturist to determine if the development of the garage/stable block would have any effect on the trees on site.

(Councillors G. A. Russell, R. S. Russell and Smith did not vote on these applications not having been on the site visits)

65. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

Resolved:- (1) That, on the development proposals now considered, decisions be recorded as set out in the schedule now submitted and the requisite notices be issued (a copy of this schedule, together with the schedule of decisions made under delegated powers, will be made available when the printed minutes are produced).

(2) That the time limits specified in Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 apply to the decisions referred to at (1) above.

(3) That applications RB2007/0892 and RB2007/1213 be refused for the reasons listed in the report.

(4) That application RB2007/0948 be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes and subject to the relevant conditions listed in the report, along with an informative that an investigation be undertaken to determine if this property was being used for multiple occupancy.

(5) That applications RB2007/0981, RB2007/1063, RB2007/1104, RB2007/1341, RB2007/1423, RB2007/1452 and RB2007/1501 be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and

Page 5 24P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

appended to the minutes and subject to the relevant conditions listed in the report. The contents of an additional letter of representation, in relation to application RB2007/1423, received after the agenda had been printed, was read out and considered.

(6) That application RB2007/1063 be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes and subject to the relevant conditions listed in the report, along with an informative being inserted into the Site Management Plan to prevent site workers’ vehicles being parked on Goodwin Avenue and for footpaths to be kept clear of obstructions.

(7) That application RB2007/1297 be granted for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes and subject to the relevant conditions listed in the report, including an amendment to Condition No. 18 to now read “Before the development, hereby approved, is commenced on site, a method statement in accordance with BS 5387- 2005 Guide to Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations shall be submitted for approval to the Local Planning Authority. The method statement shall include details of special design, construction and protection measures to be used within the crown spread of the existing trees on the site to be retained and the protected trees on the adjacent land, to safeguard their future prospects throughout any development. The approved protection details shall be implemented before any work commences on site, and the approved design and construction methods shall be implemented as part of development.”

66. APPEAL DECISION - AGAINST REFUSAL OF DOMESTIC EXTENSIONS AND ERECTION OF DETACHED GARAGE WORKSHOP AT FAIRCROFT, SLEDGATE DRIVE, WICKERSLEY, ROTHERHAM FOR MR KAHN (RB2006/0341)

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for domestic extensions and erection of a detached garage at Faircroft, Sledgate Lane, Wickersley.

The Inspector dismissed the appeal, but noted that ‘the garage workshop would be sited opposite the main dwelling, separated from it by Sledgate Drive. The building would measure some 13.8 m wide and would be some 6 m high. It would be well separated from Greenlea and would be sited adjacent to a tennis court in Sledgate Drive. Its appearance in the street scene would be acceptable so long as protection measures could be in place in respect of adjacent trees, about which I have some concern as I have limited evidence.’

The Inspector felt that the proposed building ‘would be sited close to the rear boundary with the gardens at Nos. 27 and 29 Moorlands. Although the pitched roof would slope away from the common boundary line this would not be a single storey structure, as it would contain rooms in the

Page 6 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 25P

roof. The building would be substantially higher than that which would be allowable as permitted development within a domestic curtilage’.

The Inspector considered that ‘the building would harm the living conditions of the occupants of No. 29 Moorlands Drive. Their outlook would be unacceptably affected since the building would extend along most of the width of their back garden’.

Finally the Inspector noted that ‘whilst in other locations the separation distance between buildings might not be so critical, in this area dwellings were set within spacious gardens with substantial separation distances between them. In this case, the building would seriously erode the spaciousness about dwellings, which was a feature of the layout of dwellings in the locality and was valued by local residents. The development would not, therefore, make a positive contribution to the environment in this regard or achieve an appropriate standard of design in relationship to the locality because of its siting and scale. It would therefore fail to accord with Rotherham Unitary Development Plan Policy ENV3.1.’

Resolved:- That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

67. APPEAL DECISION – AGAINST THE ERECTION OF A GREENHOUSE AT LAND ADJACENT TO 81 ST JOHN'S ROAD, LAUGHTON-EN-LE- MORTHEN (RB2006/1546)

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the erection of a greenhouse at land adjacent to 81 St. John’s Road, Laughton-en-le-Morthen.

The Inspector dismissed the appeal, but noted in his appeal decision that Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ and the guidance set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: Green Belts (PPG2) made it clear that the construction of new buildings inside the Green Belt was inappropriate unless required in connection with one of a number of specified purposes, including agriculture and essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation. The Inspector did not consider that the appeal site could be described as being in use for agricultural purposes; rather it appeared to be used for a variety of purposes including garaging, parking, storage and grazing. He did not believe that the growing of tomatoes and salad crops within such a small domestic greenhouse would constitute an agricultural use. Similarly, a small greenhouse, although providing leisure opportunities for the appellants, could not be described as being an essential facility for outdoor recreation.

In view of this, the Inspector considered that the proposal was inappropriate development in the Green Belt in view of both local and national Policy. Paragraph 3.2 of PPG2 advised that inappropriate development in the Green Belt was, by definition, harmful. In this case,

Page 7 26P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

the Inspector considered that if the development were allowed to proceed there would be harm to the Green Belt through a loss of openness on the appeal site. Although the greenhouse would be screened from certain directions this did not outweigh the harm to the Green Belt. Paragraph 3.2 of PPG2 also made it clear that it was for the appellant to show whether there were any very special circumstances to justify such inappropriate development. The Inspector noted that no very special circumstances were advanced on behalf of the appellants.

Consequently, the Inspector concluded that the proposal conflicted with both local and national planning policy to protect the Green Belt and this constituted compelling grounds for dismissing the appeal.

A letter was sent to the appellants in November, 2006 following the refusal of the planning application informing them that the building should be removed, although no action was taken at this time due to the submission of the planning appeal. Furthermore, a domestic caravan had also been stored on the site, close to the greenhouse, which would constitute a material change of use which would require planning permission in its own right.

The appellants submitted a Certificate of Lawfulness in June, 2007 claiming that the caravan had been on the site for the last ten years. This application was refused on 27th July, 2007 as the Council did not consider that the caravan was proven on the present evidence to have been sited on the land in question for more than ten years before the submission of the application that was before 6th June, 1997.

As such, the caravan was not considered to be a lawful use.

It was, therefore, considered in light of the above, that the Council should take enforcement action in order to secure the removal of the greenhouse and the caravan as described above.

With regard to the human rights of the applicant, Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights stated:-

"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.”

Regard has also been had to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The right protected by Article 8 was not absolute (as is the case with Article 1 of the First Protocol) and could be made to yield to the greater public interest in certain circumstances. Article 8 was

Page 8 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 27P

concerned with the right of the individual to enjoy life in his own home. A home could include a place of business. The issue of an enforcement notice would interfere with the applicant’s human rights - Article 8 (1). Interference may, however, be justified on grounds set out in Article 8 (2) namely that any interference was in accordance with the law, pursued a legitimate aim, was necessary and proportionate.

Resolved:- (1) That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

(2) That an Enforcement Notice be served on Mr. and Mrs. Deaton (Owners) under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to secure the removal of both the greenhouse and the caravan from the site with a compliance period of three months.

68. APPEAL DECISION - DECISION AGAINST REFUSAL OF A CONSERVATORY TO THE FRONT OF 9 ORMESBY WAY, BRAMLEY, ROTHERHAM FOR MR. BOWATER (RB2006/2255)

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service providing details of a decision of an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the erection of a conservatory to the front of 9 Ormesby Way, Bramley.

The Inspector who dismissed the appeal noted that the appeal property (No. 9) was similar to other bungalows on the street. The properties were all set back from the road with reasonably sized garden areas to the front of the properties. The narrower gable ends of the bungalows faced towards Ormesby Way.

The Inspector felt that the proposed conservatory would represent a significant extension to the front of the bungalow at 9 Ormesby Way, although he recognised that a reasonable area of garden would be retained. However, the location, size and design of the conservatory would not in his opinion sit comfortably within the street scene which was characterised by a general uniformity of layout and housing style.

The Inspector took into account the appellant’s desire to make the front of his property more attractive and his willingness to plant screening if required. However, these issues did not, in his view, outweigh the harm which would be caused by the proposed development which would conflict with Policy ENV3.1 of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan which sought to ensure a standard of design which made a positive contribution to the environment. It would also conflict with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on householder development which aimed to improve standards of residential development.

Resolved:- That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

69. APPLICATION FOR VARIATION OF CONDITION 33 IMPOSED BY RB2005/0428 UNLESS SOLD AS ANCILLARY TO THE SALE OF

Page 9 28P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

OTHER TYPES OF GOODS PERMITTED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT’ AT LAND AT ROTHERHAM ROAD, PARKGATE (RB2007/0872)

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service, which detailed the application for variation of Condition 33 imposed by RB2005/0428 which stated ‘The retail units shall not be used to sell goods other than (a) DIY and Hardware goods, (b) Furniture and Floor Coverings, (c) Electrical goods’ to ‘ Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted) Development Order 1995, or any order revoking, re- enacting or modifying these orders, there shall be no display for retail sale of any of the following goods within the retail units hereby approved; food; alcoholic drinks; tobacco; books; newspapers and magazines; clothing and footwear; chemists’ goods; jewellery; silverware; watches and clocks; bicycles and cycling accessories; toys; sports equipment; caravans; camping and boating equipment; pets and pet supplies; luggage; unless sold as ancillary to the sale of other types of goods permitted within the development’ at land at Rotherham Road, Parkgate.

Resolved:- That, consequent upon the applicant entering into a supplemental legal agreement with the Council under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 for the purposes of securing the following matters being those agreed in the granting of the previous application RB2005/0428:-

• A commuted sum of 75% of the cost of re-siting bus stop positions and installing a light controlled pedestrian crossing associated with the bus stop in A633 Rotherham Road in the vicinity of the Retail World Roundabout.

• Prior to the first occupation of the development the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of the site.

(2) That upon the satisfactory signing of the supplemental agreement planning permission be granted, for the reasons adopted by Members at the meeting and appended to the minutes, and subject to the following conditions:-

1. Before the commencement of the development, details of the siting, design and external appearance of the buildings and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

2. Within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development, trees and/or shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for species,

Page 10 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 29P

siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

3. A detailed landscaping scheme, for the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the Earl Fitzwilliam Canal, and the south eastern corner of the site around the approved access road shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, and the approved scheme shall be implemented within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development.

4. The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water.

5. No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any balancing works and off-site works, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

6. No piped discharge of surface water from the site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall for surface water have been completed in accordance with details to be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority before the development commences.

7. No buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.

8. Surface water from vehicular parking and hardstanding areas shall be passed through an interceptor of adequate capacity prior to discharge to the public sewer. Roof drainage shall not be passed through any interceptor.

9. Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through trapped gullies installed in accordance with a scheme previously submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

10. There shall be no discharge of foul or contaminated drainage from the site into either groundwater or any surface waters, whether direct or via soakaways.

11. Inspection manholes shall be provided and clearly identified on foul and surface water drainage systems, in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the scheme shall be retained throughout the life of the development.

Page 11 30P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

12. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a settlement facility for the removal of suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works shall be provided in accordance with details previously submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained throughout the construction period.

13. Before the commencement of the development, a scheme to alleviate flooding between the development site and the adjoining depot site to the south west and provision for all necessary compensatory flood storage shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented before the development is occupied.

14. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved flood risk assessment incorporating the accepted mitigation measures into the construction of the development.

15. Surface water discharge from the development shall be balanced to a maximum rate of 5 litres/sec/ha.

16. Before the commencement of the development detailed surveys as recommended in the preliminary ecological assessment dated 26th January, 2005 by ECUS shall be undertaken. The results of the surveys and detailed development plans showing how and when the recommendations will be incorporated into the development shall be submit ted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The surveys shall be in relation to water voles, amphibians, reptiles and dittander. The approved details shall be implemented.

17. Before the commencement of the development details and plans which identify areas of vegetation to be retained and other areas identified as being of ecological importance shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include measures for the protection of the identified areas during the construction and post construction phases. The approved details shall be implemented according to an agreed programme.

18. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until:-

(a) The application site has been subjected to a detailed contamination desk study and site investigation, and remediation objectives have been determined through risk assessment, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(b) Detailed proposals for the removal, containment or otherwise rendering harmless any contamination (the ‘Reclamation Method Statement’) have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Page 12 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 31P

19. No development approved by this permission, other than that necessary to implement the Reclamation Method Statement, shall be commenced until the works specified in the Reclamation Method Statement have been completed in accordance with the approved scheme, and a closure report, which provides verification that the required works to remediate the site have been carried out satisfactorily, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

20. If during reclamation works any contamination is identified that has not been considered in the Reclamation Method Statement, then additional remediation proposals for this material shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval. Any approved proposals shall thereafter form part of Reclamation Method Statement.

21. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund.

22. 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 brought into use.

23. No part of the land other than that occupied by buildings shall be used at any time for the storage of goods, components, parts, waste materials or equipment without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

24. The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed signal controlled junction with A633 Rotherham Road shown in draft form on the submitted plan, indicating the positions of bus stops, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the development is first brought into use.

25. The on-site road network shall be designed and constructed to prospectively adoptable standards to a point coincidental with the western site boundary.

Page 13 32P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

26. The detailed layout of the site shall include the provision of pedestrian/cycle links between the site and the public right of way adjacent to Earl Fitzwilliam Canal and between the site and the subway under the railway line on the north-western boundary of the site, details of which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, implemented and retained as such.

27. The detailed layout of the site shall include car parking based on the Local Planning Authority’s Interim Maximum Parking Standards and secure cycle parking spaces based on the Local Planning Authority’s Cycle Parking Guidelines for New Developments, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, implemented and retained as such.

28. Before each building within the development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives and modal split targets, together with a time bound programme of implementation, monitoring and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of, and give prior approval in writing to, any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the programme of implementation.

29. The retail units, hereby approved, shall not exceed 7,900 square metres net sales floor space, and no additional floor space shall be created without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority

30. The retail units hereby approved shall not be subdivided to create individual units less than 929 square metres gross floor space unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

31. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1987, or the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying these orders, there shall be no display for retail sale of any of the following goods within the retail units hereby approved: food; alcoholic drinks; tobacco; books; newspapers and magazines; clothing and footwear; chemists’ goods; jewellery; silverware; watches and clocks; bicycles and cycling accessories; toys; sports equipment; caravans; camping and boating equipment; pets and pet supplies; luggage; unless sold as ancillary to the sale of other types of goods permitted within the development.

32. Not less than 4,645 sq. m of the gross retail floor space, hereby permitted, shall be occupied by a DIY/hardware retail operator. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling

Page 14 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 33P

any of the other categories of goods permitted under Condition 31 takes place.

33. Trading from the retail floor space, hereby approved, shall not commence until the construction (not including internal features) of at least 929 sq. m gross of employment floor space on the site has been completed.

Reasons:-

1. No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority.

2. 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’.

3. 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’.

4. 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’.

5. 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’.

6. 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’.

7. 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’.

8. To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

9. To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

10. To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP

Page 15 34P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

11. To ensure adequate access to foul and surface water drainage systems are provided at all times.

12. To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

13. To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area.

14. To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area.

15. To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area.

16. To ensure an up-to-date ecology survey is undertaken and appropriate mitigation needs can be addressed.

17. To ensure the appropriate protection and mitigation of areas of ecological importance.

18. In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’.

19. In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’.

20. In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’.

21. To prevent pollution of any watercourse in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

22. In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

23. To prevent the land from becoming unsightly in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

24. In the interest of road safety.

25. In the interest of road safety.

26. To ensure the development encompasses satisfactory sustainable

Page 16 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 35P

access ways.

27. To ensure adequate car and cycle parking facilities are made available with the development.

28. In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

29. To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

30. To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

31. To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

32. To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

33. To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

70. DFT DESIGN GUIDANCE - “MANUAL FOR STREETS”

Further to Minute No. 67 of the meeting of the Cabird net Member for Regeneration and Developments Services held on 3 September, 2007, consideration was given to the “Manual for Streets” (MfS) which was published by the Department for Transport in April, 2007 and replaced previous design guidance “Design Bulletin 32” and “Places, Streets and Movement”. The MfS did not set out new policy, but challenged some established working practices and standards with a view to creating well designed residential streets and sustainable communities. The guide placed particular emphasis on the importance of collaborative working and co-ordinated decision making through the setting up of development teams with a view to creating locally distinct, high quality places. A higher priority was afforded to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport. The preparation of masterplans and design codes was recommended.

The above aspirations have, to a great extent, been embodied in the Council’s/South Yorkshire’s own design guides, “Better Places to Live in South Yorkshire” and “Better Places to Work in South Yorkshire” which were published in May, 2004. It was proposed that these documents be retained to form companion guides to MfS.

Movement away from the traditional hierarchies of standard road types

Page 17 36P PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07

based on traffic flows and/or the number of buildings served was now advocated. Innovation was encouraged with a flexible approach to street layouts using the minimum of highway design features necessary to make the streets work properly.

The MfS advocated a maximum design speed of 20 mph for new residential streets and suggested a range of measures to help achieve this. Perhaps the most radical was the reduction in visibility distances at junctions and around bends. Research carried out in the preparation of MfS considered the influence of geometry on vehicle speed and casualties. It concluded that improved visibility and/or increased carriageway width correlate with increased vehicle speeds. The MfS provided guidance on stopping sight distances for streets where 85th%ile speeds were up to 60 km/h. These figures were significantly less than those used for many years as recommended in the now obsolete documents “Design Bulletin 32” and “Places, Streets and Movement”. For example, the distance now recommended for a speed of 30 mph was 43 metres (previously 60 metres) and for 20 mph was now 25 metres (previously 33 metres).

Resolved:- That the information be noted.

71. UPDATES

The following update information was provided:-

(a) Use of Land for storage and maintenance of Fairground Equipment, siting of 4 No. Showman’s living vans for security, siting of two storage containers, and formation of parking area at Packman Depot, Pleasley Road, Aughton (RB2007/0711)

Further to Minute No. 52 of the meeting of the Planning Board held on 16th August, 2007, when the above application was considered, the Director of Planning reported that the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber had issued an Article 14 Direction in relation to the application. The Planning Service would be sending the relevant paperwork to the GOYH, The GOYH’s decision on this application site would be reported in due course.

With regards to the Tree Preservation Orders proposed on the site, Members of the Planning Board noted that this information had not been before them at the time they took their original decision

Further information would be provided in due course and the matter reconsidered by the Members.

(b) Display Maps

Members of the Planning Board requested that clearer images of maps displaying layouts and designs be provided for future meetings

Page 18 PLANNING BOARD - 13/09/07 37P

and that some provision be made for map packs for Members prior to the meeting take place.

Investigation was to take place on the best means to facilitate these requests.

Page 19 Agenda Item 5

ROTHERHAM METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD

DEFERMENTS

• Planning applications which have been reported on the Planning Board Agenda should not be deferred on request without justification.

• Justification for deferring a decision can arise from a number of matters:-

(a) Members may require further information which has not previously been obtained.

(b) Members may require further discussions between the applicant and officers over a specific issue.

(d) Members may delegate to the Director of Service the detailed wording of a reason for refusal or a planning condition.

(e) Members may wish to ensure that an applicant or objector is not denied the opportunity to exercise the “Right to Speak”.

• Any requests for deferments from Members must be justified in Planning terms and approved by the Board. The reason for deferring must be clearly set out by the Proposing Member and be recorded in the minutes.

• The Director of Planning and Transportation Service or the applicant may also request the deferment of an application, which must be justified in planning terms and approved by the Board. Page 20

SITE VISITS

• Requests for the Planning Board to visit a site come from a variety of sources:- the applicant, objectors, the Parish Council, local Ward Councillors, Board Members or sometimes from the Director of Planning and Transportation Service.

• Site visits should only be considered necessary if the impact of the proposed development is difficult to assess from the application plans and supporting information provided with the officer’s written report; if the application is particularly contentious or the application has an element that cannot be adequately expressed in writing by the applicant or objector. Site visits can cause delay and additional cost to a project or development and should only be used where fully justified.

• The reasons why a site visit is called should be specified by the Board and recorded.

• Normally the visit will be programmed by Democratic Services to precede the next Board meeting (i.e. within two weeks) to minimise any delay.

• The visit will normally comprise of the Members of the Planning Board and appropriate officers. Ward Members are notified of visits within their Ward.

• All applicants and representees are notified of the date and approximate time of the visit. As far as possible Members should keep to the schedule of visits set out by Committee Services on the Board meeting agenda.

• Normally the visit will be accessed by coach. Members and officers are required to observe the site directly when making the visit, although the item will be occasioned by a short presentation by officers as an introduction on the coach before alighting. Ward Members present will be invited on the coach for this introduction.

• On site the Chairman and Vice-Chairman will be made known to the applicant and representees and will lead the visit allowing questions, views and discussions. The applicant and representees are free to make points on the nature and impact of the development proposal as well as factual matters in relation to the site, however, the purpose of the visit is not to promote a full debate of all the issues involved with the application. Members must conduct the visit as a group in a manner which is open, impartial and equitable and should endeavour to ensure that they hear all points made by the applicant and representees.

• At the conclusion of the visit the Chairman should explain the next steps. The applicant and representees should be informed that the decision on the application will normally be made later that day at the Board meeting subject to the normal procedure and that they will be welcome to attend and exercise their “Right to Speak” as appropriate. Page 21 Agenda Item 6

ROTHERHAM METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD

th VISIT OF INSPECTION - Thursday, 27 September, 2007

1. RB2006/2278 - Listed building consent for demolition of outbuilding at Swinton House Club, 20 Fitzwilliam Street, Swinton for Mr. Wildblood.

RB2006/2279 - Erection of 4 detached dwellinghouses at land at Swinton House Club, 20 Fitzwilliam Street, Swinton for Mr. Wildblood

Agent:- N/A

Requested By:- Councillor Pickering, Chairman of the Planning Board

Reason:- To allow Members to look at the implications and impact of this development upon the protected Turkey Oak Tree within this site.

No. Application Area Arrival Departure

1. RB2006/2278 Swinton 9.20 a.m. 9.45 a.m. RB2006/2279 Swinton

Return to Town Hall at approximately 10.05 a.m. Page 22

SITE VISIT NO. 1 (Approximate time on site – 9.20 a.m.)

RB2006/2278

Listed building consent for demolition of outbuilding at Swinton House Club, 20 Fitzwilliam Street, Swinton for Mr. Wildblood.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT LISTED BUILDING CONSENT

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant Listed Building consent:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policies:

ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ ENV2.5 ‘Listed Buildings’ ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’

2. For the following reasons:

The existing outbuilding is in a poor state of repair and is not in a prominent location. The loss of the outbuilding is therefore considered justified.

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 and the application case file and associated documents.

Page 23

Page 24

Notes for RB2006/2278

Background

There is no previous planning history relating to the coach house of Swinton House Club.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The site is allocated for residential purposes in the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Policies ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’, ENV2.5 ‘Listed Buildings’ and ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’ are relevant in the determination of this application.

Site Description

Swinton House Club is a grade 2 Listed Building located within the Swinton Conservation Area. The grounds of Swinton House Club occupy an area of approximately 0.6hectares. In addition to the main building there is a detached coach house stone building to the north of the site that is in a poor state of repair. There are a number of trees that lie within the site including an Oak Tree that is protected under a TPO approximately 22metres south of Swinton House Club that lies close to the boundary of the rear gardens of The Beeches residential properties. In addition there are a number of self-seeded trees to the west of the site.

In terms of the wider site area, to the west of the site lies the playing fields that comprise part of Swinton Community School. To the north and south of the site lie predominantly detached single and two storey residential properties. Fitzwilliam Road, a classified highway runs on a north-south orientation to the east of the site.

Proposals

The proposal is to demolish the existing coach house that lies 8 metres to the north- west of the Swinton House Club Listed Building.

In addition, a proposal to erect 4 dwellings is being considered under application RB2006/2279.

Publicity

All relevant neighbours were informed by letter on 3 January 2007 and subsequently re-notified of the amendments on 28 August 2007. A site notice was erected 4 January 2007 and on 28 August 2007. A total of 8 objections have been received from the original consultation. The objections can be summarised as follows:

Page 25

• Increase in traffic causing disruption on Fitzwilliam Street • Supply/constructional vehicles using existing access would be dangerous • Access into the site of a poor quality • Disruption to boundaries of The Larches • Bats present in the site • Too much tree-felling would take place • Overlooking of rear gardens • Support development on the land in principle but the scheme represents overdevelopment • Building in close proximity to existing boundaries may weaken the integrity of existing structures • No details enclosed on boundary finishes • The Turkey Oak tree is a healthy specimen and should be retained • The outbuildings are of historic interest and should be protected

Consultations

Transportation Unit – no objections

Conservation Officer – no objections to the demolition of the outbuilding.

Appraisal

This application seeks only to establish whether the principle to demolish the existing outbuilding/ coach house to Swinton House Club is acceptable.

In terms of the architectural merits of the existing building, the coach house reflects a traditional design that would have been found in conjunction with developments similar to Swinton House Club. However, the coach house is in a poor state of repair and is not structurally sound. The cost to repair and upgrade the building is not considered to be financially viable.

Bearing in mind that Swinton House Club has a prominent siting on Fitzwilliam Street and the outbuilding is not visible from a public vantage point, the improved amenity value that would result from the repair and restoration of Swinton House is considered to sufficient to justify the loss of the outbuilding.

The application is recommended for approval.

Page 26

RB2006/2279

Erection of 4 detached dwellinghouses at land at Swinton House Club, 20 Fitzwilliam Street, Swinton for Mr. Wildblood.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Guidance and the advice set out in government guidance, all as set out below, and all relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policies

ENV2.11 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ ENV2.8 ‘Settings and Curtilages of Listed Buildings’

2. For the following reasons:

The courtyard development is considered to represent a high quality design that has sufficient regard to the architectural style and features of the adjoining Listed Building. In terms of the highway safety implications, it is considered that a satisfactory provision for future parking has been made and that there will be no detrimental impact on the highway over and above that currently experienced. It is considered that the plots have a sufficient outlook to prevent loss of privacy to neighbouring properties and that the plots have a satisfactory level of amenity space. It is considered that the future prospects of the protected Turkey Oak tree have been satisfactorily safeguarded.

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 and the application case file 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. 02 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block Page 27

paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 03 [PC40*] No work or storage on the site shall commence until all the trees/shrubs to be retained have been protected by the erection of a strong durable 2.30 metre high barrier fence in accordance with BS 5837: 2005 Guide for Trees in Relation to Construction. This shall be positioned in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The protective fencing shall be properly maintained and shall not be removed without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority until the development is completed. There shall be no alterations in ground levels, fires, use of plant, storage, mixing or stockpiling of materials within the fenced areas. 04 [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. 05 The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water. 06 No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any balancing works and off-site works, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. 07 Unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority, there shall be no piped discharge of surface water from the development prior to completion of the approved surface water drainage works and no buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to the completion of the approved foul drainage works. 08 [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 Page 28

out below) except as shall be otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Revised drawings)(received 23 August 2007) 09 The dormer window on the northen elevation of plot 1 facing 2 The Larches 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. 10 [PC18] Detailed plans to be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this permission shall include a vehicular turning space for a fire appliance to be agreed in writing with the LPA to be provided within the site curtilage and the development shall not be brought into use until such turning space has been provided. 11 [PC94] Not later than 7 days after the completion of the sale or lease of each dwelling, the developer shall procure from the SYPTE a Travel Master Pass and Journey Planner valid for one year on behalf of each household who shall be the first occupants of such a dwelling and the developer shall give details of the application and the date upon which it was made to the Council. 12 Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant shall carry out a bat survey of all trees and buildings on the site, the results of which and any necessary mitigation shall be agreed in writing with the LPA. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation prior to the implementation of the development. 13 Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant shall submit details of the foundations of the proposed buildings and of the existing tree root structure of the protected Turkey Oak tree. These details, to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall indicate how the root structure of the tree shall be maintained in a healthy condition 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’. 02 [PR24B] To ensure 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 road safety and residential amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’. 03 [PR40] To ensure the trees/shrubs are protected during the construction of the development 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’. 04 Page 29

[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’. 05 In the interests of satisfactory drainage. 06 To ensure that the development can be properly drained. 07 To ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal. 08 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans. 09 In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. 10 [PR18] To enable a vehicle to enter and leave the highway in a forward gear in the interests of road safety. 11 [PR94] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 12 In the interests in the ecology of biodiversity and to comply with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 13 In order to satisfactorily protect the future prospects of the existing protected tree and to maintain the amenity that this provides.

Page 30

Page 31

Notes for RB2006/2279

Background

Previous applications submitted on this site include applications to fell protected trees RB1993/1416 and RB1994/0186 that were approved. In addition an application for Listed Building Consent Listed to repair the stone mullions and gutters to sides of windows to render front façade on the building of Swinton House Club was withdrawn in 2000.

The site lies within the curtilage of the Swinton House Club and this therefore considered to represent a brownfield site as defined in Annex B of Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The site is allocated for residential purposes in the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

In addition the advice contained within national Policy PPS3: Housing is also material in the determination of this planning application.

Site Description

Swinton House Club is a grade 2 Listed Building located within the Swinton Conservation Area, 0.5km south-west of the town centre. The grounds of Swinton House Club occupy an area of approximately 0.6hectares. In addition to the main building there is a detached coach house stone building to the north of the site that is in a poor state of repair. A number of trees that lie within the site including a prominent Turkey Oak Tree that is formally protected under a TPO approximately 22metres south of Swinton House Club that lies close to the boundary of the rear gardens of The Beeches residential properties. In addition there are a number of self- seeded trees to the west of the site and some hedges that screen the Larches residential properties. The site slopes moderately from west to east with an embankment up to the school in the western extremity.

In terms of the wider site area, to the west of the site lies the playing fields that comprise part of Swinton Community School. To the north and south of the site lie predominantly detached single and two storey residential properties built post 1960 with Fitzwilliam Road to the east of the site, a classified highway, on a north-south orientation.

Proposals Page 32

The proposal is to subdivide the existing Swinton House Club curtilage into a site area approximately 0.32hectares in area, including the access into the site from Fitzwilliam Street.

The original proposal was to fell the protected Oak tree and erect 5 detached dwellings on the site. This proposal has since been radically altered to retain the protected tree and erect a total of 4 dwellings in a courtyard style development comprising two detached dwellings to the north and south of the site and a main coach house building in the middle of the site that would comprise two dwellings.

Publicity

All relevant neighbours were informed by letter on 3 January 2007 and subsequently re-notified of the amendments on 28 August 2007. A site notice was erected 4 January 2007 and a further notice on 28 August 2007. A total of 8 objections have been received.

The objections relate to the original submission of the application and they have been summarised as follows:-

An Arboricultural Report has been submitted from a local resident in respect of the protected Turkey Oak. The findings in the report can be summarised as follows:-

• The overall health and condition of the tree would appear to be good. • An examination of the structure concludes that the tree is in a safe condition. • There are no arboricultural or planning reasons why the tree should be felled. • The tree has a safe life expectancy exceeding 40 years and has an important role in play in providing a mature look to any new development. • The tree is considered to have ‘outstanding’ amenity value.

In addition the original submission of the application generated 9 Right to Speak requests at the Planning Board meeting have been submitted. These include the applicant, two supporters and six objectors. Page 33

Consultations

Transportation Unit – no objections subject to conditions.

Conservation Officer – the revised plans are considered a considerable improvement in terms of the design and the impact of the proposal on the Listed Building. No objections. Tree Officer – Concern that the protected tree may be lost.

Appraisal

The adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan identifies the site as being within a residential area and the land lies within the curtilage of Swinton House Club. The site is therefore considered to be brownfield and the principle of residential development in this location is acceptable.

In terms of the design of the proposal, the original proposal for 5 contemporary residential dwellings within the curtilage of the Swinton House Club Grade 2 Listed Building was considered unacceptable and had insufficient regard to the setting of Swinton House Club. The revised proposals indicating a U-shaped courtyard-style of developmentth with a prominent front communal area is considered to compliment the early 18 century Listed Building. The proposed windows are of a Georgian style and are uniform in design and style. The front garage doors, being vertically-boarded and considered to be of a traditional design and in keeping with the other features of the property. There are a number of roof features such as the pyramidal roofs and small- paned glazed doors which are considered to add character to the proposed development.

In terms of the living conditions within the proposed development, the scheme needs to be considered as a unique development. Accordingly, although plot 1 stands a good distance forward of the main block, it is not considered that the advice found in the Supplementary Planning Guidance relating to front extensions on residential units is relevant in this instance. The proposed courtyard development is considered to have satisfactory living conditions and to be in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 ‘’Development and the Environment’.

In terms of any potential loss of privacy to surrounding properties, the proposal benefits from a 10 metre outlook on the southern elevation of the plot 4 which conforms to the recommended spacing standards found in the Supplementary Planning Guidance. It is considered that proving the north-facing dormer window on plot 1 is obscure glazed and that sufficient boundary treatment is maintained, there would not be any significant loss of privacy to the surrounding residential properties from the proposed development.

Moving to the issues of access, The Transportation Unit have indicated that the majority of the site is served by a 4.7m access and the proposed 4.1metre section of driveway would be for a short distance only. As such the access is considered acceptable. A turning circle would be required and it is considered that this can be satisfied by a condition for future approval. Page 34

Regarding the issues of trees, the revised proposals indicate that the protected Turkey Oak tree is to be retained and incorporated into the new development. The distance between Plot 4 and the base of the tree is 9 metres. The Tree Officer has concerns regarding the potential future loss of the protected tree. The applicant has indicated that shallow foundations will be used in the construction of the building that would protect the roots of the tree. It is therefore considered that the future prospects of the tree can be safeguarded during any future development and that this can be satisfactorily conditioned.

Overall the development is considered to represent a high quality design that has sufficient regard to the architectural style and features of the adjoining Listed Building and is recommended for approval, subject to the safeguard of the above conditions.

Page 35 Agenda Item 7

REPORTTH TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON THE 27 SEPTEMBER 2007

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

RB2007/0586 Outline application for the demolition of existing dwelling and Page 37 erection of 3 No. two storey dwellinghouses including details of access at Orchard House, 175 Doncaster Road, Thrybergh for Mr. T. Hewitt.

RB2007/0989 Erection of a detached dwellinghouse at land adjacent to 223 Page 45 Nursery Road, Dinnington for Turner Property Investments Ltd.

RB2007/1143 Extension to existing stables to form barn at land at Hooton Page 54 Lane, Laughton-en-le-Morthen for Mr. J. Hedger.

RB2007/1166 Erection of a building to form 4 No. industrial units at land at Page 61 Farfield Park, Manvers for National Floor Coverings Ltd.

RB2007/1179 Application to vary Condition 4 (opening hours) of Page 70 RB2000/0361 from 08.00-18.00 to 07.30-18.30 at 230 Wales Road, Kiveton Park for Little Explorers Day Care Nursery.

RB2007/1221 Erection of stable block at Falconer Farm, Smallage Lane, Page 75 Fence for Mr. Crump.

RB2007/1270 Details of the erection of 6 No. buildings to form 14 industrial Page 82 units with associated service yards and parking (being matters reserved in outline permission ref RB2003/0046 granted 06 April 2005 at land at High Field Spring, Catcliffe for Strategic Sites Ltd.

RB2007/1314 Erection of 9 No. two storey dwellinghouses with rooms in Page 89 roofspace & dormer windows and 2 No. two storey apartment buildings with rooms in roofspace & dormer windows (12 apartments in total) at land rear of 120-130 Whitehill Road, Brinsworth for Redwall Developments Ltd. Page 36

RB2007/1323 Change of use from shop to hot food takeaway at 25A Page 94 Brinsworth Lane, Brinsworth for S. A. Chowdhury.

RB2007/1365 Formation of new multi-use games area to include 5 m high Page 99 fence and floodlights at Winterhill School, High Street, Kimberworth for Winterhill School.

RB2007/1379 Demolition of public house and erection of 3 No. three storey Page 105 buildings to form 18 No. apartments at Lord Nelson PH, Laughton Road, Dinnington for Kingsbury Homes (UK) Ltd.

RB2007/1382 Erection of 2 No. two storey buildings to form 10 No. Page 111 apartments at land at King Street, Swallownest for Rustic Developments Ltd.

RB2007/1385 Extension to existing factory at Cepac Ltd., Brookfields Park, Page 117 Meadows Road Manvers for Cepac Ltd.

RB2007/1494 Application for variation of Condition 6 (landscaping scheme Page 122 to be submitted prior to commencement of development) imposed by RB2006/0241 to allow construction of access road prior to submission of landscape scheme at land at junction 33 M1 Motorway, Brinsworth for Junction 33 Development Ltd.

Page 37

REPORTTH TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON THE 27 SEPTEMBER 2007

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.

RB2007/0586

Outline application for the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 3 No. two storey dwellinghouses including details of access at Orchard House, 175 Doncaster Road, Thrybergh for Mr. T. Hewitt.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:-

Policy ENV1 Green Belt Policy ENV1.4 Land adjacent to the Green Belt Policy ENV 3. Development and the Environment Policy HG4.4 Back Land and Tandem Development PPG 2 Green Belts PPS 3 Housing

2. For the following reasons: It is considered that by way of its layout and density the proposal will have no adverse effect on residential amenity, or the character of the area and will be in accordance with all the referred to policies and advice.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC00] Before the commencement of the development, details of the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 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. Page 38

03 [PC18*] Detailed plans to be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this permission shall include a vehicular turning space for a fire appliance to be provided within the site curtilage and the development shall not be brought into use until such turning space has been provided. 04 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 05 [PC94] Not later than 7 days after the completion of the sale or lease of each dwelling , the developer shall procure from the SYPTE a Travel Master Pass and Journey Planner valid for one year on behalf of each household who shall be the first occupants of such a dwelling and the developer shall give details of the application and the date upon which it was made to the Council. 06 Any gates to be erected across the private drive shall be not less than 7m from the highway boundary. 07 The development hereby approved shall be constructed from coursed natural stone and clay pantiles, the details of which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, before the development is commenced on site. 08 The existing stone boundary wall fronting Doncaster Road shall be retained at its current height except where required for access purposes in accordance with the layout to be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. 09 There shall be no building erected on that part of the application site allocated Green Belt in the adopted Unitary Development Plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 10 No tree or hedge shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed nor shall any tree or hedge be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any pruning works approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work). If any tree or hedge is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree or hedge shall be planted in the immediate area and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 11 [PC40*] No work or storage on the site shall commence until all the trees/shrubs to be retained have been protected by the erection of a strong durable 2.30 metre high barrier fence in accordance with BS 5837: 2005 Guide for Trees in Relation to Construction. This shall be positioned in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The protective fencing shall be properly maintained and shall not be removed without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority until the development is completed. There shall be no alterations in ground levels, fires, use of plant, storage, mixing or stockpiling of materials within the fenced areas. 12 [PC36] The detailed plans to be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this permission shall include a tree survey in accordance with BS 5337:2005 Trees in Relation to Construction Recommendations section 4.2 to 4.5.to include all the existing Page 39

trees on and adjacent to the site that may be affected by any development and the following details;

1. Reference number (to be recorded on the tree survey plan to a scale and level of accuracy appropriate to the proposal); 2. Species (common and scientific names, where possible); 3. Height in metres; 4. Stem diameter in millimeters at 1.5 m above ground level (on sloping ground to be taken on the upslope side of the tree base) or immediately above the root flare for multi-stemmed trees; 5. Branch spread in metres taken at the four cardinal points to derive an accurate representation of the crown (to be recorded on the tree survey plan); 6. Height in metres of the crown clearance above adjacent ground level (to inform on ground clearance , crown stem ratio and shading); 7. Age class (young, middle aged, mature, over-mature, veteran); 8. Physiological condition (e.g. good, fair, poor, dead); 9. Structural condition, e.g. collapsing, the presence of any decay and physical defect; 10. Preliminary management recommendations, including further investigation of suspected defeats that require more detailed assessment and potential wildlife habitat; 11. Estimated remaining contribution in years (e.g. less than 10, 10-20, 20-40, more than 40) 12. R or A to C category grading (see table 1) to be recorded and indicated on the tree survey plan

In addition the following details shall also be submitted for consideration and approval. • root protection areas (RPA) • a tree constrains plan (TCP) • construction exclusion zones • tree protection plan (TPP) • arboricultural implication assessment (AIA) • arboricultural method statement (AMS) • existing and proposed contours and levels

13 [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 Rev B)(received 30/08/07)

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR00] No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority. 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 Page 40

[PR18] To enable a vehicle to enter and leave the highway in a forward gear in the interests of road safety. 04 [PR24B] To ensure 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 road safety and residential amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’. 05 [PR94] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 06 In the interests of highway safety. 07 In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan. 08 In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan. 09 In accordance with ENV 1 Green Belts of the Unitary Development Plan. 10 [PR37] 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 [PR40] To ensure the trees/shrubs are protected during the construction of the development 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’. 12. [PR36] In order that the Local Planning Authority may consider the desirability of retaining trees 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’. 13 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans

Page 41

Page 42

Notes for RB2007/0586

Background

Planning permission to convert the house to two flats was granted in 1964 (RH1964/4217).

The current application has been held in abeyance for amended details from the applicant.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The site is allocated partly residential and partly Green Belt on the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Policy ENV1 Green Belt

“A Green Belt whose boundaries are defined on the Proposals Map will be applied within Rotherham Borough. 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 (unless permitted development rights have been withdrawn), (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 and limited affordable housing for local community needs under development plan policies according with PPG2 (Green Belts) and PPG3 (Housing).”

Policy ENV1.4 Land adjacent to the Green Belt

“In areas adjacent to the Green Belt, development should be sympathetic to the visual amenity and environmental quality of the Green Belt.”

Policy HG4.4 Back Land and Tandem Development

“The Council will resist the development of dwellings in tandem except in cases of low density where further development would not be detrimental to the amenities and character of the area. In these exceptional circumstances, the Council will impose criteria relating to building height, space around the building, privacy, safety and vehicular access.”

Housing Guidance 2: Back land and tandem development states amongst other things that:

Page 43

“The Council will not look favourably upon proposals for the subdivision of individual residential plots where such development would lead to a reduction in existing levels of residential amenity due to overlooking and/or where, together with the precedent it would create, it would have an adverse impact on the character of a residential area and the efficiency of access arrangements by virtue of increased density and multiplicity of access provision.

Accordingly, due to the sensitive nature of the type of development being proposed, more restrictive standards will be applied regarding space about buildings and privacy than would be used in considering the details of a new housing estate or frontage development; also, the provision of habitable rooms at first floor level is less likely to be acceptable than in other circumstances.”

Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment

PPG 2 Green Belts indicates that their most important attribute is their openness.

PPS 3 Housing advocates the re-use of land and good quality development. It also states that development should be well integrated with and complement neighbouring buildings and the local area in terms of scale, density, layout and access.

Site Description

The site of application is a detached house standing in a large rectangular plot of approximately 0.15 hectares, of which approximately 0.03 hectares at the rear of the site is allocated Green Belt. The dwelling stands almost centrally on the site with an adjacent detached garage, an old stone outbuilding is located just inside the Green Belt boundary. The site is well screened by existing trees and walls with a 2m high stone wall fronting Doncaster Road on the eastern boundary. To the north and south is existing low density housing. Planning permission has recently been granted for residential development within garden areas on both sides of the property.

Proposals

The outline application is for the principle of demolition of the existing house and garage, and the erection of three detached houses with integral garages. Indicative plans submitted with the application show that the house furthest away from the highway will incorporate the existing stone out building. The means of access is to be considered at this time and will utilise the existing access.

A design and access statement has been submitted with the application which indicates that the proposal will be in keeping with the area, will not harm the character of the Green Belt, and that a precedent for residential development has been set on both sides of the site.

Publicity Page 44

The application has been advertised on site and in the press and adjoining residents notified. No representations have been received.

Consultations

Transportation Unit:

Has pointed out that the proposed access will be in close proximity to the access approved in relation to RB2006/2002 for two dwellings and the vehicular manoeuvring areas within the site, though does not consider that this would justify a refusal on highway grounds in this instance. It is therefore recommended that conditions for a turning space for a fire appliance, surfacing of vehicular areas, the issuing of Travel Master Passes, and the location of gates a minimum of 7m from the highway boundary be attached.

Director of Environmental Health:

Envisages no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution impact. It is recommended that an informative regarding disposal of waste during the demolition of the existing buildings on site.

Streetpride (Trees and Woodland Section):

Has no objections subject to relevant conditions.

Appraisal

The proposal is for residential development on a site allocated mainly for residential purposes, and partly as Green Belt. There is consequently an issue in this regard. However, the portion of the site allocated Green Belt is behind the existing stone built out building, well screened by mature trees and clearly historically used as garden. Additionally the indicative plans submitted with the application indicate that no development is proposed on that part of the site, other than the existing out building which is to be incorporated into one of the houses. Under the circumstances it is considered that there will be no material conflict with policy and advice in the Unitary Development Plan and that the principle of the development is acceptable subject to a condition preventing development on that part of the site within the Green Belt.

Other material considerations are:

(i) The residential amenities of the adjoining occupiers (ii) The site density and the effect on the character of the area (iii) The site access

(i) The residential amenities of the adjoining occupiers

The proposed development is for three detached houses all in substantial plots. Additionally the site is well screened by walls and mature hedges and trees. It is therefore considered that the proposal will have no material effect on the amenities of adjoining occupiers and will be in accordance with Policies ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan.

Page 45

(ii) The Site Density and effect on the character of the area:

The development would have a density of approximately19 dwellings per hectare. PPS 3 advocates the efficient use of recycled land and encourages higher densities. However, it also states that development should be well integrated with and complement, neighbouring buildings and the local area in terms of scale, density, layout and access. The development in the area is mainly detached houses in larger curtilages. Additionally no building is proposed on the small portion of Green Belt within the application site. It is therefore considered that the indicative proposal will have no adverse effect on the character of the area or the adjacent Green Belt and will be in accordance with ENV 1.4 Development Adjacent the Green Belt, ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment and advice in PPS 3 Housing. This issue will be considered more closely at the reserved matters stage.

(iii) The Site Access:

The Transportation Unit have expressed concern that the proposed access would be close to the access granted permission on adjacent land under RB2006/2002. However it is not considered that there are sufficient grounds to warrant refusal on highway grounds in this instance. In this respect the applicant’s were requested to amend the access location, and access the site through the adjoining property already granted permission, but declined to do so. Additionally, relocation of the access to the southern side of the site would reduce slightly the visibility in a northerly direction. Having regard for these factors and the precedent set for development either side of the site, it is therefore considered that the means of access, and form of development is on balance acceptable.

Having regard for all the above it is recommended that permission be granted.

RB2007/0989

Erection of a detached dwellinghouse at land adjacent to 223 Nursery Road, Dinnington for Turner Property Investments Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

Unitary Development Plan Policy HG4.4 ‘Backland and tandem development’ Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’

Government Guidance Page 46

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing

2. For the following reasons:

With regards to the impact on the properties on St Andrews Close, the dwelling has been designed in such a way that the only windows at first floor level facing the properties on St Andrews Close are non habitable and given the size, scale and design of the dwelling it is considered that the proposal would not result in a dwelling which would be overbearing to the occupiers of the properties on St Andrew’s Close and would not be significantly detrimental to their residential amenity.

The revised scheme sites the dwelling close to this footpath link given the constraints of the plot, and the desire to site the dwelling away from the nursery wall. Given the addition of windows overlooking the footpath link and the revision to the proposals to reduce the length of the two storey dwelling from 19 metres to approximately 12 metres it is considered that the revised dwelling would not have an overbearing impact on the footpath link between Troon Walk and Nursery Road, and as such would not be detrimental to the users of that footpath.

With regards to the access to the site, the Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposals subject to conditions regarding turning facilities and driveway width.

With regards to the appearance of the dwelling, as there are a mix of different house types, styles and sizes in the surrounding area it is considered that the proposed dwelling would not be out of character with the host property of no. 223 Nursery Road or the surrounding area.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [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 number TP/1)(received 19/05/2007) 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 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plan, before the development is brought into use, the existing vehicular access to Nursery Road shall be increased in width to 4.5 metres for a minimum distance of 10 metres measured from the highway boundary and shall be retained thereafter. 04 Page 47

Before the development is brought into use, the proposed turning area indicated on the submitted plan shall be provided and made available at all times for vehicular parking/turning purposes thereafter. 05 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 06 [PC38] Within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development, trees and/or shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme to provide for species, siting, planting distances,programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 07 [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 dwellinghouse is first occupied. 08 [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. 09 Prior to the commencement of any works of demolition on the site and at an appropriate time of year, a survey of bat activity including details for their protection and any necessary mitigation measures shall be undertaken by a suitable specialist. This shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and any subsequent mitigation measures shall be undertaken in accordance with the findings of the survey. 10 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details for the retention, repair and maintenance of the Nursery wall shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Such approved details shall thereafter be implemented before the development is first occupied and subsequently retained and maintained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 11 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995 as amended (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) no development included within class(es) A, B, C, D or E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Order shall be carried out without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans 02 Page 48

[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 In the interests of highway safety. 04 In the interests of highway safety. 05 [PR24A] 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 road safety. 06 [PR38] 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’. 07 [PR44] In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 08 [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’. 09 To ensure that the development does not adversely affect any bat habitat which is a protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. 10 In the interests of the architectural and historic value of the Nursery garden wall. 11 To protect the amenity of the neighbouring occupiers.

Page 49

Page 50

NOTES FOR RB2007/0989

Background

RB1990/0783 Outline for erection of residential development GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 24/01/91

RB1992/1284 Outline application for the erection of residential development CANCELLED 20/11/98

RB2004/2235 Outline application for the erection of two dwellings GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 20/12/04

RB2006/0256 Two storey and single storey side extension and enlargement of front porch GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 21/03/06

RB2006/1376 Erection of a detached dwellinghouse REFUSED 08/02/07

UDP Allocation and Policies

The site is allocated as residential in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. Policies which are applicable to this proposal include HG4.4 ‘Backland and Tandem Development’ and ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Policy HG4.4: Backland and Tandem Development, states that the Council will resist backland and tandem development except in cases of low housing density where further development would not be detrimental to the amenities and character of the area. In these exceptional circumstances, the Council will impose criteria relating to the building height, space around building, privacy, safety and vehicular access.

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 architectural style, relationship to the locality, scale, density, height, massing, quality of materials, site features, local vernacular characteristics, screening and landscaping”.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing is also applicable to this proposal which states that development should be well integrated with and complement neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access.

Site Description

No. 223 Nursery Road is a detached red brick building located within an extremely large plot. The property also has an attached stone extension, detached stone outbuildings and a tall garden nursery wall. The application site is abutted by modern residential developments. To the west of the site lies Nursery Road. To the north of the site is a public footpath which leads from Nursery Road to Troon Walk, whilst to the south are residential properties on St Andrews Close.

Proposals

Page 51

This is a full application for the erection of a dwellinghouse. A previous application for the erection of a single dwelling was refused in February 2007. An outline application was granted on this site for a dwellinghouse in 2004.

The previous application was refused on the following grounds:

“01 The proposal, by virtue of its size, scale and siting would form an overbearing structure, to the detriment of the residential amenity of the occupiers of nearby dwellings contrary to Policy ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment' of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. 02 The proposal, by virtue of its size, scale, design and siting would result in an overbearing impact and sense of enclosure to the users of the adjacent public footpath contrary to Policy ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment' of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. 03 The Applicant and/or Agent has provided insufficient plans to enable the Local Planning Authority to assess the suitability of the proposed turning head on the site”.

The resubmitted scheme has been amended from that previously refused by altering the design and appearance of the dwelling. The dwelling now proposed consists of a predominantly two storey dwelling with an additional single storey link giving access to a single storey double garage to the front of the property. The length of the dwelling has been slightly increased from that previously refused, from 19 metres to 21 metres, though the overall bulk and mass of the dwelling has been reduced with the two storey part of the dwellinghouse now approximately 11.5 metres as compared to the full 19 metre length refused previously.

The dwelling is proposed with hipped roof forms to both the two storey and garage element which gives an overall height from ground level at 7.0m and 4.2m respectively. The proposed single storey link is indicated at some 3.4 metres in height.

Publicity

This application has been publicised by neighbour notification with letters to 10, 11, 12, 14 and 17 St Andrews Close, 222, 223, 225 and 227 Nursery Road and 5 and 7 Troon Walk. Two letters of objection have been received from a neighbouring property raising the following:

• The development would form an overbearing structure on the residential amenity of the occupiers of all nearby dwellings; • It will still result in an overbearing impact and sense of enclosure to the users of the adjacent public footpath; • The house will block the view from the front of 5 Troon Walk; • The house will block the light from the front of 5 Troon Walk; • The house will affect the peace and quiet of Troon Walk; • The house will overlook the front of 5 Troon Walk.

Consultations

Page 52

The Council’s Transportation Unit were consulted on the proposal and have stated that there are no objections to the proposal subject to conditions.

Appraisal

In considering this proposal, regard has been paid to the residential amenity of adjacent properties, and the allocation of the site as residential within the Unitary Development Plan.

The proposal is a full application for the erection of a detached dwellinghouse. Prior to the refusal of the previous application in February 2007, an application was previously granted on this and additional land within the curtilage of no. 223 for outline permission for the erection of two detached dwellings with all matters reserved. The submitted plans indicated that this site formed Plot 1 utilising the current access for no. 223 Nursery Road. Plot 2 was to the rear of no. 223 Nursery Road adjacent to no. 10 St Andrews Close with access taken off St Andrews Close. Full planning permission was submitted for Plot 2 in 2006 and was subsequently granted (RB2006/0290).

With this revised application, the Agents have stated in their Design and Access statement that the main part of the house is similar to the one that has been built on the plot adjacent to 10 St Andrew’s Close but has been altered in dimension to make it suit the site. They also state that the “hipped roof has been provided in order to reduce the mass of the house as far as possible for the houses on St Andrew’s Close” and that “the house has been re-positioned in order to ensure that the whole of the house is not at the rear of 10 St Andrew’s Close”. Main habitable room windows are as previous on the western and eastern elevations with secondary dining room/kitchen windows on the southern elevation at ground floor. The distance between the dwelling and the boundary with 17 St Andrews Close is approximately 24 metres. The distance from the front wall of the proposed garage to the rear of no. 223 Nursery Road is approximately 11 metres to the outbuildings with the front wall of the main dwelling offset by a further 2.5 metres.

With regards to the impact on the properties on St Andrews Close, the dwelling has been designed in such a way that the only windows at first floor level facing the properties on St Andrews Close are non habitable and as such it is not considered that there would be significant harm to the privacy of the neighbouring properties. On the issue of loss of sunlight and overshadowing it is considered that neither the two storey or single storey elements of the proposed dwelling would unduly impact upon the neighbouring dwelling at St Andrews Close. It is noted in this respect that the dwelling would be orientated to the north of these dwellings and would be located some 12 metres distance at the closest point.

In terms of the impact on the properties on Troon Walk, it is considered that given the distance between the rear of the proposed dwelling and the front of 5 Troon Walk and the juxtaposition between the dwellings that there would be no significant impact upon the residential amenity of 5 Troon Walk in terms of overlooking, loss of light/view. Turning to the impact upon no. 7 Troon Walk to the side of the proposed dwelling, taking into account the siting of the proposed dwelling as well as incorporating a design with no habitable rooms on the first floor side elevation it is once again considered that there would be no significant harm caused to the residential amenities of this property.

Page 53

In terms of scale, the dwelling has been reduced in bulk and mass from that previously refused and the siting has been amended such that the main two storey part of the building is not located immediately to the rear of no. 10 St Andrews Close, although it is acknowledged that part of the proposed single storey link and garage extends both to the rear of no. 10 and partly along the boundary of the new dwelling erected adjacent, this is at a distance of approximately 14 metres from this dwelling. Additionally, whilst the main two storey element of the building would also partly project along the boundary with no. 11 St Andrews Close by approximately two metres, the new dwelling will be sited approximately 1.2 metres off the boundary with the properties on St Andrew’s Close. Overall it is considered that given the reduced height of the dwelling, the hipped roof nature, the reduction in size of the two storey element and the retention of the existing 3 metre high boundary wall, it is considered that the proposal would not result in a dwelling which would be overbearing to the occupiers of the properties on St Andrew’s Close and would not be significantly detrimental to their residential amenity.

On the matter of overlooking to no. 223 Nursery Road, it is acknowledged that an application for two storey and single storey extensions to replace the existing stone extension and outbuilding upon a similar footprint to the side of this dwelling were granted in 2006. However this permission remains to be implemented. Should however this permission be exercised the distance between the dwelling proposed and the extensions granted would be approximately 10 metres from the rear extensions to the front of the garage. Taking into account the juxtaposition between the two properties it is considered that there would be no significant increase in overlooking between the two properties the detriment of residential amenity to warrant a refusal of planning permission on this ground alone.

In respect of other matters, the existing nursery wall on the boundary between the site and the properties on St Andrew’s Close is not listed or within the Conservation Area but is very attractive and has been protected by planning conditions attached to planning permissions granted in the past on adjacent sites. The stone outbuilding attached to the wall is proposed to be demolished to accommodate the scheme, however the nursery wall is intended to be retained and a suitably worded condition is recommended to ensure that the wall is repaired and maintained to a suitable condition.

The previously submitted and refused application was submitted with a bat survey which at the time found no evidence of bats utilising the building although it was noted that the building had the potential to support breeding birds. Given that some time has lapsed in re-submitting a revised application it is considered appropriate under the circumstances that a fresh survey be undertaken to ensure that no protected species are present. A suitably worded condition is therefore recommended.

Turning to the objections received with regards to the closeness of the proposed dwelling with the footpath link between Troon Walk and Nursery Road, these have been noted. A reason for refusal on the previous application related to the impact of the development on the public footpath which runs to the north of the site. Concern was raised that the proposal would have an overbearing impact and sense of enclosure on this footpath due to its size, scale, design and siting.

As with the previously refused application the revised scheme sites the dwelling close to this footpath link given the constraints of the plot, and the desire to site the dwelling away from the nursery wall. The Agents have stated that windows have been sited along the elevation with the footpath comprising a tall window for the stairs, windows for Page 54

the study and utility room and windows with obscure glazing for the ground floor toilet and first floor en-suite bathroom. The information set out in the document Secured By Design is noted which relates to the siting of dwellings close to footpath links. This states that “it is important to avoid the creation of windowless elevations and blank walls adjacent to space where public have access” and goes on to state “where possible, provide at least one window, which can be at first floor level, to give views over the publicly accessible area”. In this instance, given the addition of windows overlooking the footpath link which will assist with passive surveillance and the revision to the proposals to reduce the length of the two storey dwelling from 19 metres to approximately 12 metres it is considered that the revised dwelling would not have an overbearing impact on the footpath link between Troon Walk and Nursery Road, and as such would not be detrimental to the users of that footpath.

With regards to the access to the site, the Council’s Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposals subject to the imposition of conditions regarding turning facilities and driveway width. As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable in this instance.

Finally with respect of the overall appearance of the dwelling, it is considered that the revised design is similar to that erected on land adjacent to 10 St Andrew’s Close. As there are a mix of different house types, styles and sizes in the surrounding area it is considered that the proposed dwelling would not be out of character with the host property of no. 223 Nursery Road or the surrounding area. As such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

In conclusion and taking into account the above, it is considered that the revised proposal overcomes the reasons for refusal from the previous application and as such complies with both national and local policies and guidance. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved with conditions.

RB2007/1143

Extension to existing stables to form barn at land at Hooton Lane, Laughton-en- le-Morthen for Mr. J. Hedger.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

Unitary Development Plan

Page 55

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: Green Belts

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered that the use of the land for the stabling of horses is not an inappropriate use as set out in PPG2 and as such an appropriately sized extension to allow for storage materials and feed for the horses is not considered to form inappropriate development.

The extension to the existing stables is to be of a similar size and design to the existing stables with the same materials proposed to be used. The size of the building has been significantly reduced from that previously refused and at 10m x 6m x 4m with materials to match the existing building is not considered to be harmful to the visual amenity of the Green Belt by reason of its siting, design and materials.

With regards to the impact on highway safety given the comments of the Transportation Unit the proposal is not considered to be harmful to highway safety and therefore is considered to be acceptable in this instance.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [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. (Floor plan, section a-a, Hayliedge role storage area, north view, south view, west/east view and site plan)(received 01/05/07) (Location plan (1:2500)(received 08/06/07) 02 [PC51] The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 03 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehciles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafer be maintained in a sound condition.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans 02 [PR51] 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’. Page 56

03 [PR24A] 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 road safety.

Page 57

Page 58

Notes for RB2007/1143

Background

RB2002/1660 Erection of stable block, tack room and feed room and construction of vehicular access GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 05/12/02

RB2006/0753 Erection of storage barn REFUSED 05/06/06

UDP Allocation and Policies

The land is allocated as Green Belt in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. Policies which are applicable to this application include ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ and ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: Green Belts is also applicable to this proposal.

Policy ENV1: Green Belt 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) agricultural and forestry (unless permitted development rights have been withdrawn; 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 limited infilling in existing villages and limited affordable housing for local community needs under development plan policies according with PPG2 (Green Belts) and PPG3 (Housing)”.

Paragraph 3.4 of PPG2 states “the construction of new buildings inside a Green Belt is inappropriate unless it is for the following purposes:

- agriculture and forestry - essential facilities for sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries and for other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land in it - limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings - limited infilling in existing villages”

Paragraph 3.15 of PPG2 states “the visual amenities of the Green Belt should not be injured by proposals for development within or conspicuous from the Green Belt which, Page 59

although they would not prejudice the purposes of including land in Green Belts, might be visually detrimental by reason of their siting, materials or design”.

Site Description

The site is a field of approximately 3 hectares on Hooton Lane, Laughton-en-le- Morthen. The site is close to the sewerage works (Hooton Bridge). The land contains an existing stable block, tack room and feed room as well as a pond, access road and secure wooden gates. The land is well screened from the main road by mature trees.

Proposals

This application is for the erection of an extension to the existing stables on the site to form a storage barn approximately 10m x 6m with an overall height of 4 metres. The barn is to be used as a storage area for hay.

This application is a re-submission of a previously refused application for the erection of a detached barn. This barn was to be adjacent to the existing stables at a size of approximately 20m x 7m x 4.8m. This application was refused on the following grounds:

“01 The site is within the Green Belt in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and Policy ENV 1 - Green Belts states that "In the Green Belt, development will not be permitted except in exceptional circumstances for purposes other than agriculture, forestry, recreation, cemeteries and other use, appropriate to a rural area". The Council does not consider, particularly having regard to the existing detached building including stable block, tack room and feed room on this small parcel of land, that there are any exceptional circumstances to justify the erection of an additional building in this location at a time when no viable agricultural use has been demonstrated at the site.

02 It is considered that due to its size and siting the building will constitute an unacceptable visual intrusion in the landscape, will be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt and in conflict with policies ENV 3, ENV 3.1, and ENV 3.2, of the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan”.

The applicant has confirmed that the extension to the barn will be constructed out of the same materials as the existing building, breeze block walls to be rendered and painted and red concrete roof tiles.

Publicity

This application was publicised by site notice and by neighbour notification with letters to 1 – 3 Slade View, 1-2 Coldwell View, 2 – 10 and The Croft, Abbey Lane, Cotswold House, Hooton Lane, and Slade Hollow, Coldwell, Railway Cottage, Robins Hill, Slade Hooton Hall, Slade Hooton Hall Farm, The Haynook, Pennate Cove, Manor Cottage and Greenfields, Laughton. Four letters of objection have been received including one from the Parish Council raising the following:

• the area is green belt and the location is of great historic value; • the site is not large enough to stable horses; Page 60

• any storage of expensive items on the site would attract thieves to the area; • the existing entrance is harmful to highway safety, any further vehicles using the access would be dangerous; • the barn construction is excessive, why is a large building required for such a small area of land; • If the barn is to be constructed of stone to match the existing building it will be a permanent fixture; • There are no horses in the stables so why is there need for a storage barn; • Problems with previous owner and so it would be unwise to allow the new owner to develop the land further; • Hay can be stored outside, why does it need to be stored in a barn; • The building will be converted to residential at a later date.

The applicant has requested a right to speak at the Planning Board meeting.

Consultations

The Council’s Transportation Unit does not consider that additional traffic generated by the proposed development would be significant and has no objections to the proposals.

Appraisal

The land is allocated for Green Belt purposes in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and as such appropriate agricultural or countryside recreation development is not considered to be inappropriate, in accordance with Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and the guidance contained in PPG2. In this proposal, the applicant has confirmed that the building is for a secure place to store machinery and equipment to maintain the land for grazing including a small tractor and trailer. In addition it will be used for a storage area for hay to be used as food for the horses. The previous refusal on the grounds that no viable agricultural use has been demonstrated on the land is noted. However, it is considered that the use of the land for the stabling of horses is not an inappropriate use as set out in PPG2 and as such an appropriately sized extension to allow for storage materials and feed for the horses is not considered to form inappropriate development. As such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ of the Unitary Development Plan and the guidance set out in PPG2.

In terms of the impact of the development in the Green Belt, Paragraph 3.15 of PPG2 states that the visual amenities of the Green Belt should not be injured by development by reason of their siting, design and materials. In this proposal the extension to the existing stables is to be of a similar size and design to the existing stables with the same materials proposed to be used. The size of the building has been significantly reduced from that previously refused and at 10m x 6m x 4m with materials to match the existing building is not considered to be harmful to the visual amenity of the Green Belt by reason of its siting, design and materials. As such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy ENV3.1 of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and would not be contrary to the guidance set out in PPG2.

With regards to the impact on highway safety as raised by the objector, given the comments of the Transportation Unit the proposal is not considered to be harmful to highway safety and therefore is considered to be acceptable in this instance.

Page 61

Other Issues Raised by Objectors

An objector has raised concern that storage of expensive items on the site will encourage thieves which will impact on the other residents in the locality. Although designing out crime can be a material planning consideration, storage of agricultural equipment in an agricultural barn is considered to be acceptable and therefore in this instance it is considered that little weight can be attached to this objection in this instance.

The objectors have also raised concern that as there were problems with the previous owner of the land and that the new owner should not be allowed to develop the land further. As land ownership is not a material planning consideration, no weight has been attached to this objection when considering the application.

Finally, reference to the conversion of the building to a residential use at a later date is not material as it would require planning permission in its own right which would be considered accordingly.

Conclusion

Given the above it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in its revised form and would not be harmful to the visual amenity of the Green Belt area. It is recommended that the application be approved with conditions.

RB2007/1166

Erection of a building to form 4 No. industrial units at land at Farfield Park, Manvers for National Floor Coverings Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant Planning Permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policies : EC1 Existing Industrial and Business Areas EC2.1 Sites for New Development (Site E5 Manvers 8) EC3.1 Land Identified for Industrial and Business Development ENV2 Conserving the Environment ENV3 Borough Landscapes ENV3.1 Development and the Environment T6 Location and Layout of Development

Page 62

2. For the following reasons:

The proposal is in accordance with the adopted Unitary Development Plan Policy EC1 ‘Sites for New Development’ which states: “Land allocated for future industrial and business uses in a variety of areas with particular emphasis on strategic locations close to the Borough’s primary transportation network at Manvers -Cortonwood, Templeborough, Waverley, Aldwarke and Dinnington. A variety of sites, in terms of size and location, will be made available: E9 Manvers 3”.

The proposal is not considered to have any adverse effect on the character of the area or on residential amenity and therefore, and is considered to comply with Policy EC3 ‘Land identified for Industrial and Business Development’.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC97] The permission hereby granted shall relate to the area 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 nos. N4627-501 and N4627-04 dated 26 July 2007). 02 The development hereby approved shall be used for Light industry B1 ( c ) (light industry) or B8 (warehouse) within the terms of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1987, and for no other purpose, except with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 03 [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. 04 [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. 05 [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. 06 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 07 [PC17*] Before the development is brought into use the sight lines indicated on the proposed car parking plan drawing no. N4627-501 shall be rendered effective by removing or reducing the height of anything existing on the land between the sight line Page 63

and the highway which obstructs visibility at any height greater than 900mm above the level of the nearside channel of the adjacent carriageway and the visibility thus provided shall be maintained. 08 [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. 09 [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. 10 [PC29] Before the development is commenced road sections, constructional and drainage details shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. 11 [PC95] Before the proposed development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives, modal split targets together with a time bound programme of implementation, monitoring and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of and give prior approval in writing to any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the programme of implementation. 12 Cycle parking facilities should be provided in accordance with the Council’s guidelines. 13 Details of a landscaping scheme for the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. This scheme shall be carried out during the first available planting season after the commencement of the development The landscape scheme shall be prepared by a Chartered Landscape Architect 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 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 work. 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 the appropriate standards and codes of practice within a timescale agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 14 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 Page 64

annual basis in September of each year and any defective work or materials discovered shall be rectified before 31st December of that year. 15 [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 and its implications on the health and safety of site workers and nearby persons, building structures and services, final end users of the site, landscaping schemes and environmental pollution, including ground water, and make recommendations so as to ensure the safe development and use of the site. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the survey and all recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer, prior to occupation of the site. 16 Prior to the commencement of development, a remediation statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. If remedial works are necessary, then the remediation statement will demonstrate how the works will render the site suitable for use and will describe the works in relation to the development hereby permitted. It shall include full details of any works to be undertaken, including the phasing of works, proposed site clean up criteria, site management procedures, contingencies and how the works will be validated. 17 If remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved remediation statement, a revised remediation statement shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised remediation statement. 18 At all times during the carrying out of operations authorised or required under this permission, 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 consultation 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. 19 Prior to the commencement of development, details of the proposed lighting to the public areas and car parks shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The lighting shall be installed in accordance with the agreed details. 20 Prior to the use being commenced, a scheme shall be submitted to the Council for approval in writing, indicating strategies to be implemented to enable local people access to job opportunities arising from the development site. Within 12 months of the use being commenced a statement shall be provided to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority demonstrating how occupants have complied with the above scheme. 21 Sustainable Drainage Solutions shall be provided in association with the drainage systems the requirements of which are set out above. 22 If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Page 65

Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the Method Statement detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. 23 No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. 24 No development shall take place until a report identifying how the predicted C02 emissions of the development will be reduced by at least 10% through the use of on-site renewable energy equipment, has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be constructed in accordance with the approved report.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. 02 For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the plans and particulars hereby approved. 03 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’. 04 [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’. 05 [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’. 06 [PR24A] 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 road safety. 07 [PR17] To provide and maintain adequate visibility in the interests of road safety 08 [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. 09 [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. 10 [PR29] No details having been submitted they are reserved for approval. 11 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 12 In the interests of sustainable transport choices. 13 Page 66

[PR38] 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’. 14 [PR38] 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’. 15 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 16 In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 17 In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 18 In the interests of local amenity, in accordance with Policy WM 1.3 of the adopted UDP 19 No details having been submitted they are reserved for subsequent approval. 20 In the interests of economic regeneration of settlements associated with the development site. 21. To reduce the risk of flooding, improve water quality and enhance the biodiversity value of the site. 22 To protect the water environment and ensure that the remediated site is reclaimed to an appropriate standard 23 To prevent the pollution of groundwater 24 In the interests of sustainability and to minimise the development's impact on climate change.

Page 67

Page 68

Notes for RB2007/1166

Background

RB1997/0382 Erection of B1, B2 and B8 premises with part of building being used for the coating of carpets with a bitumen backing.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber (2004)

Rotherham Unitary Development Plan (1999) Allocation: Industrial and Business Use. Development Site. Policy EC2.1 ‘Sites for New Development’ is relevant, within the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. This policy states that land is allocated for future industrial and business uses in a variety of areas with particular emphasis on strategic locations close to the Borough’s primary transportation network, including Manvers-Cortonwood.

Policies:-

EC1 Existing Industrial and Business Areas EC2.1 Sites for New Development EC3.1 Land Identified for Industrial and Business Uses ENV2 Conserving the Environment ENV3 Borough Landscapes ENV3.1 Development and the Environment T6 Location and Layout of Development

Site Description

The application site comprises approximately 1.31 ha (3.25 acres) of land off Farfield Park, which runs parallel to and south-west of Manvers Way in the midst of the former Enterprise Zone. In particular, the site lies across the roundabout stub road from applicant National Floor Coverings ‘Paragon’ factory, in a south-easterly direction.

The site boundary to Farfield Park is occupied by a tall hedge and a 2 metre high security fence.

Proposal

The application site has the benefit of full planning permission ref. no. RB1997/0382 granted on 15/05/1997 for the erection of B1, B2 and B8 premises with part of the building being used for the coating of carpets with a bitumen backing.

The current application RB2007/1166 is an application for full planning permission for the erection of 1 building comprising 4 separate industrial units. The total floorspace of the units is 2302m² of which 2142m² is industrial floorspace and 160m² is office space.

The names of the proposed occupiers of the building is declared as not known at present but the processes to be carried on there are described as ‘light industrial/warehousing’ and the relationship with existing uses on or near the site as ‘ancillary units adjacent to existing buildings and short term let’. Page 69

Normal daily traffic flow is estimated as ‘4 rigid vehicles’.

The drawings submitted with this application (as amended) show that it is the intention to erect a building measuring approximately 80 metres long X 28 metres wide, 7.5 metres to the eaves and 9.5 metres to the ridge adjacent to the south-east boundary of the site. The building has a brick plinth, but all walls, soffits, eaves and roofs are in profiled Kingspan steel cladding in 4 colours. Apart from fire doors all windows and operational door openings are on the front elevation.

The proposed site layout drawing N4627-01 shows a new 9 metre wide access with 2 X 1.8 metre footways from Farfield Park at a point approximately 60 metres from the roundabout. 44 car parking spaces are shown on this site plan.

The application is accompanied by a brief Design and Access Statement which contains the following information:-

• The proposal is for the development of land adjacent to the existing manufacturing and warehouse facility providing a new site entrance and a 2300m² unit for light industrial useage, including associated service yard and parking. • The building will be sub-divided into 4 equal units each providing approx. 536m²industrial floorspace and 40m²offices/welfare facilities, incorporating an access toilet to each unit. • This will be a steel portal frame structure with steel faced profile cladding and masonry cavity wall construction up to 2200mm above finished floor level.

Publicity

The occupiers of nearby business premises were advised of the application by letter. The application was also advertised by means of a site notice.

A letter has been received from the Finance Director of Purex at plot 6 Farfield Park in which she makes the following points:-

• The proposed development is opposite the Purex access. Care should be exercised in selecting the position of the access to this site. It would be helpful if the 2 access points were staggered and not opposite. • Consideration should be given to restricting the use of the building so that the local environment is not polluted. Purex have suffered from the smell from the bitumen process and will be opposed to any similar process being carried out in this building.

Consultations

The Transportation Unit have no objections to the development, subject to conditions.

Appraisal

This is an application for full planning permission for the erection of a building to form 4 no. industrial units. Part 2 of the application form indicates that the units will be used for light industrial/warehousing purposes.

Page 70

The whole of the site area is allocated for Industrial and Business Use in the Unitary Development Plan. In this respect the proposal complies with policies EC1, EC2.1 and EC3.1 of the UDP.

The units which are essentially industrial in appearance have a single unified design, with the main windows and door openings on the front elevation. The designer has made an effort to alleviate the continuous bulk and massing of the structure by incorporating a 2 metre high brick plinth and 4 separate colour matches to the steel cladding. In these respects the design is equivalent to the general standard that is found at Manvers and in some respects superior to it. It is therefore, considered that Policy ENV3.1 has been complied with.

The site plan includes details of pedestrian and vehicular access, car parking, circulation space and cycle parking. It is considered that the development complies with Policy T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’

Although there is a clear intention to incorporate landscaping into the site development the detail of this is absent from the amended site plan Drg. No. N4627-501. An additional landscape condition is suggested.

In conclusion, it is considered that the details submitted are satisfactory and that the principle of developing this site with B1(c) light industrial and B8 warehouse units is acceptable, as is the means of access to the site. In addition the design, site layout and appearance of the development is reasonable. In consequence, the proposals satisfy each of the UDP policies listed.

The proposed development is therefore, considered to be acceptable in principle and in detail and in the absence of any material considerations that might indicate otherwise, the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RB2007/1179

Application to vary Condition 4 (opening hours) of RB2000/0361 from 08.00-18.00 to 07.30-18.30 at 230 Wales Road, Kiveton Park for Little Explorers Day Care Nursery.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution. HG 1 Existing Housing Areas. Page 71

2. For the following reasons: It is considered that subject to the recommended conditions the proposal will not have any additional materially adverse effect on the residential amenities of adjoining occupiers by way of noise and general disturbance and consequently there will be no conflict with the referred to policies.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC73*] The use hereby permitted shall only be open to customers or for deliveries between the hours of 07:30 and 18:30 Mondays to Fridays.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR73] In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’.

Page 72

Page 73

Notes for RB2007/1179

Background

Planning permission was granted for change of use from a dwelling to a day care nursery for 36 children, subject to conditions for surfacing of vehicular areas, closing of an existing access, installation of a one way traffic system, restriction of the number of pupils to 36, and operating hours of 08:00 to 18:00 hrs (RB2000/361).

Permission to vary condition 5 (relating to the number of children) attached to the planning permission was granted in 2002 so that the number of children could increase from 36 to 52 (RB2002/895).

Development Plan Allocation

The site is allocated residential on the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Policy HG1 Existing Housing Areas states that existing housing areas shall be retained primarily for that purpose and only development which is ancillary and does not adversely affect the residential amenity or character will be allowed.

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:

(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.”

Site Description

The site of application is a large detached house standing in a substantial corner plot, fronting Wales Road. The property is bounded to the north and west by existing residential properties, and to the south and east by Wales Road and Lodge Hill Drive, respectively.

Page 74

Proposals

The proposal is for variation of condition 4 attached to the original planning permission (RB2000/361), so that the opening hours can be changed from 08.00 to 18.00 Monday to Fridays, to 07.30 to 18.30 hours Monday to Friday, to provide a more flexible service for customers.

Publicity

Adjoining residents were notified of the proposal and a notice was posted on site. No representations have been received

Consultations

Director of Environmental Health Services:

Points out that the site is adjacent residential properties, though notes that no complaints regarding noise from the premises have been received to date, and has no objections to the proposal.

Transportation:

No objections to the proposal.

Appraisal

The proposal is to increase the operating hours of the premises to better facilitate customer requirements. The main consideration is the effect of the additional hours on the residential amenities of adjoining occupiers. In this respect the use is existing and is ancillary to the residential nature of the area. Additionally the Director of Environmental Health has indicated that no complaints, regarding noise from the premises have been received to date and has no objections to the proposals. The premises have been in operation now for approximately seven years. Finally no objections have been received from neighbouring residents to the proposals.

It is therefore considered that the new opening hours will not result in any additional materially adverse effect on the amenities of adjoining occupiers and it is recommended that permission be granted.

Page 75

RB2007/1221

Erection of stable block at Falconer Farm, Smallage Lane, Fence for Mr. Crump.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts Policy CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution PPG2 Green Belts

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered that the proposed development will be essential for the use of the site for open recreation and that by way of the design, scale, siting and materials of the building it will have no adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt in accordance with all the above referred to Policy and advice.

Conditions Imposed : 01 The premises shall only be used for the stabling of domestic animals and shall not be used for any business purpose. 02 No manure or waste materials from the stables shall be burned on the site and shall be disposed of in a manner so as not to cause detriment to the residential amenities of the nearby residents. 03 [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 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. 04 [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 07-007-01 Revision C received 20th August 2007) 05 [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 In the interests of highway safety and the residential amenities of nearby residents, and in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Unitary Development Plan. 02 In the interests of the residential amenities of nearby residents and in accordance with Policy ENV 3.7 Control of Pollution of the Unitary Development Plan. 03 [PR38] 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’. 04 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans 05 [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’.

Page 77

Page 78

Notes for RB2007/1221

Background

26 planning applications have been determined in the vicinity of the application site. The most relevant are:

RB1999/1350 - Notice of intent to erect a Dutch barn – No Objections

RB2005/2238 - Conversion of barn to residential and retention of storage building. Permission was refused for Green Belt reasons and a subsequent appeal dismissed. An Enforcement Notice dated 26 September 2006 has been served requiring the removal of the storage building from the land.

Permission for a similar stable to that currently proposed was granted on adjacent land in 2002 (RB2002/742).

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The site is allocated Green Belt.

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ states: A Green Belt whose boundaries are defined on the Proposals Map will be applied within Rotherham Borough. 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 (unless permitted development rights have been withdrawn)

(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,

Policy CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside states:-

“Proposals for sporting and recreational activities in the countryside will be acceptable providing that:-

(i) they would not detract from the open character of the Green Belt in any location which is particularly vulnerable because of its prominence or narrowness, (ii) they would not materially detract from the surrounding landscape character, (iii) they would not give rise to undue disturbance caused by excessive noise or the attraction of large numbers of people or excessive traffic, (iv) they are sited and designed so as to avoid any adverse impact on identified heritage interest or agricultural interests, and (v) they can satisfy other relevant policies of the Plan.”

Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment

Page 79

Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution states:

“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:

Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: ‘Green Belts’ (PPG2) underpins Policy ENV1 Green Belts regarding development in such areas and indicates that the most important attribute of Green Belts is their openness.

Site Description

The site of application is a field to the south west of Falconer Farm, a group of barns converted to residential accommodation in the early 1990s. The complex includes the farm buildings, a large Dutch barn erected under Agricultural Permitted Development rights, and a storage building which is the subject of the above referred to Enforcement Notice. The existing buildings are to the north of Falconer Lane and at a higher level than the application site. The land falls away fairly steeply from the level of the existing buildings in a south westerly direction, the slope being particularly pronounced in front of the Dutch Barn. The land is rough pasture.

Proposals

The applicant proposes to erect a relatively modest stable block, having a hipped roof and constructed from stone with a pantile roof. The block would be located at the foot of the steep slope in front of the Dutch Barn, measure 9.6m by 6.5m with a 4.35m high apex, and comprise a stable, tack room and loose box/hay store. The plans have been Page 80

amended at my request to remove an ornate ventilator on the roof which was considered to be out of character with the site.

The applicant’s design and access statement states that:

“The proposed development is an appropriate use for the site and suitable for the semi rural context.”

There is a demonstrable need for good quality stabling in this location which is demonstrated by the high occupancy levels of the existing stabling available locally.

It incorporates materials compatible with the local vernacular and the context of local development, comprising:

- Coursed rubble walling to match the other existing buildings on site. - Traditional joinery stable doors etc, with galvanised strap hinges and ironmongery etc - Clay pantile roof covering”.

Publicity

Adjoining occupiers were notified and one letter of objection has been received. It states that:

• the stables would not be used for the correct purpose • the applicant has already built a Dutch barn, which is not used for agricultural purposes and spoils the views from our property. • the applicant has erected a conservatory and an extension without permission • the applicant has some dog kennels that he built without planning permission that gives off an awful smell.

A letter of objection has also been received from the Parish Council who consider that the development would be “unnecessary over development of the site, which is located in the Green Belt within an area of meadowland”.

The correspondence will be on deposit in the Member’s Room prior to the meeting.

Consultations

Transportation Unit:

Notes that the stables are for the applicant’s use only and will be accessed from the existing vehicular access to Smallage Lane. On this basis they have no objections to the proposals.

Director of Environmental Health:

No objections subject to a condition relating to no burning of manure.

Appraisal

Page 81

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ states that development will not be permitted except in very special circumstances for purposes other than development essential for the use of agriculture, forestry, open recreation, cemeteries and other uses appropriate to a rural area. The guidance goes on to state that the erection of new buildings for uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt will be acceptable.

The main considerations with regard to the proposal are:

a. The appropriateness of the development b. The effect on the openness of the Green Belt. c. The impact on local residents. d. Other issues raised by objectors. a. The appropriateness of the development:

The keeping of horses is an acceptable use within the Green Belt and development in connection with that use would not be inappropriate provided it is essential and modest in size. The applicant’s agent has submitted a letter in support indicating that the stables are for purely domestic purposes and would enable the applicant to keep his two horses on site. The horses are currently kept at livery in Eckington which is approximately 8 miles away.

It is also pointed out that by way of the size, design and location, at the top of a steep incline, the existing Dutch barn building adjacent would not be suitable for the stabling of the horses. The proposed siting of the stable block at the bottom of the steep bank would allow the horses to exit straight onto the adjacent grazing land.

Having regard or these factors and the scale of the development it is considered that the proposal would not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt and thereby be in accordance with ENV1 and PPG2 Green Belt. b. The effect on the openness of the Green Belt:

The proposed stables would be located at the bottom of a steep incline in front of the complex of buildings which is Falconer Farm. The building would therefore be seen against a backdrop of the hillside which, with the aid of additional planting, would serve to substantially soften the development. Additionally the building would be sufficiently close to the adjacent Dutch barn at the higher level to relate to it, and not be isolated in the landscape. Having regard for these factors it is considered that subject to appropriate landscaping the development would not have a materially adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt in this location and would not therefore prejudice advice in Policy ENV1 and PPG2 Green Belts. c. The impact on local residents:

The principle impact of the proposal on local residents would be noise and general disturbance from traffic movements associated with the development and potential smell issues. It is considered that these will be minimal and can be addressed by way of conditions to ensure that the stables would be used for domestic purposes only and to control burning of manure. d. Other issues raised: Page 82

The other matters raised relate to other developments in the area and not to the stables themselves.

Having regard for all the above it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and it is recommended that permission be granted.

RB2007/1270

Details of the erection of 6 No. buildings to form 14 industrial units with associated service yards and parking (being matters reserved in outline permission ref RB2003/0046 granted 06 April 2005) at land at High Field Spring, Catcliffe for Strategic Sites Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR GRANT

The local Planning Authority has decided to grant approval of reserved matters:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations:

UDP POLICIES

EC3 - Industrial and Business Development EC3.1 - Land Identified for Industry and Business Use ENV2 - Conserving the Environment ENV2.3 – Maintaining the Character and Quality of the Environment ENV3.1 - Development and the Environment

2. For the following reasons:

The proposal complies with the policies and Guidance referred to above being capable of meeting environmental and ecological concerns subject to condition and accords to the development plan overall. The proposed industrial buildings and associated service yards and car parking does not result in any visual detriment in the locality and would not cause any significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution.

3. The foregoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant approval of reserved matters. More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s Report and the application case file and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC91*] The development shall only take place in accordance with the submitted details and specifications shown on the plans. (08)001 Rev PL1, (07)001 Rev PL1, (07)002 Page 83

Rev PL1, (07)003 rev PL1, (07)004 Rev PL1, (07)005 Rev PL1, (07)006 Rev PL1), (06)005 PL3 02 [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. 03 [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. 04 Before the development is brought into use the sight lines indicated on the submitted plan shall be rendered effective by removing or reducing the height of anything existing on the land between the sight line and the highway which obstructs visibility at any height greater than 900mm above the level of the nearside channel of the adjacent carriageway and the visibility thus provided shall be maintained. 05 The proposed vehicular access into the service yard fronting unit FO3 shall remain open at all times to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority 06 Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 07 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.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR91] To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. 02 [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’. 03 [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. 04 To provide and maintain adequate visibility in the interests of road safety. 05 To enable vehicles to turn at the end of the cul de sac. 06 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 road safety. 07 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.

Page 84

Page 85

Notes for RB2007/1270

Background

Members may recall granting conditional permission RB2003/0046 in April 2005 for Outline approval for development of the Advanced Manufacturing Park including uses in Classes B1 and B2 with related infrastructure and landscaping at Waverly Advanced Manufacturing Park. This application was also subject to a Section 106 agreement to secure matters such as the provision of footway and bridleway over the Sheffield Parkway, contributions to highway improvements/bus services and an employment strategy for local people to access job opportunities as a result of the development.

The present proposal forms a reserved matters application for the details of the siting, design, external appearance and means of access to matters reserved in this outline permission.

The proposed development falls within the description contained at paragraph 10(b) ‘Urban development Projects’ of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Ass4ssment) Regulations 1999 and meets the criteria set out in column 2 of the table in that schedule in that the size of the site exceeds the 0.5 hectare threshold. The Borough Council as the relevant Local Planning Authority, has taken into account the criteria set out in Schedule 3 to the 1999 Regulations, and is of the opinion that the development would not be likely by virtue of factors such as its nature, size or location. Accordingly the Authority has adopted the opinion that the development is not EIA development as defined in the 1999 Regulations and this opinion has been placed on the Planning Register

UDP Allocations and Policies

The application site is allocated for Industrial and Business Use within the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

The following policies are the most relevant to the site:-

EC3 - Industrial and Business Development EC3.1 - Land Identified for Industry and Business Use are relevant to the proposal, as they aim to encourage industrial and business activities, subject to no adverse effects within the Borough ENV2 - Conserving the Environment ENV2.3 – Maintaining he Character and Quality of the Environment ENV3.1 - Development and the Environment

Site Description

The application site is located within the larger AMP site located to the east of the Sheffield parkway, and to the south of Poplar Way and the Big W/Morrisons development.

The application site itself runs parallel alongside High Field Spring Road at its junction with a proposed roundabout and adjacent to the central primary existing sub station. Abutting the application to the north is the recently constructed Innovation Technology Centre. Page 86

The site has been reclaimed and restored with development plateaus which rise away from High Field Spring Road to the west. The application site is currently grassed and overgrown.

Proposal

The application seeks reserved matters approval for the erection of 6 no. buildings to form 14 industrial units with associated service yards and car parking on approximately 28,127sq.m. of land.

Although the High Wall rips through the central part of the site the site has been so designed either side to create an inward looking series of court spaces which provides access, parking, servicing and manoeuvring areas.

The proposal envisages 10125sq.m. of buildings overall on the application site with the division of uses being 1622sq.m. Offices and 8503sq.m. Industrial use. It is proposed to provide 229 car parking spaces, 60 cycle spaces and 20 disabled parking spaces within the development.

There are no public rights of way across the site.

The applicant has submitted the following documents to accompany the application:-

Design and Access Statement Flood Risk Statement Ecology Report Contamination and Ground Report Landscaping Scheme Traffic Assessment PPS6 Statement Drainage details Travel Plan

Publicity

The application has been advertised by means of site notice, local press notice and individual notification to adjoining neighbouring industrial units.

As a result of this publicity one letter of objection has been received from a local resident who wishes to object to the application for the following reasons:-

• Increase in traffic generated by proposal will impact on the roads around Catcliffe and create extra pollution in an already highly polluted area. Questions whether a Traffic Impact assessment has been carried out. • Question whether there is an existing right of way through the site that accesses the proposed parkway bridge • Main objection is concerns about surface water and sewage disposal having regard to recent flooding. Feel there is inadequate information included with the application to assess this issue Page 87

• Concerns that it was originally indicated the AMP site would be a showpiece development but feel the development proposed is just like any other industrial sites.

The objector has requested to speak against this application at the Board meeting.

Consultations

Transportation Unit – originally offered concerns to the proposal but following receipt of amended plan which have addressed these concerns now offer no objections to the proposal subject to the imposition of relevant conditions

Environmental Health – no objections to the proposal subject to condition requiring the roads to be kept free from mud and dust during construction of the development. Conditions attached to the related outline permission secure these requirements.

Access Officer – no objections

South Yorkshire Architectural Liaison Officer – no objections but recommends the application is built to Secure by Design standards. An informative to this effect will be attached to any decision issued

Appraisal

As previously reported this site being the second phase of the whole development site for an Advanced Manufacturing Park, including businesses within class B1 and B2 of the Use Classes Order has the benefit of outline planning permission. The present proposal forms the submission of details for consideration related to that permission.

The applicant’s feel these new buildings will offer the AMP further development reinforcing its position as a leading industrial, research and development park.

The design and layout of the site have been given careful consideration. It is proposed that one large building facilitating a workshop and office space being covered by a pair of intersecting mono-curved pitched roof be located in the top north-east corner of the site, a series of smaller hybrid units line the south-east corner along High Field Springs which are single mono pitched units, and directly opposite and in the south-west corner, larger hybrid units with intersecting mono-curved pitched roofs that will hide the embankment behind. In the north-west are smaller mono pitched hybrid units. The majority of the buildings tend to be single volume buildings with clear internal heights of 6m. It is considered the designs and variety of roofscape will add interest to the area and would be visually acceptable.

A pedestrian route through the site links the north-south accesses. There is also proposed a pedestrian route from the internal court spaces to High Fields Spring adjacent to the primary sub-station linking the site to proposed bus stops.

A landscaping scheme has been proposed for the site, amended details have been received which now provide for a tree lined planting strip along the axis along the frontage of the site creating a ‘green’ corridor through the larger AMP site which it is considered will enhance the visual quality of the estate.

Page 88

The flood risk assessment raises no concerns from the Environment Agency as the site is not located within a floodplain. There are therefore no significant risks from flooding to the buildings proposed, nor is the proposed development predicted to cause flooding problems in the area.

The disposal of surface water as agreed with the Environment Agency and Yorkshire water is to discharge into an attenuation lake on the adjacent Orgreave development site. This matter is yet to be confirmed and requires to be agreed prior to the commencement of development on the site as required by condition attached to the related outline approval.

The PPS6 statement accompanying the application has justified the need for the high office content of the larger of the units being that the end use is as a research facility not as a factory. As such there will be a need to deliver very large machines and therefore a requirement for a service yard which makes an inner city location completely unacceptable. This justification is accepted and it is felt by the granting of these reserved matters the proposal would not effect the viability or vitality of Rotherham town centre.

It has been confirmed that there are no ecological issues within the site that would prevent commencement of the development. However, whilst no nesting birds were recorded at the time of the assessment it is recommended that unless the proposed works commenced before 1 September 2007 a repeat walkover survey be carried out to establish whether any ground-nesting birds are within the area. It is intended to deal with this requirement by the imposition of an informative attached to the decision notice issued.

No issues were raised as a result of the submitted Contamination and Ground Report

The Traffic Assessment Report and Travel Plan have been examined and their contents are considered to be acceptable

Conclusion

In the light of the above it is considered that the proposal complies with the policies and Guidance of the Rotherham UDP and all other material considerations. As such the proposal is capable of meeting environmental and ecological concerns subject to condition and accords to the development plan overall. The proposed industrial buildings and associated service yards and car parking do not it is considered result in any visual detriment in the locality and would not cause any significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution.

Page 89

RB2007/1314

Erection of 9 No. two storey dwellinghouses with rooms in roofspace & dormer windows and 2 No. two storey apartment buildings with rooms in roofspace & dormer windows (12 apartments in total) at land rear of 120-130 Whitehill Road, Brinsworth for Redwall Developments Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

Reasons for Refusal : 01 The proposed development would be contrary to the Council’s general practice which seeks to restrict the number of dwellings served by a private drive to five so as to ensure that the future maintenance of streets serving more than five dwellings is provided for by adoption by the Council. 02 The Council further considers that the proposed development does not bear a good relationship to the locality by virtue of its density of 84 dwellings per hectare. In these respects it fails the tests of PPS3 ‘Housing’ which suggests that developments should integrate well and complement the surrounding area in terms of scale, density, layout and access. 03 The Council considers that the proposed development will have a detrimental affect on the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties on Whitehill Road and Whitehill Drive by virtue of overlooking and loss of privacy to their private garden areas due to the close proximity of first floor habitable room windows of the apartments.

Page 90

Page 91

Notes for RB2007/1314

Background

There have been 22 applications received with the application site’s boundary which have all been for the erection of detached garages.

The site is owned by the Council and was marketed for sale as a residential development in spring 2006. Within the Heads of Terms of the sale it was stressed that access arrangements to the site would have to be improved. This included provision of improved visibility splays at the entrance to the site.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The land is located within an area allocated as Residential in the Rotherham UDP. As such, UDP policy, HG4,3 ‘Windfall Sites’, HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ are the principal policies material to the determination of the application.

In addition the provisions of PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Communities’ PPS3 ‘Housing’ and PPG13 ‘Transport’ are also material.

Site Description

The site relates to an area previously used to support domestic garages which served properties on Whitehill Drive. The garages have since been removed but their hard surfaces still remain. The site has a derelict appearance which is characterised by self set shrubs.

Residential properties of Whitehill Road and Whitehill Drive abut the site’s boundary on all elevations. These properties are semi detached and are afforded with large gardens of approximately 22m which back onto the site. Access to the site is taken via a narrow lane between no.s 124 and 126 Whitehill Road.

Proposals

The application is for full planning permission for the erection of 9no. Two Storey dwelling houses and dormer windows and 2no. Two Storey apartment buildings with rooms in the roof space and dormer windows (12 Apartments in total) at land to the rear of 120-130 Whitehill Road, Brinsworth.

The details of the proposed properties are as follows;

• 7 x Three bed houses • 2 x Four bed houses • 6 x One bedroom apartments • 6 x two bedroom duplex apartments

The site area measures approximately 0.25hectares, the addition of the proposed 21 residential units equates to a density of 84 dwellings per hectare. Parking is provided on a 1:1 ratio in addition two visitor parking bays are provided.

Page 92

The dwelling houses are provided with gardens to their front and rear elevations and the apartments are served with a shared amenity area to their rear elevations.

Publicity

The application has been advertised by way of a site and press notice, and adjacent properties have been consulted in writing. One letter of objection has been received, the reasons for which can be summarised as follows;

• Loss of privacy from the apartments which will overlook adjacent properties • The development will result in a significant increase in vehicular movement s to the site. • Lack of provision for visitor parking.

There have been two requests for a right to speak.

Consultations

Highways: - The proposed layout is deficient in terms of carriageway width and footway provision. In addition it provides a substandard turning facility for a refuse vehicle. This would result in a private driveway serving 21 dwellings which is contrary to the Council’s design guide; ‘Better Places to live in South Yorkshire’ and the recently published ‘Manual for Street’s’. As such it is recommended that the application should be refused.

Main Drainage: - No comments have been received.

Environmental Health: - No objections subject to recommended conditions.

Landscape Design: - No comments have been received.

Yorkshire Water: - No objections subject to recommended conditions.

Brinsworth Parish Council: - Concerned with regards to the access and sight lines provided at the access to the site from Whitehill Road.

South Yorkshire Police: - No objections acknowledge that the proposal achieves secure by design standard.

Appraisal

The application site is allocated for residential purposes within the adopted Unitary Development Plan. The site had previously supported garages and as such falls within the definition of being a ‘Brownfield’ site. Therefore the principle of the development of the site for residential purposes is acceptable in land use terms.

The main issue to arise from this application relates to the access arrangements to the site. The proposal will see the introduction of 21 units to the site, the proposal does not incorporate a highway which is of an adoptable standard and as such it is recommended that the application is refused.

Page 93

The Highways Authority encourages developers to minimise the use of private drives for communal use, it is advocated that that adoptable areas should be extended wherever possible. The location of mains or other services to a number of dwellings within a private curtilage can lead to friction between residents and difficulties for the utilities of gaining access in an emergency. Statutory undertakers are, for this reason, generally opposed to the concept of shared private drives.

It has been the Council’s long established practice to restrict the number of new dwellings served from a private drive. For many years this was restricted to a maximum of three (in accordance with the former South Yorkshire County Council Design Guide for Residential Roads, Section 5). The Council raised this number to five dwellings several years ago to accord with the guidance in Design Bulletin 32 (second Edition) which stated that “Shared driveways are un-adopted paved areas that may serve the driveways of up to five houses” These standards are still advocated both within ‘The Manual for Streets’ and the ‘South Yorkshire Design Guide’ and the Council still enforces this standard on all new developments for more than five dwelling houses. This policy has also been up held at appeal (APP/P4415/A/02/1088365). In addition theses issues could not be addressed by way of a condition, as that would relate to land which is outside of the application site boundary and as such would be unenforceable.

Objections received to this proposal raise issue with the overdevelopment of the site. The addition of 15 no flats on this site results in a density of approximately 144 dwellings per hectare which is significantly higher than the density of the surrounding area. PPS3 suggests that more intensive development of a site is not always appropriate. However, when well designed and built in the right location, it can enhance the character and quality of an area.

The scheme as submitted will provide accommodation at a density of approximately 84 dwellings per hectare (dph) which is considered to be a significantly above the minimum 30 dwellings per hectare suggested by PPS3. Whilst PPS3 does not suggest a maximum density threshold, in this instance it is considered that the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site which is not in keeping with the grain/density of the locality.

The Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance for residential infill Plots states that there should be 20 metres minimum between principal elevations and that any elevation situated less than 10 metres from a boundary with another residential curtilage should contain no habitable room windows at first floor level, nor should it contain a window or door to any habitable room or kitchen at ground floor level unless there is adequate screening to prevent loss of privacy. Although this guidance relates specifically to infill on corner plots, it is nonetheless applied as a desirable standard on all new developments. In this regard it is considered that the location of the two storey apartments within 6 metres of the rear boundary of Whitehill Road and Whitehill Drive is unacceptable, as the development could result in a loss of privacy. Therefore the objections raised in this regard are supported.

In conclusion it is recommended that the application should be refused. The proposal is contrary to the Council’s Policy on the number of properties served by a private drive, and the design and layout of the scheme is considered contrary to UDP policies ENV3.1 and HG5 which strive to enhance the quality of the residential environment by ensuring new developments make a positive contribution. Page 94

RB2007/1323

Change of use from shop to hot food takeaway at 25A Brinsworth Lane, Brinsworth for S. A. Chowdhury.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policies

ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ RET1.1 ‘Shopping Environment’ RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’

2. For the following reasons:

The Council considers that the proposed use would not have an adverse effect on the amenities of the area or on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. It would represent an acceptable use that would be in-keeping with the ambience and character of this local retail area, would add convenience and value to the area, would not detrimentally effect the viability and vitality of this area and would be in line with the guidance contained within the policies above.

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. Page 95

03 The use hereby permitted shall be open to customers between the hours of 1700hrs- 2300hrs Sundays to Thursdays and 1700hrs and 23:30hrs on Fridays and Saturdays.

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’.

Page 96

Page 97

Notes for RB2007/1323

Background

There have been 6 previous applications at the premises, the last of which were received in 1991 and were for alterations to the shop front. Records indicate that the premises have supported an A1 purpose since 1973.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The site is allocated for Retail Use within the adopted Unitary Development Plan. Planning Policy RET1.1, ‘Shopping Environment’ and RET6, ‘Local Shopping provision’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV 3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ are material to the determination of this application.

Site Description

The applicant premises are located within a local shopping parade which fronts onto Brinsworth Lane. The site occupies the end premises of a local shopping parade which supports seven units, at present the premises are vacant having previously supported a florists.

The local shopping parade is separated into two distinct parts either side of Poplar Drive. Within the parade adjacent to the applicant site there are a further four units, these support both A1 (retail) and A5 (takeaway) uses. To the front of the parade there is designated parking provision for approximately 7 vehicles.

Proposals

The application is for the change of use of the presently empty A1 premises at 25a Brinsworth Lane, into an A5 (Hot Food Takeaway).

The applicant has confirmed that the premises will operate as an Indian Takeaway. They wish to operate between 5pm-11pm Sunday-Thursday and 5pm to 12am Friday to Saturday.

Publicity

Neighbouring properties and businesses have been consulted in writing and a site notice has been erected, 8 individual letters of objection have been received along with 133 generic letters signed by individual residents.

The application has also received 53 signature petition in favour of the application.

The reasons for objection can be summarised as follows;

• The business will attract vermin as a result of discarded litter. • The premises will attract large groups of youths • Concerns about noise and smells • Car Parking, Brinsworth Lane is extremely busy and the proposal will only add to the problems • Too many similar businesses within the area Page 98

• The extraction chimney will be detrimental to appearance/setting of the locality.

Consultation

Highways: - No Objections

Access Officer: - No objections

Environmental Health: - No objections subject to planning condition (PC 56) being attached to application.

Brinsworth Parish Council –object to the scheme. They consider that it is neither necessary nor appropriate, given that a number of A5 uses already exist within the area. If the application was approved it would further add to such anti-social matters such as excessive amounts of rubbish and litter, parking issues and congregation of people within close proximity of these types of premises.

Appraisal

The application site is located within an allocated retail area within the adopted UDP. Whilst a development within an A1 Use Class would represent the preferred use of the premises given that the site is not identified as a prime shopping street, the site is not subject to any safeguarding polices and as such the proposal is considered acceptable in planning policy terms.

UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ indicates that all proposals should be appropriate to their surrounding locality, this is further emphasised by policy RET1.1. RET1.1 ‘Shopping Environment’ states that its key objective is to ‘ensure that high quality, attractive and secure environments’ are both maintained and created with local shopping areas, while, RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’, only supports development that provides local convenience shopping facilities for local communities.

Given the character of the area and the UDP allocation of the site as retail, the principle of the proposal is deemed acceptable subject to no materially unacceptable effects upon the amenities of the area or on road safety.

With regards to amenity issues, the Council’s Environmental Health officer has stated that the proposal is acceptable subject to the addition of relevant planning conditions in terms of the addition of litter bins on the front of the property and the extraction of fumes through a suitable extraction and/or fuming system. This in my opinion can be satisfactorily addressed with the imposition of standard planning conditions.

In terms of limiting opening hours, and whilst noting the applicant has requested a midnight closing time, I have recommended in the interests of residential amenity closing times of 11:00 (Sunday to Thursday) and 11:30 (Fridays and Saturdays) be imposed on the permission by condition.

Turning to highway safety the Council’s Transportation Engineers have been consulted and they have raised no objections to the proposal. It is acknowledged that Brinsworth Lane is extremely busy as a result of customers to the various retail units arriving by car. However, it is noted that these issues are more prolific during mornings and afternoons. Given that the premises will open in the early evening when adjacent Page 99

businesses are closing it is not considered that the proposal will exasperate the existing parking conflicts. Furthermore the business will be operating a takeaway delivery service therefore reducing activity to the site from customers.

Therefore, the Council considers that the proposed use would not have an adverse effect on the amenities of the area or on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. It would also represent an acceptable use that would not adversely affect the ambience and character of this local retail area, would add convenience and value to the area, would not detrimentally effect the viability and vitality of this area and would be in line with the guidance contained within the relevant UDP policies.

In the above circumstances the proposal is recommended for approval subject to the attachment of relevant conditions.

RB2007/1365

Formation of new multi-use games area to include 5m high fence and floodlights at Winterhill School, High Street, Kimberworth for Winterhill School.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policy

ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ CR1.5 ‘Community Facilities’ CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’

National Planning Policy

PPG2 – Green Belts PPG17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and recreation

2. For the following reasons:

The Council considers that the proposed Multi-Use Games Area would be an acceptable addition in this Green Belt location, as the proposal is for a recreation Page 100

use and a facility for outdoor sport which would preserve the openness of the Green Belt.

The Council further considers that the proposal represents an acceptable size, form, design and location that would have a positive effect on the environment, while not giving rise to any undue disturbances.

Accordingly, the proposal would be in full compliance with UDP Policies ENV1 ‘Green Belts’, ENV3.1’Development and the Environment’, CR1.5 ‘Community Facilities’ and CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’.

Conditions Imposed : 01 [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 WS/04/2007/01, WS/04/2007/02, WHS/2007/01/01 and WHS/2007/01/02, received 5 July 2007) 02 The floodlights shall be switched off between the hours of 2130hrs and 0900hrs. 03 The external lighting hereby approved shall be installed in accordance with the Institution of Lighting Engineers ‘Guidance Notes for the reduction of light industry’.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans. 02 In the interests of residential amenity and to reduce the impact on the surrounding Green Belt. 03 In the interests of residential amenity and to reduce the impact on the surrounding Green Belt.

Page 101

Page 102

Notes for RB2007/1365

Background

There have been a number of previous applications on this school including the extension and alteration of the building along with applications for various signs. None of the previous planning applications have any implication on the current proposed development.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The school building is allocated within an area for ‘Community Facilities’ and the site of the proposed playing area is located within an area allocated as Green Belt. Accordingly, the proposal shall be assessed against UDP Policies ENV1 ‘Green Belts’, ENV3.1’Development and the Environment’, CR1.5 ‘Community Facilities’ and CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’. In addition the guidance contained within PPG2 (Green Belts) and PPG17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and recreation) will have to be satisfied as well.

Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belts’ indicates that in the Green Belt development will not be permitted except in very special circumstances for purposes other than agriculture, forestry and recreation. It further states that new buildings in the Green Belt are inappropriate except for several purposes, one of which is ‘essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation…which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it’.

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 architectural style, relationship to the locality, scale, density, height, massing, quality of materials, site features, local vernacular characteristics, screening and landscaping’.

Policy CR1.5 ‘Community Facilities’ hopes that all Community Facilities will, wherever possible, be retained or developed. While CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’ outlines that proposals for sporting and recreational activities in the countryside will be acceptable provided that; they do not detract from the open character of the Green Belt, would not detract from the surrounding landscape and they would not give rise to undue disturbance caused by excessive noise or the attraction of large numbers of people or excessive traffic.

Site Description

Winterhill Comprehensive School is situated on the edge of the residential area of Kimberworth adjacent to the open countryside. A private road, Little Common Lane runs along the northern boundary of the school from Farm View Road. To the north- west of the school is an area of open land with a sports hall and youth and community centre.

The application site will be located to the west of the existing school building and south of the existing hardstanding area which is used for a number of sports, including tennis and netball. Parallel to the proposed new games area to the west is a pedestrian footpath and a large area of open space. Page 103

Proposal

The proposal is to construct a new Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) 61m x 42.5m located close to the existing Sports Hall and Changing Room facilities as is possible. It will be located on an upper plateau above the existing floodlit tennis court and adjacent to the southern boundary of the school grounds.

The MUGA will include two 3m x 10m end recesses for storage of full size goals. Additional 2.5m x 5m side recesses are also proposed for storage of mini soccer goals. There will be a perimeter sports fence 5m in height along the sides and ends of the pitch, to minimise stray balls escaping over the perimeter fence. The sports fencing will comprise of a lower element of 358 mesh which is a dense, robust fence.

The synthetic pitch is to be floodlight to 200 lux by a total of six 12m high floodlight columns.

Publicity

All neighbouring properties have been notified in writing of the proposal, while a site notice has been posted near the site and a press notice has been placed in the local media. No representations have been received.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposal from a highway perspective.

Environmental Health Officer has stated that as long as the floodlighting is switched off at an appropriate time at night and is angled downwards, then they are satisfied that the amenity of any residents will be safeguarded. As such, they envisage no significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution impact.

Sport England is satisfied that the proposal meets one of the exceptions of their playing fields policy in that; the proposed development is for an outdoor sports facility. The provision of which would be of sufficient benefit to the development of sport as to outweigh the detriment caused by the loss of the playing field. Therefore, Sport England does not have any objections.

Appraisal

The proposal is for the creation of a MUGA on the existing school field and close to the existing hardstanding tennis courts. It would have a 5 metre high mesh fence around the synthetic pitch and six floodlighting columns 12 metres high.

As the application site is within an area allocated as Green Belt, the Council will only approve development in special circumstances; moreover new buildings will only be approved if they are for essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation. In addition development will only be approved if it makes a positive contribution to the environment, by achieving an appropriate standard of design having regard to its size, scale, form and site features. Development of this type in this locality should not detract from the open character of the Green Belt, materially detract from the surrounding Page 104

landscape character or give rise to undue disturbance caused by noise, or excessive traffic.

It is considered that the proposed MUGA is acceptable in this Green Belt location as the proposal would be for a recreation use and a facility for outdoor sport which would preserve the openness of the Green Belt, in accordance with ENV1 ‘Green Belt’. It is also considered that the MUGA is of an acceptable size, design, form and location that would have a positive effect on the environment in keeping with the guidance of ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’.

Furthermore, the proposal would be in accordance with CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’ as the MUGA would not detract from the open character of the Green Belt; would not have a materially detrimental impact on the character of the immediate surrounding landscape. While given its location away from residential properties and within the grounds of a secondary school no undue disturbance would be caused by excessive noise or the attraction of excessive traffic or large numbers of people.

Although the proposal would result in the loss of part of a playing field, which would be contrary to Sport England’s playing field policy. Sport England are satisfied that the proposal meets one of the exceptions of their playing fields policy in that the proposal is for an indoor and outdoor sports facility, the provision of which would be of sufficient benefit to the development of sport as to outweigh the detriment caused by the loss of the playing field or playing fields.

The proposal would represent a significant investment in sport and would be likely to lead to an increase in sports participation. The multi-use games area is sited so to reduce the impact on the existing pitch provision and the all weather nature of the surface and use of floodlighting would benefit its usage.

It is therefore considered that the proposal results in an acceptable addition to this area that would not have an adverse effect on the open character of the Green Belt or the character of the area nor would the proposal have an adverse impact on the residential estate to the far south-east and north-east of the site, by way of noise or light pollution. Accordingly, the proposal would be in full compliance with UDP Policies ENV1 ‘Green Belts’, ENV3.1’Development and the Environment’, CR1.5 ‘Community Facilities’ and CR2.5 ‘Proposals for New Outdoor Sport and Recreation in the Countryside’. The proposal would also be in accordance with PPG2 (Green Belts), PPG17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and recreation).

With the above in mind, the proposal is considered to be of an acceptable scale and design for the site and surrounding locality and is recommended for approval accordingly.

Page 105

RB2007/1379

Demolition of public house and erection of 3 No. three storey buildings to form 18 no. apartments at Lord Nelson PH, Laughton Road, Dinnington for Kingsbury Homes (UK) Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

Reasons for Refusal : 01 The proposed development is considered to constitute an overdevelopment of the site resulting in insufficient area within the curtilage to provide adequate amenity space, to the detriment of the residential amenity of the occupiers of the development, contrary to Policy HG5 'The Residential Environment' of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan, Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development and Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing.

Page 106

Page 107

Notes for RB2007/1379

Background

All previous planning history for this site relates to the use of the site as a Public House.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The site is allocated as residential in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. Policies which are applicable to these proposals include ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ and HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’.

HG4.3: Windfall Sites states:

“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 uses, and (ii) compatibility with other relevant policies and guidance”.

Policy HG5 “The Residential Environment” states that “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”.

Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ states “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”.

Supplementary Planning Guidance Housing Guidance 3: Residential Infill Plots suggests criteria for considering residential development including distances between dwellings, distances from boundaries, drive lengths etc. This guidance was specifically prepared for dwellings on corner plots but is considered to be applicable to all residential development. Page 108

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development 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. It also states that good design should be integrated into the existing urban form and the natural and built environment.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing reinforces the message from PPS1. It states that development should be well integrated with and complement neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Planning and Noise states that development should not normally be permitted in areas which are subject to unacceptably high levels of noise and that measures should be introduced to limit exposure to such noise.

Site Description

The application site is a triangular shaped piece of land containing an existing Public House building (The Lord Nelson) on the junction of Laughton Road and Doe Quarry Lane. Existing access to the site is off Laughton Road to the south, with Doe Quarry Lane bounding the site to the north. To the eastern boundary is the Police Station. The existing building on site is two storey in height with a render finish and tiled roof. To the south and west of the site is residential development, with Rother Valley College in close proximity to the north.

Proposals

This application is for the demolition of the public house and the erection of 3no three storey buildings to form 18no apartments. The buildings are proposed to be located to the south of the site adjacent to Laughton Road. Access will be taken from Laughton Road, through an archway between two of the apartment blocks. Parking provision with 18 spaces is to the rear of the apartment blocks adjacent to Doe Quarry Lane.

The applicant has submitted a Design and Access Statement which states that the layout of the site has been substantially governed by the intended numbers of apartments and Highway Authority parking requirements. They have stated that discrete areas of planting and amenity space are generated in front of the units, between parking bays and hard landscaped areas.

Publicity

The application was publicised by press advertisement, site notice and by neighbour notification with letters to surrounding properties. No letters of representation have been received.

Consultations

The Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposals subject to sight lines and intervisibility splays.

Mains Drainage have not commented on this proposal.

Page 109

Severn Trent Water have no objections to the proposals subject to conditions.

The Director of Environmental Health has concerns with regards to the possible noise disamenity of future occupiers of proposed residential properties from the two roads (Doe Quarry and Laughton Road) which are busy roads which run parallel to the site. However, it is considered that any impact could be controlled by way of suitable mitigation measures.

South Yorkshire Police have stated that on site planting should be kept to a maximum height of 1 metre, tree canopies should be no less than 2.4 metres from the ground to allow for good surveillance and the site should be bound in 2 metre high ornate railings to deter access to the site.

Appraisal

The main issues to be considered in this application are the principle of the development, the design, appearance and siting of the buildings, the impact on neighbouring residential amenity and access and parking provision.

Principle of the Development

Policy HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ states that such sites will be determined in the light of their location and compatibility with adjoining uses and compatibility with other relevant policies and guidance. The proposed development is on the site of an existing public house and as such is considered to be brownfield land. The site is allocated as residential in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and as such the principle to erect residential development on this site is acceptable subject to other material planning considerations.

Design and Appearance and Siting of the Buildings

The site occupies a prominent position on the approach to both Dinnington town centre and Rother Valley College. As such any development on this site will have an impact on the street scene. This proposal involves the erection of three blocks of apartments, one at the apex of the triangle on the junction between Laughton Road and Doe Quarry Lane and two blocks adjacent to Laughton Road to be linked by an archway entrance for vehicles. Properties surrounding the site are predominantly terraced houses constructed in the early 1900’s. These houses are two storey with gable roof features to the front. This design can also be seen in the existing public house building which also has gable roof features. The proposal also seeks to replicate these features with both large gable roofs and small gables over dormer windows.

With regards to the three storey nature of the scheme, it is considered that the erection of a three storey building in this location would have no significant detrimental impact on the appearance of the street scene, due to the varying heights of buildings in the immediate vicinity and the location of the proposed building on the highway frontage. The three storey nature of the scheme on this prominent site is considered to add character and a sense of place to the location.

Paragraph 35 of PPS1 states that “high quality and inclusive design should create well mixed and integrated developments which avoid segregation and have well-planned public spaces that bring people together and provide opportunities for physical activity Page 110

and recreation”. Paragraph 16 of PPS3 states that “matters to consider when assessing design quality include the extent to which the proposed development…provides, or enables good access to, community and green and open amenity and recreational space (including play space) as well as private outdoor space such as residential gardens, patios and balconies”. The guidance set out in PPS1 and PPS3 adds weight to Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan which states that “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”.

In this proposal there is approximately 225 square metres on the site of undeveloped space, which equates to approximately 12.5 square metres per unit, very little of this space is considered to be usable amenity space for the residents. The majority of the space is to the frontage of Block 1 adjacent to the junction with both Laughton Road and Doe Quarry Lane with a small amount on the site frontage adjacent to the Laughton Road frontage. In any case, most of this space is indicated to be used for planting. The high number of apartments to be provided on the site and the amount of space within the site to provide parking spaces for these apartments is considered to form overdevelopment of the site, and as such fails to provide a sufficient residential environment for the occupiers of the apartments contrary to the guidance set out in PPS1 or PPS3, or Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

The proposal involves the erection of 18 apartments. PPS3 suggests that more intensive development of a site is not always appropriate. However, when well designed and built in the right location, it can enhance the character and quality of an area. The scheme as submitted will provide apartment accommodation at a density of approximately 106 dwellings per hectare which is a significant level on a plot of this size. Whilst the location of the site is close to the town centre of Dinnington, it is considered that the higher density combined with the minimal amenity space makes the proposal unacceptable in this location.

Impact on Neighbouring Residential Amenity

The proposed apartment blocks are sited approximately 20 – 21 metres from the front elevations of the dwellings opposite the site on Laughton Road. As such the proposal is considered to comply with the guidance as set out in Supplementary Planning Guidance Housing Guidance 3: Residential Infill Plots. In terms of the height of the proposed buildings, although the development is three storeys, the highest part of the buildings is approximately 10 metres. Given that the development is to the north of the existing dwellings it is considered that the proposal would not result in harm to the amenity of the occupiers of these dwellings with reference to loss of light/overshadowing.

Noise impacts

The site is adjacent to two busy roads (Doe Quarry Lane and Laughton Road) and the Director of Environmental Health has raised concerns with regards to the possible noise disamenity of future occupiers of proposed residential properties from the two roads which run parallel to the site. Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ states that the Council will seek to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance … disturbance … associated with development and transport. Planning permission will not be granted for new Page 111

development which is incapable of being avoided by incorporating preventative or mitigating measures at the time the development takes place. PPG24 suggests the use of conditions to achieve required noise levels to mitigate any impact of noise and disturbance from traffic. It is therefore recommended that a scheme for the protection of the development from noise be submitted as a condition of any approval.

Access and Parking Provision

The proposal involves the use of the existing access to the site, and as such is considered not to be detrimental to highway safety. In terms of the parking provision, the Transportation Unit have no objections to the proposals subject to sight lines and intervisibility splays. Although the parking provision is located adjacent to Doe Quarry Lane, it is considered that sufficient screening and landscaping could be provided to this boundary to screen the parking area and as such it is considered that this would not be detrimental to the visual amenity of the locality.

Conclusion

In conclusion, given the above, it is considered that the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site and would be contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’, and the government guidance contained in PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development and Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing.

It is therefore recommended that the application be refused for the reasons set out above.

RB2007/1382

Erection of 2 No. two storey buildings to form 10 No. apartments at land at King Street, Swallownest for Rustic Developments Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

Reasons for Refusal : 01 It is considered that by way of its position, scale, massing and height, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents by way of its overbearing impact overlooking and overshadowing. As such the proposal would conflict with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment 02 The Council considers that the proposal represents over development of the site by way of its lack of amenity open space and landscaping to the detriment of the amenities of future occupants of the flats contrary to Policy HG 5 The Residential Environment and advice in PPS 3 Housing. 03 The Council further considers that by way of the loss of parking provision for the existing club and bowling green the proposal would result in additional on street parking in the area to the material detriment of residential amenity.

Page 112

Page 113

Notes for RB2007/1382

Background

Planning permission for the erection of 17 flats was refused in November 2006 (RB2006/1649) for the following reasons:

1. It is considered that by way of its position, scale, massing and height, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents by way of its overbearing impact overlooking and overshadowing. As such the proposal would conflict with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment 2. The Council consider by way of its scale massing and height the proposal would constitute an unacceptable overbearing and incongruent element in the street scene to the material detriment of visual amenity in conflict with Policy ENV 3.1 of the Unitary Development Plan. 3. The council considers that the proposal represents over development of the site by way of its lack of amenity open space and landscaping to the detriment of the amenities of future occupants of the flats contrary to Policy HG 5 The Residential Environment. 4. The Council further considers that by way of the loss of parking provision for the existing club and bowling green the proposal would result in additional on street parking in the area to the material detriment of residential amenity.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

The site is allocated residential on the adopted Unitary Development Plan. The following policies are relevant:

Policy HG4.3 Windfall Sites

“The Council will determine proposals for housing development not identified in Policies HG4.1 and HG4.2 in the light of their:

(i) location within the existing built-up area and compatibility with adjoining 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.” Policy ENV3.1 Development and the Environment

Page 114

“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. Developers will be required to supply details of design and landscaping for approval by the Council and where developments adjoin or include a transport route or other important linear feature (e.g. a river, canal or stream) the Council will negotiate the creation or maintenance of a landscaped ‘green corridor’. Developments which make a positive contribution to the environment through a reduction in harmful emissions, but cannot meet the design standards mentioned above, will be considered on their merits. Encouragement will be given to the inclusion of works of public art within the design of major developments.”

National Planning Guidance

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development 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.

PPS 3 Housing reinforces the message from PPS 1. It states that development should be well integrated with and complement neighbouring buildings and the local area in terms of scale, density, layout and access. The advice still advocates efficient use of land, but emphasises that this should not be at the expense of the quality of the local environment, and should be well integrated with and complement the neighbouring buildings and more generally the local area in terms of scale density layout and access. It also states that successful intensification need not mean low quality accommodation with inappropriate space. It further states that new development should have regard for the provision of quality family accommodation with good open space provision.

Site Description

The site of application is a cleared area of land used as car parking for the existing adjacent Working Men’s Club and the Parish Bowling Green. Access is via King Street, and the site is bounded on all sides by existing residential development consisting of terraced, semi-detached and detached properties..

Proposals

The application is for the erection of 10 two bedroom apartments in two storey blocks, with car parking accommodation. The block fronting King Street would accommodate 4 flats whilst the block on the rear boundary of the site would accommodate 6 flats. Car parking would be provided between the blocks (10 spaces) with an additional 4 spaces at the front.

Publicity

The application was advertised on site and in the press and adjoining occupiers notified in writing.

At the time of writing this report, three letters of representation had been received. One letter is from Swallownest Social Club suggesting that four car parking spaces would be enough for the Club and should be made available for their members, and one objects Page 115

to the proposal on the basis of over development of the site, and adverse effect on pet animals kept adjacent the site.

Additionally the Local Parish Council have objected to the proposal for the following reasons:

• Overdevelopment of the site • Site used as car parking for Swallownest Social Club, its loss would result in traffic congestion and parking problems. • The site is on license for car parking provision for the adjacent bowling green. Once again its removal would result in unnecessary traffic congestion and on street parking.

All the correspondence will be on deposit in the Members’ Room prior to the meeting.

Consultations

Transportation Unit:

The current proposal now has an adoptable turning head, and four visitor car parking spaces. Consequently no objections are raised, subject to conditions for the provision and drainage of the car parking shown on the submitted plans, road construction details, the issuing of travel master passes, and surfacing of footpath link between King Street and Nursery Road.

Director of Environmental Health:

Recommends that if permission is granted, conditions for the control of dust, noise and operating hours, for the building operations should be imposed.

Streetpride Service Landscape Section:

As the layout maximises development within the plot, there is limited scope for soft landscaping to screen or soften the development, or for access to this, including for maintenance. A number of unusable and impractical spaces are created by the proximity of the buildings to the boundaries. Visitor parking also reduces the width to the roadside footway. The current layout is not conducive to effective screening / softening of the development by planting, and if this is desired, it will need to be revised. The limited offset from the boundaries also raises concern over potential impacts on trees within adjoining properties.

Appraisal

The application site is allocated for residential purposes in the Unitary Development Plan. The principle of the development is therefore acceptable.

I consider the main issues in this instance are the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring residents and on the street scene and the appropriateness of the development for the future occupiers of the flats and the impact on the loss of the parking facilities.

Impact on neighbouring residents: Page 116

Whilst the two blocks have been reduced from three storey (as proposed in the previous application) to two storey, it is still considered that the impact on the neighbouring residents is still significant in respect of the rear two storey block which would still be located directly adjacent to the gardens of properties on Aughton Road, with kitchen windows located in the rear elevations. As such it is still considered that by way of its position, scale, massing and height, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents by way of its overbearing impact, over looking and over shadowing. As such the proposal would be in conflict with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan.

Streetscene:

The two storey block at the front of the site would be located directly adjacent existing two storey houses and it is considered that it would relate well to the existing buildings and would not appear overbearing in the street scene. As such it is considered that this element of the scheme is materially better that the three storeys proposed in the original application. As such the proposal would not be in conflict with Policy ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment of the Unitary Development Plan in this respect.

Future Residents:

The proposal has a density of approximately 73 dwellings per hectare. Whilst this is an improvement over the density of 123 per hectare under the previous scheme, it is still considered that this represents over development of the site, on which minimal open space and landscaping is provided to the detriment of the amenities of future occupiers of the flats. This would be contrary to advice in Policy HG 5 The Residential Environment and PPS 3 Housing.

Car Parking:

The development would once again result in the loss of car parking facilities for the existing Social Club and Bowling Green in an area with a shortfall of off street car parking provision. The number of flats has been reduced from 17 to 10 with car parking provision of 10 spaces within the site, and 4 spaces have been provided at the front of the site for members of the nearby Social Club and Bowling Green users. However it is considered that the loss of the existing car parking provision for the Club would result in additional on street parking to the detriment of the amenities of nearby residents.

Other issues raised by Local Residents:

It is considered that the other issues raised by local residents relating to the impact of the proposals on their pets, is not material to the consideration of the proposal.

It is therefore considered that the proposals constitute a poor form of development and it is recommended that planning permission once again be refused.

Page 117

RB2007/1385

Extension to existing factory at Cepac Ltd., Brookfields Park, Meadows Road, Manvers for Cepac Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT FOR REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

The local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations:

UDP POLICIES

EC1- Existing Industrial and Business Areas EC3 - Land Identified for Industry and Business Use

2. For the following reasons:

The proposal complies with the policies and Guidance referred to above being capable of meeting environmental and ecological concerns subject to condition and accords to the development plan overall. The proposed extension to the factory does not result in any visual detriment in the locality and would not cause any significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution.

3. The foregoing 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 and the application case file and associated documents.

[PC51] The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 04 [PC91*] The development shall only take place in accordance with the submitted details and specifications shown on the plans 07-04-10, 07-04-50, 07-0451, 07-04-100, 07-04- 101 Rev A, 07-04-201 Rev A, 07-04-208, 07-04-250. 05 [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 and its implications on the health and safety of site workers and nearby persons, building structures and services, final end users of the site, landscaping schemes and environmental pollution, including ground water, and make recommendations so as to ensure the safe development and use of the site. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the survey and all recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer, prior to occupation of the site. 06 Prior to the commencement of any development on site to which this permission relates an excavation report which details the amount of land to be removed, methods of future disposal, number of vehicular movements and resultant stability of land shall have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 119

Page 120

Notes for RB2007/1385

Background

The existing factory, to which this application forms an extension to, has been operating on this site since 1999. The factory manufactures packaging along with a wide range of other products for supermarkets. However with changes in technology and increases in Health and Safety Regulations and Requirements, in order to accommodate process changes which were essential for the long-term viability of the site, the warehouse area would need to be expanded to accommodate new equipment as the existing building does not provide the necessary space.

The proposed new factory is intended to be used for unloading raw material and for the loading of the finished product for delivery.

UDP Allocations and Policies

The application site is allocated for Industrial and Business Use within the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan.

The following policies are the most relevant to the site:- EC1- Existing Industrial and Business Areas EC3- Land Identified for Industry and Business Use

The application site is bounded by Green Belt to the north-east which is to be reclaimed; none of the application proposals impinge on to this adjoining land.

Site Description

The existing factory to which this proposal relates is located at the northern boundary of the existing industrial estate know as ‘Brookfield Park’ off Meadows Road on the reclaimed colliery site at Manvers, Wath Upon Dearne.

The proposed extension is envisaged to be located on an area of land presently in use as a service yard. A new service yard is proposed on land within the application site that is presently being used in part for the storage of material that was formally excavated from the initial build project.

Page 121

Proposal

The application seeks approval for the erection of an extension to the existing factory unit located attached to the buildings north-east elevation. This extension would provide 3300sq.m of additional floor space bringing the total of floor space of the factory units to 22,580sq.m.

The proposal also envisages the creation of a new service yard which includes an enclosed pallet storage area which is intended to be located immediately adjacent the proposed extension on the north-eastern boundary of the site.

Publicity

The application has been advertised by means of site notice, local press notice and individual notification to adjoining neighbouring industrial units. No observations or comments have been received as a result of these advertisements

Consultatioins

Transportation Unit – no objections subject to the imposition of relevant conditions

Environment Agency – no objections

Environmental Health – does not envisage any significant loss of amenity by virtue of noise, air quality or land pollution as a result of the proposal

Appraisal

The occupiers of this site ‘Cepac’ is part of a long established international company which have extensive interests in the packaging industry along with a wide range of other products.

The existing factory which has been on the site since 1999 manufactures packaging however due to expansion and changing technology an extension is required for the unloading of raw materials and the loading of the finished products for delivery. To facilitate the creation of the new service area on the north-eastern boundary of the site a mound of land originally excavated from the initial build project will be required to be removed. No details as to the methods, stability of land or amount of land to be removal or disposal of have been provided with the application. This can however be controlled by condition attached to the grant of any permission which precluded the development from commencing until such time as these details have been agree. It is therefore the intention to attach such a condition to this permission should it be received favourably.

The increased productivity as a result of the new extension would result in an increase in employment of a further 8-10 people.

The application site is located within a designated Industrial and Business site as allocated by the Rotherham UDP wherein policies EC1- Existing Industrial and Business Areas and EC3- Land Identified for Industry and Business Use. The proposed extension is not at variance with the provisions of these policies.

Page 122

The application site it located outside the flood plane, no comments have been received from the Environmental Agency

Traffic movement to the site is also envisaged to increase by approx. 15% over the 24 hour period. The Transport Unit offers no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of vehicular area to be surfaced and the requirement of a Travel Plan to be submitted.

The application has been amended since its original submission as a result of design considerations. The extension has now been designed to mirror the existing factory unit both in terms of overall height and the use of external materials. The design put forward is considered to be acceptable and would not result it is felt in any loss of visual amenity.

In the light of the above, full considerations of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application as amended should be recommended favourably.

RB2007/1494

Application for variation of Condition 6 (landscaping scheme to be submitted prior to commencement of development) imposed by approval of reservd matters application ref RB2006/0241 to allow construction of access road prior to submission of landscape scheme at land at junction 33 M1 Motorway, Brinsworth for Junction 33 Development Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT FOR REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission: 1. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations:

UDP Policies

EC5 – Mixed Use Areas EC6 – Tourism and Visitor Development EC6.1 – Hotel Development ENV1.4 – land adjacent to the Green Belt ENV2 – Conserving the Environment ENV3 – Borough Landscape

2. For the following reasons Page 123

In the light of the above, full considerations of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application to vary this condition should be recommended favourably, to do so would still fulfil the conditions original objective and not result in undermining the intension for which it was originally imposed

Conditions Imposed : 01 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tar macadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 02 There shall be no direct access to/egress from the site (including construction) via the existing maintenance access at the Motorway Roundabout 03 No discharge of surface water to the River Rother shall take place until the Local Planning Authority has been notified that the consent of the Environment Agency has been obtained. 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 All loaded lorries leaving the site shall be securely and effectively sheeted 06 With the exception of the works identified on Drawing No. 26783/017 Rev A, no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the local Planning Authority until such time as a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.’ 07 The development hereby permitted shall only be constructed/carried out using the access shown on the approved plans. 08 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use unless and until the highway works as indicated on drawing number 0363/GA/08 Revision C prepared by WSP Development have been completed (or such other drawing as is approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority) have been completed, subject to the approval by the Council of details for the circulatory carriageway markings and other highway equipment. 09 No development shall take place within the frustum of support to the foundations of the electricity pylon on the site. Page 124

10 Surface water from areas likely to receive petrol/oil contamination (eg vehicle parking areas) shall be passed through adequate oil/grit interceptors prior to discharge to any sewer or watercourse

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR24A] 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 road safety. 02 [PR20] In the interests of road safety. 03 [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’. 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 [PR20] In the interests of road safety. 06 To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’ 07 To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’ 08 To ensure that the development does not give rise to the release of hazardous or toxic materials to any part of the natural environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’ 09 In the interests of safety 10 [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’.

Page 125

Page 126

Notes for RB2007/1494

Background

The application to which this proposal relates was originally granted planning permission in May 2006 under reference RB2006/0241. Permission was given for the remodelling of the land, landscape works and the formation of a vehicular access off Junction 33 roundabout between the southbound slip road off the M1 and Rotherway..

The application to which this present proposal relates (RB2006/0241) gave planning permission for the remodelling of the land, landscaping works and the formation of vehicular access. This application was submitted in the interests of clarity and to rule out any uncertainties as the whole of this and the adjoining site had over preceding years, since 1986, been the subject of numerous applications and permissions with differing site boundaries The permission granted did not envisage any buildings or hard landscape on the site

An application to vary Condition 01 (samples of material to be submitted prior to development) and Condition 02 (landscaping details to be submitted prior to development) imposed by RB2006/0153 to allow construction of access road prior to submission of material samples and landscape scheme is also being considered by the board at this meeting

UDP Allocation and Policies

The application site is allocated for Mixed Use development (MU27) within the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. The identified acceptable uses for this site are listed within the UDP as A3 food and drink, C1 hotels, and petrol filling stations. The UDP states the site is particularly suitable for a hotel, restaurant and petrol filling station.

The following policies are the most relevant to this site:-

EC5 – Mixed Use Areas EC6 – Tourism and Visitor Development EC6.1 – Hotel Development ENV1.4 – land adjacent to the Green Belt ENV2 – Conserving the Environment ENV3 – Borough Landscape

Site Description

Page 127

The application site is a long and linear shape piece of land measuring approximately 320 metres in length by 30 metres at its widest point running alongside the northern boundary of the Parkway.

The application site is at a lower level than both the M1 and the Sheffield parkway and is overgrown and unsightly.

Proposals

This application seek approval for the variation of condition 6 imposed on RB2006/0241 to state ‘With the exception of the works identified on Drawing No. 26783/017 Rev A, no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the local Planning Authority until such time as a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.’

The present condition no. 6 states as follows:-

Prior to the commencement of development, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local planning Authority. Such a scheme should provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establish and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

The application has been submitted to enable the construction of the access road, as identified on drawing number 26783/017RevA attached to permission reference RB2006/0241 prior to the submission of the landscaping scheme.

Publicity

Statutory advertisement of the application in the local press has been carried out. The advertisement period for receipt of written comments to the application does not expire until 28 September 2006, the day after this board’s consideration of the application. This early schedule of the application has been undertaken in order to avoid unnecessary delay in its determination and also to meet government targets on performance. Should members resolve to grant permission any decision notice will not be issued until the expiry of the advertisement period, should any representations be received before that time and have not already been reported to the board the application will be returned for members further consideration.

Consultations

Environment Agency – no comments to make Transportation Unit – considers the proposal has no implications from a highway/transportation context

Appraisal

Page 128

The application to vary this condition has been submitted to allow the construction of the access as previously approved without the need to first submit details of landscape and materials prior to commencement of development.

Having regard to the site’s location and proximity to the busy roundabout, the applicant has indicated that in the interests of road safety and to avoid congestion and disruption to the free flow of traffic during construction of the access road it is their intention to construct the road from within the site, working backwards towards the point of access on the roundabout.

The applicant justifies the need to vary this condition in order to allow implementation of the permission at the earliest opportunity and whilst any weather conditions are not inclement to the undertaking of this type of construction works. Assurance is given that wheel washing facilities and road suction brushes will be provided to ensure that any mud deposits are not brought onto the highway as a result of the development. This matter is also proposed to be controlled by condition attached to any grant of permission.

It is agreed that this type of construction work is best carried out during the dryer months as any deposits as a result of inclement weather on the adjacent highway could lead to conditions contrary to highway safety.

Having regard to this it is felt that so long as the intention behind the original condition is not undermined which sought to ensure the satisfactory provision for the submission and agreement of materials and landscaping on the site on the completion of the development then the variation of the conditions as proposed are acceptable

Page 129 Agenda Item 8

To the Chairman and Members of the PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD Date 27 September 2007

Report of the Director of Planning and Transportation Service

ITEM NO. SUBJECT

1. Outline application for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial),B8 (Storage & Distribution), hotel, railway station and ancillary leisure & retail development including details of the means of access at land off High Field Spring, Catcliffe for UK Coal Mining Ltd. Ref.RB2004/1571

2. Four storey extension to form an additional 40 No. bedrooms at Holiday Inn, West Bawtry Road, Moorgate Ref: RB2007/1292

3. Application for Variation of Condition 01 (samples of material to be submitted prior to development) and Condition 02 (landscaping details to be submitted prior to development) imposed by RB2006/0153 to allow construction of access road prior to submission of material samples and landscape scheme at land at junction 33 M1 Motorway, Brinsworth Ref. RB2007/1519

4. Courtesy Consultation for the erection of 8 units in 2 No. two storey blocks to be used for Business (use class B1), General Industry (use class B2) and Storage and Distribution (use class B8) with 39 car parking spaces and associated landscaping works for Broomco 2156 Ltd. Ref: RB2007/EN08

5. Appeal Decision – Dismissed Erection of 32no two and three storey dwellinghouses and garages at land at Hamilton Road/Muglet Lane, Maltby Ref. RB2006/1250

6. Appeal Decision – Dismissed Erection of a detached garage at High Cragg Cottage, 10 The Green, North Anston Ref. RB2006/1620

7. Appeal Decision: Dismissed. Appeal by Mr M Perry Against Refusal of Planning Permission for the Erection of Fodder and Implement Storage Building at Land Rear of 32 Dowcarr Lane Woodall Ref. RB2006/1658 Page 130 2

8. Appeal Decisions – Dismissed

1. Erection of a detached dwellinghouse with two detached outbuildings to form double garages with rooms over, formation of a vehicular access and alterations/partial demolition of boundary wall.

2. Conservation Area Consent for lowering and partial demolition of boundary wall at land off Brampton Road, Brampton-en-le- Morthen.

Refs. RB2006/1978 and RB2006/1977 (respectively).

9. Application to vary condition 34 attached to RB2005/0428 which states "Not less than 4645 square metres of the gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be occupied by a DIY/hardware retail operator. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under Condition 33 takes place" to "Not less than 2787 square metres of the gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be used for the sale of DIY, hardware, home improvement and garden goods. The wriiten approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under condition 33 takes place" at land at Rotherham Road Parkgate for Henry Boot Developments Ltd. Ref. RB2007/0868

Page 131

ROTHERHAM METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REPORT TO COMMITTEE SERVICE 27 SEPTEMBER 2007

Item 1

Outline application for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial),B8 (Storage & Distribution), hotel, railway station and ancillary leisure & retail development including details of the means of access at land off High Field Spring, Catcliffe for UK Coal Mining Ltd.

Ref. RB2004/1571

Recommendation:-

A) That the Council enter into an agreement with the developer under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the purposes of securing the following :

i) A commuted sum to provide 10% of the total cost of the Waverley Link Road. This is estimated to be £813,000 at present however the total amount of contributions shall be capped at £1 million and payment will not be requested until 1 April 2009. ii) Reserve area of land, for five years, within UK coal ownership for potential Park and Ride scheme with a minimum of 500 car parking spaces but potential for 1000 spaces in the vicinity of the high wall. iii) Provide suitable access to the Park and Ride scheme through the application site in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and approved by the local Planning Authority. iv) Provide transport hub for Park and Ride facility (estimated cost to be confirmed by SYPTE). v) Provide 2 bus stops for local services at cost of approximately £20,000 (£10,000 for each bus stop to include shelter, raised kerb etc). vi) Reserve land for railway station platform, drop off point and car park with no more than 50 spaces until the sooner of: (1) elapse of five years from the grant of this permission, (2) provision of viable business plan for railway station and services to Strategic Rail Authority, (3) provision of Park and Ride facility at Waverley. vii) Should the Park and Ride scheme not be operational when the buildings connected to this application be first occupied, contributions to the A1, A132 and A3 bus service will be provided for five years. This is estimated to cost £1.5 million (£300,000 per year). Page 132 2

viii) Prior to the first occupation of development the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.

B) Consequent upon the satisfactory signing of such an agreement the Council resolves to grant permission for the proposed development subject to the following reasons for grant and conditions:

STATEMENT FOR REASONS FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

The local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations:

Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and Humber (2004)

UDP POLICIES

EC1 Existing Industrial and Business Area EC2.1 Sites for New Development EC3.1 Land Identified for Industrial and Business Development EC3.3 Industrial and Business Development EC6 Tourism and Visitor Development ENV2 Conserving the Environment ENV2.3 Maintaining the Character and Quality of the Environment ENV3 Borough Landscape ENV3.1 Development and the Environment

And

Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ (2005) Planning policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’ (2005) Planning Policy Guidance note 13 ‘Transport’ (2001) Good practice Guidance on Planning and Tourism (2006)

2. For the following reasons:

The proposed elements of the application for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage and Distribution) uses are in accordance with the sites allocation within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan for Industrial and Business Use. The hotel and ancillary retail and leisure elements of the proposal although not in accordance with the adopted Unitary Development Plan’s allocation for Industrial and Business use are not considered to prejudice the implementation of the Development plans policies and proposals, and is considered to be in accordance with PPS6 and policy EC3.3 ‘Other Development within industrial and Business Areas’

Page 133 3

The proposal is not considered to have any adverse effects on the character of the area or on residential amenity and therefore is considered to comply with Policy EC3.1 ‘Land Identified for Industrial and Business Use’

Conditions Imposed: General 01 [PC00] Before the commencement of the development, details of the siting, design, external appearance of the building(s) and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 02 The development of uses on the site shall be restricted as follows: B1 offices: not more than 22% of the gross floor area. 03 No more than 9000 square metres in total of gross floor area of the site shall be used for the hotel hereby permitted, and ancillary retail and leisure use, unless agreed otherwise, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 04 [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. 05 The detailed plan to be submitted in accordance with the requirements of this permission shall include a plan indicating positions, design, materials and type of site boundary treatment to be erected. The approved details shall be implemented. 06 In accordance with the development hereby approved, prospectively adoptable footpath and bridleway links shall be incorporated into the future development of this site. The detail of the routes, widths, surfaces, furniture and landscape screening shall be first provided to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing, the approved details shall be implemented concurrently with the carrying out of the development.

Landscaping 07 No development shall commence on site until a masterplan indicating proposals for hard and soft landscaping on the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The masterplan shall provide for advance, structure landscaping on the boundaries of the site, as well a palette of suitable species and boundary treatments to be implemented as subsequent detailed proposal for development come forward. The advance structure landscaping shall be implemented before any development on the site is fist brought into use. 08 Page 134 4

A landscape management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Highways 09 The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed realignment of Highfield Spring and resiting of the existing roundabout to the south east of the site, to align with the proposed Waverley Link Road, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with a phasing programme to be agreed. 10 The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed alterations to the existing roundabout in Highfield Spring, indicated in draft form on plan reference B0345300/P/100/003 Revision 4, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the details shall be implemented in accordance with a phasing programme to be agreed. 11 Any future detailed layout shall include cycle parking facilities in accordance with the Council's Cycle Parking Guidelines for New Developments. 12 Notwithstanding the indicative road layout on plan reference B0345300/P/100/003 revision 4 the proposed on site road layout shall be designed and constructed to prospectively adoptable standards. 13 [PC95] Before the proposed development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives, modal split targets together with a time bound programme of implementation, monitoring and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of and give prior approval in writing to any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the programme of implementation. 14 Any future detailed layout shall include car parking facilities in accordance with the Council's Maximum Car Parking Standards.

Drainage 15 The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the “Waverly Development Site Flood Detention Reservoir Outline Design Report” November 2006 prepared by Jacob Babtie. 16 Before the commencement of development, the proposed surface water and land drainage works as detailed in drawing number B0467000/LD/001 Rev 2 shall be completed unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 17 Before the commencement of development, details of Lakes 1, 2 and 3 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include all proposed wetland areas, operational details of each Lake including connecting pipes, outfall and emergency spill/overflow. The Lakes shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Page 135 5

18 Before the commencement of development, details of Handsworth Beck diversion and pumping arrangements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 19 Before the commencement of development, details of SUDS techniques shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 20 There must be no buildings, structures (including gates, fences and walls) within 8 metres of the top of any bank of the River Rother unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 21 [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. 22 Before the commencement of development, a programme of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall detail all on-site and off-site works. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved programme. 23 The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off-site. 24 Details of the proposed means of disposal of foul 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. 25 No buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to the completion of the approved foul drainage works unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Other 26 [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 and its implications on the health and safety of site workers and nearby persons, building structures and services, final end users of the site, landscaping schemes and environmental pollution, including ground water, and make recommendations so as to ensure the safe development and use of the site. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the survey and all recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer, prior to occupation of the site. 27 Before the commencement of development, the method for piling foundations shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The piling shall thereafter be undertaken only in accordance with the approved details. Page 136 6

28 Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks plus 10%. All filling points, vent, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filing points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. 29 Except in case of emergency, no operation that is likely to give rise to noise nuisance or loss of amenity shall take place on site other than between the hours of 0800 to 1800 Monday to Friday and between 0800 to 1300 on Saturdays. Operations which give rise to noise nuisance shall not be carried out on Sundays, Public Holidays or outside normal weekday working hours. 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 shall be notified at the earliest opportunity of the occurrence of any such emergency and a schedule of essential work shall be provided. 30 All machinery and vehicles employed on the site shall be fitted with effective silencers of a type appropriate to their specification and at all times the best practicable means shall be employed to prevent or counteract the effects of noise emitted by vehicles, plant, machinery or otherwise arising from on-site activities. 31 The operator shall install and thereafter utilise as appropriate, wheel washing facilities on the site for the duration of the construction. Prior to its installation on site, full details of its specification and siting shall be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 32 All vehicles reversing warning alarm systems shall be operated in accordance with a specification submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development. At all times, effective means shall be employed to prevent and counteract the effects of audible warning alarms to nearby noise sensitive receptors. No audible warning alarm shall exceed the ambient noise level in the working location by more than 5dBA. 33 Prior to the commencement of site operations the operator shall nominate a qualified person to be responsible for immediate investigation of complaints. Prior to the commencement of the operations the Local Planning Authority shall be informed of the appointment, and the arrangements to be employed shall be agreed. A log of all complaints shall be kept and made available on request to the Local Planning Authority. 34 Prior to the commencement of site operations the operator shall submit a scheme to control dust emissions, and their effect on surrounding residential premises, for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include for routine visual assessments, specify those staff able to make decisions as to the obtaining of any Page 137 7 plant or equipment required for dust suppression, and a protocol to investigate complaints. 35 At all times during the carrying out of operations authorised or required under this permission, effective means shall be employed to minimise dust. Such measures shall include water bowsers, sprayers whether mobile or fixed, or similar equipment, upward pointing exhausts, wind fences, landscaping bunds, stockpile dampening, aerodynamic shaping of stockpiles to prevent dust lift off, regulating the speed of vehicles, hard covering of roadways and other steps as are appropriate. 36 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, overburden and other dust raising materials shall be temporarily curtailed until such time as the site/weather conditions improve such as to permit a resumption of the operations. 37 [PC67] No part of the land other than that occupied by buildings shall be used for the storage of goods, components, parts, waste materials or equipment without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 38 Prior to first occupation of the buildings hereby approved the works indicated and approved by drawing no. B0345300/P/100/003 shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. 39 The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed new roundabout in Highfield Spring, indicated in draft form on plan ref. B0345300/P/100/003 Revision 4 (southern roundabout), has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with a phasing programme to be agreed.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 [PR00] No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority. 02 To ensure that the development complies with Planning Policy Statement 6 `Planning for Town Centre:2005` and to ensure that the whole site is not developed for B1 office use. 03 To ensure that the development complies with Planning Policy Statement 6 `Planning for Town Centre:2005` and to ensure that the whole site is not developed for hotel, retail or leisure uses. 04 [PR38] 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’. 05 [PR44] In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. Page 138 8

06 In the interests of promoting sustainable development. 07 In the interests of proper planning control of development and the visual amenity and bio-diversity of the site. 08 In the interests of proper planning control of development. 09 [PR29] No details having been submitted they are reserved for approval. 10 [PR29] No details having been submitted they are reserved for approval. 11 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 12 [PR29] No details having been submitted they are reserved for approval. 13 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 14 In the interests of promoting sustainable development. 15 In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage, and to ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 16 In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage, and to ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 17 In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage, and to ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 18 In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage, and to ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 19 In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage, and to ensure that no foul or surface water discharges take place until proper provision has been made for their disposal in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 20 To allow for sufficient access for maintenance. 21 [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’. 22 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. Page 139 9

23 [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’. 24 [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’. 25 [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’. 26 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 27 The site is contaminated/potentially contaminated and piling could lead to the contamination of ground water in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 28 To prevent pollution of the water environment. 29 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 30 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 31 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 32 [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. 33 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 34 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 35 In the interests of minimising dust intrusion in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 Control of Pollution. 36 [PR58] In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’. 37 [PR67] To prevent the land from becoming unsightly in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 38 To ensure the satisfactory road provision prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved in the interest of road safety. Page 140 10

39 To ensure the satisfactory provision of the new roundabout.

Informative: It should be noted that there are public rights of way that currently cross the application site (see attached plan). These will be required to be diverted or extinguished. For further information please contact Jane Donaldson in Public Rights of Way on 01709 822932

Page 141 11

Page 142 12

Background

Members will recall considering and resolving to grant permission, subject to the satisfactory completion of matters the subject of a section 106 agreement, for this development originally back in December 2006.

This agreement was never completed and subsequently the decision notice has not been issued.

The applicant has now after lengthy discussions with the Council’s Transport Unit requested that an amendment be considered to the original proposal. This amendment involves the substitution of one of the proposed roundabout within the scheme to be replaced by at signalised cross road.

In addition to this proposed amendment and in order to correct an error within the previous report and minutes of the board meeting which should have stated the maximum amount of ancillary leisure and retail development had been reduced to 5,000sq.m. (2,000sq.m. for the hotel and 3,000sq.m. for ancillary retail and leisure) therefore there was no requirement to refer the application to the Government Office the application is being returned for further full consideration. The remainder of the report remains the same.

RB1993/1058 Extraction of coal by opencast methods together with all ancillary operations (car park, plant yard, temporary offices, water treatment areas and sewage treatment facilities) the creation and use of waste at land off Orgreave Road/High Field lane, Orgreave. GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 21/12/94 Subject to a legal agreement

RB2000/1436 Outline application for the development of fist phase of advanced technology park including uses in class B1, offices, research and development/industry at Waverley development site Poplar way/ High Field Spring, Catcliffe GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 07/03/01

RB2003/0046 Outline application for development of advanced manufacturing park including business uses in classes B1 & B2 with related infrastructure and landscaping at Waverley Advanced manufacturing park, High Field Spring, Catcliffe Granted Conditionally 06/04/05 Subject to a legal agreement

RB2003/1640 Continuation of open cast coal and reclamation operations without compliance with condition 2 of planning permission R93/1058P dated 21/12/94 together with revisions to approved restoration contours at land at Orgreave Road/ High Field lane, Orgreave

GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 01/07/04

Development Plan Allocations and Policy

Page 143 13

The application site is allocated for industrial and Business Uses within the adopted Rotherham Unitary development plan

Relevant National, Regional and Local Planning Policies;

Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and Humber (2004) Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ (2005’ Planning Policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’ (2005) Planning Policy Guidance 13 ‘Transport’ (2001) Good Practice Guide on Planning and Tourism (2004)

UDP POLICIES

Site Description

The application site is approximately 22.54 hectares in area and is located within the site known as Waverly. The Waverly site comprises of approximately 300 hectares and is the subject of a masterplan that has been commissioned by the applicant, UK Coal. Waverly had been split into four principle components on the masterplan that comprise of the Advanced Manufacturing Park (AMP) Highfield Commercial, residential and mixed use, and the parkland and recreational areas. The 100 acre AMP site has the benefit of planning permission and there are a number of units constructed and occupied on site at present.

This application relates to the Highfield Commercial element of Waverly which is one of the last areas of land within the Waverly site currently allocated within the UDP.

As members may be aware, the Waverly site has a long history of coal mining. The reclamation scheme commenced in April 1995 and is currently ongoing. Its intension is to clear up extensive areas of contamination and dereliction associated with the former coking works. The application site has already been backfilled and compacted ready for development whilst the restoration of the remainder of the Waverly site is on-going and is due to be landscaped by approximately May 2008.

Proposal

The application is in outline with the means of access to be considered at this stage. Details of siting of any proposed buildings, external appearance of buildings and landscaping are all reserved for approval at the reserved matters stage. The application was submitted with an indicative plan which shows the access to the site Page 144 14 being taken from the existing roundabout on Highfield lane/Highfield Spring and is anticipated to link to the proposed link Road.

The proposal is for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial), B8 (Storage & Distribution), Hotel, Railway Station and ancillary Leisure & Retail development. Whilst the application is in outline, the applicant’s agent has noted that the anticipated quantum of development is 48,250sq.m. commercial floor area, 2,000sq.m. Hotel, 3,000sq.m. ancillary Leisure and Retail Uses, 3500sq.m. Railway Station.

The application was accompanied by a Transport Assessment, Environmental Assessment, Development Framework Document, Planning Policy Statement 6 Assessment, Flood Detention Reservoir Outline Design Report, Air Quality report, landscape design Code and Method Statement for great crested newts.

Environmental Impact Assessment

A screening option was carried out to determine whether an Environmental Statement should accompany the application. The proposed development falls within the description contained within paragraph 10a of the 1999 Town and Country Planning(Environmental Impact Assessment) regulations 1999 and meets the criteria set out in column 2 of the table i.e. that the area of the development exceeds 0.5 hectares. However, taking account of the criteria of Schedule 3, the opinion has been reached 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 and therefore an Environmental Statement was not required to accompany the application.

Publicity

The application was advertised in the press and on site as a departure to the UDP as the proposal includes a hotel, retail and leisure use, as a major development and as affecting a public right of way. In addition site notices were posted in the vicinity. No comments have been received as a result of the publicity carried out.

Consultations

As the application has been amended since the previous report all consultees have been reconsulted. No further comments or objections have been received as a result of this reconsultation all comments as previously reported below remain the same.

Highway Agency

Note from the Transportation Assessment (TA) submitted with the application that the proposed development would generate a significant number of trips during both the morning and evening peek periods which would put pressure on J33. Further work including the analysis of accidents, assessing junction 33 with and without the proposed development in 2008, 2010 and 2027 was requested to be carried out. This has been completed and the results reported. The Highway Agency has concluded that they do not propose to give a direction restricting the granting of planning permission.

Page 145 15

Transportation Unit

The amended proposal to replace one of the proposed roundabouts within the scheme by a signalised crossroads is supported by the Transportation Unit. Lengthy consultations in respect of this provision have been undertaken with the applicant and the Council which has resulted in this present amendment. The latest proposal will result in less land take and more control over highway movement and safety.

Note the Transportation Assessment (TA) submitted in support of the proposal has been audited. Whilst the development has the potential to generate a significant volume of additional vehicle traffic in the surrounding highway network, it is considered that this can be managed subject to a package of highway/transportation measures. In this respect, SYPTE have suggested that land be reserved for a Park and Ride facility with appropriate vehicular access and a new railway station platform. Contributions to existing bus services (should the Park and Ride facility not be operational when the development is first occupied) and the provision of bus stops/shelters are recommended also. In addition, consideration has been given to the Highway’ Agency’s comments and their subsequent decision not to object.

No details have been submitted with regard to car parking at this stage however a condition is recommended to ensure that the detailed plans comply with the Council’s maximum parking standards.

Environment Agency

Although a flood risk assessment was submitted with the application the Environment Agency objected to the application as this was not considered to be sufficient and they requested further details be submitted. Following the submission from the applicant of the report ‘Flood Detention Reservoir Outline design Report 2006’ the EA removed their objection subject to the attachment of a number of conditions

With regard to contamination, it is recommended that several conditions be attached to ensure that there is no possibility of contaminated water entering or polluting ground water.

Environmental Health

No further comments to make.

Catcliffe Parish Council

Has commented that as there has been a masterplan with some evidence of support an application covering the whole site should be the way forward. The proposed business, industry and storage element of the proposal is welcomed as this will create job opportunities. They question need for a hotel and suggest this would have a detrimental effect on the hotel approved at junction 33. They ask that members note their surprise at the leisure and retail element given that an application was refused at the nearby Highfield Spring.

Page 146 16

In response, it is understood the application referred to above was an outline application (ref RB1996/0684) for 196,000sq.ft of leisure development with 1500 car parking spaces, 24 screen cinema, bingo, family entertainment centre, food court and nightclub. The application site for this scheme was the AMP site. Planning permission was refused in September 1998. This scheme would have been assessed under different guidance as PPS6 was only published in March 2005. In addition, this application has to be assessed on its own merits in relation to current government guidance.

SYPTE

Have commissioned Arup to carry out a study looking at the suitability and viability of a potential park and ride scheme. Note that the Waverly area has been identified as a suitable area of further investigation and request this application does not preclude the development of a potential Park and Ride scheme at Waverly. Following lengthy discussions with the developers, the issues raised with regard to Supertram, railway station and Park and Ride schemes at Waverly have been clarified. Note that any proposed railway station would need to be supported by a full business appraisal as investment in rail is being concentrated on maintaining and improving existing infrastructure rather than providing new facilities.

The discussions with the developer highlighted the opportunity for land release on an area of otherwise undevelopable land (the High Wall area) for the Park and Ride scheme. In order to ensure effective and sustainable public transport access to the site, SYPTE would wish to see the following:

• Reserve area of land, for five years, within UK Coal ownership for Park and Ride scheme with a minimum of 500 car parking spaces but potential for 1000 spaces in the vicinity of the High Wall • Provide a suitable vehicular/pedestrian access to the park and Ride scheme through the application site • Provide transport hub for Park and Ride facility • Provide 2 bus stops for local services • Provide 1 bus stop for Park and Ride scheme • Reserve land for railway station platform, drop off point and car park with no more than 50 spaces until the sooner of:1) elapse of five years from\the grant of the planning permission, 2) provision of viable business plan for railway station and services, 3) provision of Park and Ride facility at Waverly. • Should the Park and Ride scheme not be operational when the buildings connected to this application be first occupied, contributions to the A1, A132 and A3 bus service will be provided for five years. • Prior to the first occupation of development, the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of this site.

Streetpride (Drainage)

Concerns raised with regards to the flood risk implications of the proposal and with regard to drainage of the site. Have no objections, in principle, following the submission of the ‘Flood Detention reservoir Outline design Report 2006’ subject to the attachment of a number of conditions relating to drainage. Page 147 17

Streetpride (Landscape Design Section)

Although a written statement and illustrative masterplan has been submitted with the application, suggested that further work was carried out to identify key elements and a palette of typical treatments, species etc. Welcomed the submission of Landscape Design Code and makes detailed comments upon this document. Has however requested that landscaping conditions be attached to any permission issued to ensure that these comments are incorporated into the proposed development.

Yorkshire Water

Note that a water supply can be provided and make no objections subject to a number of conditions being attached to any permission issued

South Yorkshire Police Liaison Officer

Suggest that the development should be constructed to secure by design standards.

Sheffield City Council

Note that the proposal is likely to generate a number of jobs and as such, in light of Government Guidance, sustainability and accessibility implications need to be addressed. Also make a number of points in relation to highway issues. Also point out that assessment information is required under Planning Policy Statement 6. Suggest that conditions be attached to any permission to restrict total leisure and retail floor space. Suggest that office and hotel use is only appropriate if a public transport interchange is provided as part of the development.

Robin Hood Airport

No comments received but have made advisory comments that will be forwarded onto the applicant.

South Yorkshire Archaeological Service

Comment that the application has no archaeological implications due to the extent of the opencast extraction.

Appraisal

Principle of development

The application site is allocated for industrial and business use in the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan. The application is for development within Use Class B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial), B8 (Storage & Distribution), hotel, railway station and ancillary leisure & retail development. Therefore, the B1 (b) research, B1 (c) light industry, B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage and Distribution) elements of the proposal are acceptable in land use terms.

Page 148 18

The proposal also includes an element of B1 (a) (office) and hotel. Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres 2005 (PPS6) states that a number of uses have to be assessed against criteria to establish if their location is acceptable. This includes undeveloped land that could be used for amongst other uses, offices and hotels.

Therefore, the B1 (a) office and hotel aspects of the application should be assessed in line with the criteria stated in PPS6 which are as follows:

(a) the need for development

The applicant has submitted an assessment in accordance with PPS6 in relation to the above criteria. With reference to (a) need, the applicant maintains that there is a need for high quality office development and discounts a number of sites and existing offices. Need has been assessed on the basis of the need for grade A; office space. Grade A office space is defined as being high specification office space, good quality new or refurbished buildings. The report compares the demand for office space alas identified by enquiries to RIDO as to the supply of existing and proposed ‘grade A’ office floor space. This information has been assessed and it is considered that the applicants have demonstrated need for the proposed office space in line with (a) above. The indication that the amount of B1 (a) office floor space proposed is to be limited to 10,000 sq.m., approximately 22% of the commercial floor space within the application site. This is to be controlled by attaching a condition to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the submitted PPS6 Assessment.

With regard to the need for the hotel, this hotel is intended to serve this development, the adjacent Advanced Manufacturing Park in addition to the overall Waverly development. Indeed, the applicants note that the hotel is unlikely to compete for visitors to Town Centres or City Centre hotels. They confirm that this hotel is also likely to serve a different market to the hotels recently approved at junction 33 and Sheffield Business Park. The demand for the proposed hotel is envisaged to be mainly from business users visiting the existing businesses at the application site.

The applicant’s agent also notes that both Sheffield and Rotherham have a significant undersupply of hotel accommodation. It is noted that additional hotels are required in Rotherham to continue the area’s economies transformation. Consequently, it is recommended that a condition be attached to any permission issued to ensure that a quarter of the commercial development takes place before the hotel is developed (12,000 sq.m. of commercial development) as the hotel is intended to serve the AMP and wider Waverly site in addition to the application site. It is important that the hotel development is phased to ensure that it is not provided prematurely. Therefore it is considered that the information submitted has demonstrated a need for the proposed hotel in line with (a) above as it fulfils a business need.

(b) that the development is of an appropriate scale

With reference to the scale of the development (b) the applicants comment that the application site will become a significant business park development and the B1 (a) office element will be restricted to 10,000 sq.m., 2,000sq.m. hotel and 3,000sq.m. of Page 149 19 ancillary leisure and retail use proposed. This equates to the hotel and office element of the scheme comprising of less than 11% of the size of the total commercial floor area. This is considered to be an acceptable scale in terms of the adjacent AMP and the wider Waverly site.

With regard to (c) that there are no more central sites for the development of the office and hotel aspect of the proposal, the PPS6 assessment submitted by the applicant’s agent assesses a number of other locations and compares them to the application site. The applicant’s agent has pointed out that whilst the application site is at present not considered to be a ‘centre’, it may be when the Waverly site is fully developed. No decision has been made on the wider development of the Waverly site which will be established through the LDF process. Whilst the applicant’s have discounted a number of sites, it is clear that there are more sequentially preferable locations available for development which could accommodate the proposed hotel and some of the identified office space required. However, it is considered that the proposed office use is to form part of a Business Park and that the park is split into three elements, B1, B2 and B8. Thereby, B1 (a) office use is not the only commercial use proposed and is needed as part of the proposed Business Park. Furthermore, the B1 (a) office use proposed is recommended to be restricted to 10,000sq.m. and will be phased to ensure that the B1 (a) development is not the only part of the permission implemented. In addition, it is considered satisfactory that the hotel would serve the Waverly area and that whilst more sequentially preferable sites are available; these would not meet the requirements of the Waverly area. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of (c)

(d) That there are no unacceptable impacts on existing centres

In addition, whilst the applicant has noted the aspirations for the development of Rotherham Town centre to achieve the Rotherham renaissance, at present there is an absence of sites/space of the scale proposed in this application. It is also argued that there is a relatively large undersupply of offices and this is unlikely to affect the prospects of the town centre provided the amount of B1 (a) office space is limited to 22%. Similarly, the proposed hotel would serve a different market to any hotel located within Rotherham town centre and is unlikely to be detrimental to the town centre. Therefore, this is considered to demonstrate that the proposed offices and hotel will not have an unacceptable impact upon the town centre and meets criteria (d) of PPS6.

(e) That locations are accessible

No information has been submitted in relation to the accessibility of the proposal which would address point (e) of the above criteria. No objections are raised to the accessibility of the proposed scheme and given the existing and proposed developments in the Waverly area and the proposed transport contributions with the application, the proposal is considered to be acceptable.

Therefore, given that the applicant’s have demonstrated a need for the office and hotel element of the proposal, that there are no unacceptable impacts on existing centres and the location is accessible, that the proposals are of an acceptable scale, Page 150 20 the application can be supported, subject to condition being attached limiting the amount of B1 (a) floor space to be developed and the floor area of the proposed hotel to that stated previously within this report.

With regard to the proposed ancillary leisure and retail elements of the proposed scheme. Policy EC3.3 ‘Other development within Industrial and Business Areas’ states that uses other than B1, B2 and B8 will be accepted provided it can be shown that (i) there are no suitable alternative locations available for the proposed development, (ii) no land use conflicts are likely to arise from the proposed development and (iii) that the proposal would significantly increase the range and quality of employment opportunities in the area. It also states and recognises that facilities which can be shown to be ancillary to the main industrial/business use of an area will be considered to be acceptable subject to compliance with the usual planning requirements. The proposed floor area of the ancillary retail and leisure use is proposed to be 3,000 sq.m. This can be controlled by attaching a suitable condition and is considered to comprise an ancillary and complementary use to the primary use of the proposed Business Park and the adjacent AMP. Therefore, no objections are raised to this element of the proposal.

Consequently, no objections are raised to the principle of the development given that the development is considered to be in accordance with PPS6 and policy EC3.3 ‘other development within Industrial and Business Areas’.

Transportation Issues

A Transportation Assessment (TA) was submitted with the application. The TA assessed the impact of the development on the surrounding road network as well as making provisions to encourage sustainable non-car modes of transport. The audit of the TA concludes that whilst the development has the potential to generate a significant volume of additional vehicular traffic in the surrounding highway network, it is considered that this can be managed subject to a package of highway/transportation measures. In addition, the Highway Agency does not wish to offer objection to the development.

With regard to the proposed railway station, no detail plans have been submitted with reference to this element of the proposal. It is understood that the applicant and their agent are still progressing this element with the Strategic Rail Authority however as the SYPTE point out, investment in rail is being concentrated on maintaining and improving existing infrastructure rather than providing new facilities. Therefore the proposed Section 106 agreement terms would secure that the land for the proposed railway station platform, drop off point and car park with no more than 50 spaces is reserved for five years from the grant of this planning permission, or the applicant provide a viability business plan for the proposed railway station and services to the Strategic Railway Authority or a park and ride facility is provided at Waverly. This is considered to be satisfactory to mitigate to a significant degree the traffic impact of the development.

A study has been undertaken by Arup for SYPTE to look at a number of potential sites for park and ride schemes for which there is a wider need in both the Rotherham and Sheffield area. It is important therefore that the development of this site does not prejudice the potential of a park and ride scheme and as such the Page 151 21 applicant has agreed to reserve land outside the application site, but within their ownership, for such a possible park and ride scheme. In addition, they have agreed to provide a transport hub and access through the application site to the park and ride scheme. Part of the proposed Section 106 agreement also includes that should the park and ride scheme not be operational when the first building is occupied, the developer will pay for contributions to the A1, A132 and A3 bus services for five years at a cost of £300,000 per year resulting in a total contribution of £1.5 million.

Furthermore, the construction of a Waverly Link Road will provide visitors to the site with an alternative route to the M1 and help reduce the impact of additional traffic on the residential areas to the south of the site by providing direct routes into the site from the B6200. RMBC has submitted a major scheme business case to the department of transport (DFT) which they approved in July 2006. The road now has ‘programme entry status’ and its design is currently in progress with an anticipated planning application expected to be submitted in late 2007. The developer has agreed to fund 10% of the total cost of the proposed Waverly Link Road up to a maximum contribution of £1 million which is considered reasonable when compared to contributions to the adjacent 80 acre site.

Details of car parking has not been included in this outline application however it is recommended that conditions be attached requiring the detailed scheme to comply with the Council’s maximum parking standards.

Given the above, no objections are raised to the scheme from a Transportation point of view.

Public Rights of Way

There are public rights of way that cross through the application site which will be required to be diverted or extinguished. The applicant has been advised of this and this information will be added as an informative to any permission issued. In addition, a condition is recommended to be attached to ensure that prospectively adoptable footpath’s and bridleway links be incorporated into future development of this site.

Drainage

Concerns have been raised with regard to the proposal and the drainage of the wider Waverly site by both the Environment Agency and the Council’s drainage Engineer. The applicant’s agent has submitted a ‘Flood Detention Reservoir outline Design Report 2006’ and as such both parties are satisfied with this report, in principle, subject to the attachment of a number of conditions that ensure that these issues are dealt with in a comprehensive manner.

Landscape

A Landscape Design Code has been produced and submitted with the application. Whilst the Code is acceptable in principle, there are some areas that require more detailed work and therefore it is recommended that a condition is attached securing the submission of a landscaping masterplan to ensure that all these issues are fully addressed. In addition, details of the management of the landscaping areas are also recommended to be attached as a condition to any permission issued. Page 152 22

Air Quality

The report submitted with the application has concluded that the proposed development will not have an adverse impact upon the Air Quality Management Ares closest to the site. It is considered therefore that the proposed development would have a negligible adverse impact on air quality. Consequently, the impact on air quality is considered to be acceptable.

Employment Opportunities

The approval of this permission would allow a large area to be developed for employment generation uses. It is therefore considered appropriate that the Section 106 agreement should include provision to ensure that local people are able to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of this site. Additionally, could attract high profile companies to the borough which would also boost the local economy.

Conclusion

The proposal is considered to be acceptable, in principle, as the main element of the scheme accords with the site’s allocation as Industrial and Business Use, the B1 (a) office use and the hotel are considered to meet the criteria set out in Planning Policy Statement 6, and the ancillary retail and leisure uses can be restricted by condition to 3000sq.m to ensure that this element of the scheme remains ancillary.

In the light of the above, full considerations of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application as amended should be recommended favourably.

Item 2 Four storey extension to form an additional 40 No. bedrooms at Holiday Inn, West Bawtry Road, Moorgate

Ref: RB2007/1292

Recommendation:-

Grant Conditionally.

STATEMENT FOR REASONS FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission: 1. Having regard to the policies and proposals in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other relevant material planning considerations:

UDP Policies:

Economic Development Page 153 23

EC6 - Tourism and Visitor Developments EC6.1 – Hotel Development

Environment ENV1 – Green Belt

National Policies and Statements

Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres Planning Policy Statement 2: Green Belts

2. For the following reasons:

The Council considers that the proposal represents an acceptable limited extension to an existing building which does not represent a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original building. It is a well proportioned building mirroring the existing structure and subject to the recommended conditions would not it is felt by reason of its scale, nature or location have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt.

It is considered this proposal, in this location being within an existing hotel site within the immediate vicinity of a motorway junction is in accordance with policies contained with the Rotherham UDP and assists the Council in the delivery of its aims.

Conditions Imposed 01 [PC51] The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 02 [PC95] Before the proposed development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives, modal split targets together with a time bound programme of implementation, monitoring and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of and give prior approval in writing to any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the programme of implementation. 03 Details of the proposed replacement access to the area denoted ‘overflow parking and linen delivery’ shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. 04 [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 Page 154 24 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 - Plan numbers H6774/01, H6774/02 Rev A and H6774/03.

Reasons for Conditions 01 [PR51] 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 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 03 To ensure the satisfactory provision and access to ‘overflow parking and deliver facilities’ in the interests of highway safety. 04 [PR97] To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved/amended plans.

Page 155 25

Page 156 26

Background

Planning permission was originally granted on this site for a 40 bed hotel in 1978 under RB1978/3984. Since that time numerous applications have been received and granted for extensions to the original structure resulting in the present building that currently occupies the site.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The application site is located within the general extent of the Green Belt as defined by the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan (UDP), adopted in June 1999.

The site also abuts an area of known interests outside protected sites.

The following policies are the most relevant to this site:-

ENV1 – Green Belt EC6 – Tourism and Visitor Development EC6.1 – Hotel Development

Site Description

The existing hotel is situated on the A631 West Bawtry Road, Rotherham. The Hotel is surrounded by woodland and fronts the West Bawtry Road dual carriageway between Canklow and Moorgate.

To the south west on the opposite side of the dual carriageway is an estate of mixed industrial/retail development bounded by the River Rother.

To the south east is open grassland and the road traffic island that feeds junction 33 of the M1 Motorway.

Proposals

The application proposes a four storey side extension to the existing hotel to form an additional 40 no. bedrooms.

The present hotel site is rectangular in shape with the existing building situated centrally along the length of the site and surrounded on three sides by car parking areas giving at present some 260 car parking spaces. Page 157 27

The extension the subject of this application is proposed to be attached to the North West elevation of the existing building, in line with the existing structure and over land that is presently occupied by a hard surface car park.

The application has been amended since its original submission to accord to the internal requirements of the building to accommodate disabled access.

Publicity

The application has been publicised in the local press and site notices have been posted in the immediate vicinity to the application site.

In addition to the above publicity individual letters were sent to adjacent neighbours/businesses informing them directly of the proposal and inviting their comments.

No comments have been received as a result of the publicity carried out.

Consultations

Transportation Unit – No objections to the proposal subject to a suitable condition being attached to any grant of permission requiring details to be submitted and approved prior to commencement of development relating to:-

i) the details of the proposed replacement access to the internal overflow parking and delivery area ii) A Travel Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the development being brought into use.

Environmental Health has no objections to the proposal

Access Officer originally raised concerns to the lack of disabled access to internal bedrooms, as a result amended plans have been received which address this requirement. No further objections have been received to these amendments.

Appraisal

The application proposes a side extension to an existing hotel complex located within the general extent of the Green Belt as defined by the adopted Rotherham UDP.

The proposed forty bedroom extension echo’s the existing building in design, detailing, materials, mass and height with only slight alterations to the fenestration to compensate for the small rise in ground level from the existing building. The siting and design of the proposal are considered acceptable.

At the present 270 parking spaces are available within the site. This figure would reduce to 243 as a consequence of the development. Transportation Unit have confirmed they wish to offer no objections to this reduction as adequate car parking will still be available to be facilitated within the confines of the existing site. They Page 158 28 have requested the attachment of conditions to any grant of permission which relate to details of overspill car parking and the requirement of a travel plan.

Although the application is located within the general extent of the Green Belt wherein the presumption is against development except in very special circumstances, it is considered that the proposal represents an acceptable limited extension to an existing building which does not result in a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original building. It is a well proportioned extension mirroring the existing structure and would not if approved significantly prejudice the implementation of the development plan, policies and proposals or have a negative impact on the Rotherham town centre. The application therefore does not conflict with policy ENV1 – Green Belts, PPS 2 –Green Belts or PPS 6 – Planning for Town Centres.

As such, although a departure from the development plan, it is considered that there is no need to refer the application to the Secretary of State for determination.

Consideration has also been given to UDP policy EC6 (Tourism and Visitor Developments) wherein the Council recognises the contribution that tourism can make to sustainable economic development and job creation, and policy EC6.1 (Hotel Development) which encourages the development of hotels in appropriate locations in order to assist the growth of the ‘tourism and visitor’ sector of the local economy. It is considered this proposal, in this location being within an existing hotel site within the immediate vicinity of a motorway junction is in accordance with these policies and assists the Council in the delivery of its aims.

Given the above it is felt the proposal is in accordance with the UDP and all other material considerations and as such is recommended favourably.

Item 3 Application for Variation of Condition 01 (samples of material to be submitted prior to development) and Condition 02 (landscaping details to be submitted prior to development) imposed by RB2006/0153 to allow construction of access road prior to submission of material samples and landscape scheme at land at junction 33 M1 Motorway, Brinsworth

Ref. RB2007/1519

Recommendation:-

GRANT CONDITIONALLY

STATEMENT 0F REASONS FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:-

1. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations: Page 159 29

UDP Policies EC5 – Mixed Use Areas EC6 – Tourism and Visitor Development EC6.1 – Hotel Development ENV1.4 – land adjacent to the Green Belt ENV2 – Conserving the Environment ENV3 – Borough Landscape

2. For the following reasons: In the light of the above, full consideration of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application to vary these conditions should be recommended favourably, to do so would still fulfil the conditions original objectives and not result in undermining the intension for which they where originally imposed

Conditions Imposed 01 ‘With the exception of the works identified on Drawing Nos. 26783/007 Rev B and 26783/014 Rev A, no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority until such time as samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development has 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 02 With the exception of the works to create the site access road, as identified on Drawing nos. 26783/007 Rev B and 26783/014 Rev A no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority until such time as a landscaping scheme has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 03 [PC24] Before the development is brought into use, that part of the site to be used by vehicles shall be properly drained and constructed in concrete, tarmacadam, block paving or other such material as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained in a sound condition. 04 [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. 05 Page 160 30

There shall be no direct access to/egress from the site (including construction traffic) via the existing maintenance access at the Motorway Roundabout to the north east of the proposed Public House. 06 There shall be no discharge of foul or contaminated drainage from the site into either groundwater or any surface water, whether direct or via soakaway. 07 Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least the equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the compound capacity of interconnected tanks plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental drainage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the land. 08 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the recommendations contained within the Site Investigation report prepared by Eastwood and Partners Ref 26783-001 dated September 2005. 09 [MC15] Effective steps shall 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. 10 [MC17] All loaded lorries leaving the site shall be securely and effectively sheeted.

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’. 02 [PR38] 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’. 03 [PR24A] 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 road safety. 04 [PR27] Page 161 31

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. 05 [PR21] In the interests of road safety. 06 To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’ 07 To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’. 08 To ensure that the development does not give rise to the release of hazardous or toxic materials to any part of the natural environment in accordance with UDP policies ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ and ENV3.7 ‘ Control of Pollution’ 09 [MR15] Effective steps shall 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. 10 [MR17] In order to ensure that the development does not give rise to problems of mud/dust on the adjoining public highway in the interests of general highway safety/amenity, to give effect to the requirement of Policy MIN 6 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Page 162 32

Page 163 33

Background

The application to which this proposal relates was originally granted in May 2006 under reference RB2006/0153. This permission was a reserved matters approval for details of the erection of a five storey hotel, a public house/restaurant and associated access, car parking and landscaping works (reserved by outline RB2005/0949) at land adjacent junction 33, M1 Motorway, Brinsworth.

Members are also being asked to consider a separate application at this meeting for the proposed variation to condition 6 (Landscaping scheme to be submitted prior to commencement of development) ref RB 2007/1494.

UDP Allocation and Policies

The following policies are the most relevant to this site:-

EC5 – Mixed Use Areas EC6 – Tourism and Visitor Development EC6.1 – Hotel Development ENV1.4 – Land adjacent to the Green Belt ENV2 – Conserving the Environment ENV3 – Borough Landscape

Site Description

The application site includes two areas of land which are split by the M1 motorway. The southern area is bounded to the south and east by the Sheffield Parkway, the west by the railway line and to the north by the M1. The northern area is bounded to the south by the M1, the east and north by an agricultural field with Brinsworth Switching Station beyond. The two sites are linked by a single lane private road under the motorway adjacent to the railway. The southern site is at a lower level than both the M1 and the Sheffield Parkway and is overgrown and unsightly. The northern part of the site is at a higher level than the carriageway of the motorway. Part of the Page 164 34 site forms a section of an agricultural field whilst part of the site is covered in self set trees/bushes.

Proposals

This application seeks approval for:

i) the variation of condition 01 imposed on RB2006/0153 to state ‘With the exception of the works identified on Drawing Nos. 26783/007 Rev B and 26783/014 Rev A, no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority until such time as samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development has 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

ii) the variation of condition 02 imposed on RB2006/0153 to state: ‘With the exception of the works to create the site access road, as identified on Drawing nos. 26783/007 Rev B and 26783/014 Rev A no further development shall take place on the site unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority until such time as a landscaping scheme has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

The present condition No. 01 states:-

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 and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details And the present condition 02 states;

Prior to the commencement of development, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme should provide details of the species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establish and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

The application has been submitted to enable the construction of the access road, as identified on drawing number 26783/007Rev B and 26783/014 Rev A attached to permission reference RB2006/0153 prior to the submission of the landscaping scheme.

Publicity

Page 165 35

Statutory advertisement of the application in the local press has been carried out. The advertisement period for receipt of written comments to the application does not expire until 28 September 2006, the day after this board’s consideration of the application. This early schedule of the application has been undertaken in order avoid unnecessary delay in its determination and also to meet government targets on performance. Should members resolve to grant permission any decision notice will not be issued until the expiry of the advertisement period, should any representations be received before that time and have not already been reported to the board the application will be returned for members further consideration.

Consultations

Environment Agency – no comments to make Transportation Unit – considers the proposal has no implications from a highway/transportation context.

Appraisal

The application to vary these two conditions has been submitted to allow the construction of the access as previously approved without the need to first submit details of landscape and materials prior to commencement of development.

In the light of the above, full considerations of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application to vary these two conditions should be recommended favourably, to do so would still fulfil the conditions original objective and not result in undermining the intention for which they were originally imposed. Page 166 36

Item 4 Courtesy Consultation for the erection of 8 units in 2 No. two storey blocks to be used for Business (use class B1), General Industry (use class B2) and Storage and Distribution (use class B8) with 39 car parking spaces and associated landscaping works for Broomco 2156 Ltd.

Ref: RB2007/EN08

Recommendation:

That Sheffield City Council be thanked for the opportunity to comment on this application and be informed that this Authority does not wish to raise any objections to the submission subject to a request that the use be restricted to light industry and any office proposals be subject to PPS6 sequential testing to assess any proposed impact on both Sheffield and Rotherham town centre.

Background

The above application has been forwarded to the Borough Council for comments from the adjoining authority Sheffield City Council.

The site formerly part of the Tinsley Open Cast Site forms a fairly small component of the Sheffield Business Park. Numerous applications have been approved in the past on this and the adjoining area for industrial and offices uses.

The surrounding area is industrial in character comprising of older developments from the 1960/70’s and more recent construction units that have been developed following the completion of the open casting works.

Site Description

The application site is located on land south of Tinsley Park works between Rotherham Boundary and Shepcote Lane, Sheffield.

The site is level except for a steep embankment at the rear that slopes up to a larger partially developed industrial site to the east.

There is no significant vegetation on the site, although landscaping works have been carried out between the site and the road on the Europa Link frontage.

Proposal

The proposal seek full planning permission for the erection of 8 units in 2 no. two storey blocks to be used for Business (use class B1), General Industry (use class B2) and Storage and Distribution (use class B8) with 39 car parking spaces and associated landscaping works.

Appraisal

Page 167 37

The application site is located within the wider proposals for the Sheffield Business Park. As such from a land use point of view there are no objections to the proposal. However having regard to the site’s close proximity to Rotherham Town Centre it is recommended that a request be put forward to Sheffield City Council to consider restricting the B1 use to light industry and that any office proposal be subject to sequential testing as advocated within Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6). The remainder of the proposed uses (B2 and B8) are considered acceptable.

From a transportation view point it is felt the proposal if implemented would have little if any adverse impact on the Rotherham network.

Item 5

Appeal Decision – Dismissed Erection of 32no two and three storey dwellinghouses and garages at land at Hamilton Road/Muglet Lane, Maltby.

Ref. RB2006/1250

Recommendation:

That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

Background

An application for the erection of 32no two and three storey dwellinghouses was refused at Planning Board on 28 September 2006. The reasons for refusal were as follows:

“01 The site is allocated for Business purposes in the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan, and the Council consider that the loss of this business site to residential development would be in conflict with Policies EC1 ‘Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ and ‘EC 1.1 Safeguarding Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ of the Unitary Development Plan, which supports only proposals that will safeguard the viability of business and industrial areas.

02 The Council consider that the site provides valuable employment opportunities with the potential to contribute towards the range and quality of employment land in the area. As such the proposal is therefore in conflict with Policies EC 3.2 ‘Land Identified for Business Use’ and Policy EC 3.3 ‘Other Development within Industrial and Business Areas’ in the adopted Unitary Development Plan, which seek to provide business sites which are situated within or close to residential areas”

An appeal against this refusal was lodged on 30 January 2007 and was heard at a Public Inquiry in June/July 2007.

Page 168 38

The Inspector considers that the main issue in this case is the effect of the proposal on the supply of employment land in the area. She notes that the appeal site is situated within a primarily residential area within the urban area of Maltby. It is occupied by a metal manufacturing company, and consists of a number of units within which manufacturing takes place, an office building and car parking. The proposal would introduce 32 dwellings to the site. The Council accepts that other than in respect of the loss of an employment site the appeal site is suitable for the use proposed and the Inspector agrees.

The uses which take place on the appeal site fall predominantly within Class B2, although the allocation for the site is for B1 use. The most recent planning permission relating to the current use contains a number of restrictions on operations, including hours of operation and deliveries and the need to keep doors closed in the interests of residential amenity. Permission for a further building on the site was refused due to impact on residential amenity. Although there have been no recent complaints about the site the Inspector accepts that operations on the site are noisy and that the future growth and development of the enterprise may be hindered due to the proximity of residential areas.

The Inspector accepts that this is a case where relocation may be the preferred long term solution. However, there is no policy in the UDP which permits the use of an employment site for residential purposes in such circumstances and the Inspector does not accept that removal of the non-conforming use is a paramount material consideration. She agrees with the Council that, although assisting relocation could include the grant of planning permission, the proposal would still fall to be considered against Policies EC3.2 and EC3.3.

Reference has also been made to Policy EC1 which provides that land allocated for industrial and business uses will remain predominantly in industrial or business use. The appellant suggests that the proposal would not be contrary to this Policy as the allocation, which includes the Council depot, would remain predominantly in employment use even if the appeal succeeded. However, the reasoned justification makes it clear that the Council attaches high priority to the protection of jobs and in the Inspector’s view the Policy is not intended to operate in the manner suggested. The appeal site would no longer be in employment use at all and, accordingly, she considers that it would be contrary to Policy EC1.

Need for Employment Land

Paragraph 6.3.1 of the UDP states that employment creation has been the Council’s first priority for more than a decade and the underlying objective which the economic strategy seeks to achieve is to reduce local unemployment to the regional average. It is not disputed that Maltby has high levels of unemployment, with a rate of 5.3% which is significantly higher than the national rate of 2.6% or the Rotherham rate of 2.7%. Furthermore, it is accepted that depending upon the nature of any future employment use of the site it is likely that between 33 and 112 jobs could be provided on the site. The current use employs 30 people. The appellant has provided a unilateral obligation made under Section 106 of the Act which provides for the relocation of the current use to a site within the Borough of Rotherham and the Inspector accepts therefore that the grant of planning permission for the appeal Page 169 39 proposal would not result in the loss of employment within the Borough. It would however result in the loss of an employment opportunity within Maltby.

The Employment Land Review (January 2007) (ELR) identifies Maltby as a settlement with a high potential for change and refers to it as being significantly under-represented given its key growth status. It refers to 2.08 hectares of employment land being available for development in Maltby. The parties agree that there are only 2 market ready sites available in the area being 2.08 hectares of land at Hellaby Industrial estate and 0.48 hectares at Aven Industrial Estate, both of which have permission for development. Although the appellant pointed to other areas of land which may come forward for development in the future none are available immediately. The appellant suggests that the appeal site is also not market ready and is no different from other sites which may become available in Maltby. Nevertheless it is clear that there is limited land available for employment purposes in Maltby. The fact that Maltby is not identified as a strategic employment location and that there is no shortage of employment land on a borough wide level does not, in the Inspector’s view, lead to the conclusion that a site allocated for B1 purposes in Maltby should be released for residential development.

Suitability of Appeal Site for Employment Purposes

The ELR gives the appeal site an overall score of 3, recognising it as a good quality site likely to meet future market requirements. It scored better or as well as all other sites in Maltby in relation to its strategic location and sustainability and only one site scored better than it in relation to market attractiveness. The Inspector accepts that it is well located being close to Maltby town centre, a short distance from the A631 which is a main transport corridor and less than 3 miles from Junction 1 of the M18. The appellant considers that the ELR has a number of limitations and, in particular, criticised its restricted scope and strongly refuted the suitability of the site for B1 use.

Although the Inspector notes the evidence of Mr Kirk (Maltby Parish Council) that there is a waiting list for office space within Maltby Community Development Trust the Council were unable to provide any evidence of demand for office space and suggested that it was supply rather than demand led in the area. However the Council conceded that there was low office demand in Maltby and that this could be as a result of its location and that Maltby does not meet the requirements of businesses looking for office accommodation. Nevertheless she accepts that there appears to be high demand for the Lincoln Street Workshops which are located near to the appeal site.

The appeal site has been marketed over a period of 20 months. It was advertised at offers around £700,000, whereas the District Valuer suggested a value of between £550,000 and £650,000. It was advertised in the local press but not in any publications with a wider distribution and, although the report relied upon by the appellant suggests that advertising should be undertaken on a monthly basis in order to secure a significant profile, there were a number of substantial gaps in advertising. In the Inspector’s view the lack of interest in the site generated by the marketing campaign which was undertaken is insufficient for her to conclude that the appeal site is not in a desirable location for any B1 use.

Page 170 40

The appellant also refers to the costs of redeveloping the site being prohibitive and relies upon a viability assessment appended to a Merryweathers’ report. However, the assessment relates only to a high tech business park, the costings produced are not site specific and the Inspector’s view is that these matters limit its usefulness. Although she accepts that the Council has not provided an alternative viability assessment, and the assessment provided is supported by Mr Lloyd (Director of DTZ), on the limited information available, she is unable to conclude that the redevelopment of the site for any B1 use would be unviable.

The appellant also referred to the planning conditions attached to the current planning permission which limit the use of the site. However, the Inspector accepts that in considering a planning application for the redevelopment of the site for B1 use the Council would need to consider afresh what planning conditions would be appropriate. In her view B1 uses could coexist with the surrounding residential uses.

For all of these reasons therefore the Inspector is unable to conclude that the appeal site could not be brought forward for employment uses. The proposal would be contrary to the development plan and the evidence relating to lack of demand for employment land in Maltby and the unsuitability of the appeal site for such purposes is insufficient to grant permission contrary to the provisions of the development plan.

Housing

Paragraph 71 of Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) provides that where an up to date 5 year supply of deliverable sites cannot be demonstrated, local planning authorities should consider planning applications for housing favourably having regard to policies in PPS3.

The table relating to the Council’s housing trajectory shows that the number of completions in the Borough has been significantly below the RSS requirement for the last four years. The Inspector accepts that PPS3 requires performance to be judged against the trajectory rather than against individual years in isolation and that when cumulative completions are considered in relation to the cumulative requirement, performance does not fall below 85%. She also notes that paragraph 64 of PPS3 provides that where actual performance, compared with the trajectories, is within the acceptable ranges (for example within 10-20%) and future performance is still expected to achieve the rates set out in the trajectories, there may be no need for specific management actions at that time. However, she agrees with the appellant that a Council should aim to meet a housing requirement in full.

The trajectory shows less than 92% of the requirement being met by 2012 and also takes no account of the RSS Panel’s recommendations which increase the requirement from 2011 from 750 to 1160. Although actual performance is within the ranges referred to in PPS3, in the Inspector’s view the predicted future performance is such that this may be a case where there could be a need for specific management actions. In this respect she notes that the Council has granted considerably more planning permissions for housing in the last year.

The Inspector accepts that, even taking into account this action by the Council, there remain doubts over whether the Council will meet the required housing trajectory and can demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing in accordance with the Page 171 41 requirements of PPS3. She agrees with the appellant that this is a material consideration, and that the grant of permission for 32 houses could, taking into account the unilateral obligation from the appellant dated 18 June 2007 relating to affordable housing, make a useful addition to the need to deliver more market and affordable homes in the Borough. Nevertheless, in this case, she considers that any benefit this may bring would not outweigh the harm which would be caused by the loss of employment land.

Conclusion

The Inspector concludes therefore that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the supply of employment land in the area and would be contrary, in particular, to UDP Policies EC1, EC1.2 and EC3.2 and Policy E3 of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy. For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, she concludes that the appeal should be dismissed.

Item 6

Appeal Decision – Dismissed Erection of a detached garage at High Cragg Cottage, 10 The Green, North Anston.

Ref. RB2006/1620

Recommendation:

That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

Background

An application for the erection of a detached garage in curtilage of High Cragg Cottage, 10 The Green, North Anston was refused planning permission by the Chair and Vice Chair under Delegated Powers in October 2006. The reason for refusal was as follows:

“The proposed garage, by virtue of its siting and bulky and solid form, is considered to form an awkward feature which does not relate well with the existing buildings, altering the relationship between the courtyard space and the built form of the surrounding buildings. As such the proposal would not serve to preserve and enhance the appearance of the Conservation Area and as such is considered to be contrary to Policy ENV2.11 and the guidance contained in Environment Guidance 3: Development in Conservation Areas of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and the guidance contained in PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment”.

An appeal against this refusal was lodged on 29 March 2007 and I have now been informed that the appeal has been dismissed.

Page 172 42

The Inspector has noted that the site lies within the Conservation Area which is characterised by development on the steeply sloping land that rises from south to north. This appeal relates to one of a group of properties located on the higher land adjacent to the open space known as The Green. The proposed garage would be located within a small courtyard area which is to a large extent screened from public views by the existing dwellings and out-buildings.

It is the Inspector’s view that the proposal would dominate this small courtyard area. Because of the limited space available it would be set at an angle. This would appear contrived when viewed from the entrance to the courtyard and from the windows and doors of 11 The Green and the door of the application property itself. It would be an incongruous and cramped feature within this courtyard and it would unacceptably detract from this small area which is considered to be important to the intimate arrangement of buildings and spaces. The use of matching materials would not overcome this concern. Whilst historically there may have been development in this area, the Inspector has considered the proposal with regard to the current situation.

The Inspector notes that reference has been made by the appellant to the current appearance of the yard and to other developments which are unsympathetic to the Conservation Area. However he considers that neither these matters nor the limited views of the proposal represent a good argument for justifying poor layout and design. As the building would not respect its setting it would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. It would be contrary to Policy ENV2.11 of the Unitary Development Plan which seeks to resist development that would adversely affect the architectural or historic character or the visual amenity of the Conservation Area. It would also fail to satisfy Policy ENV3.1 which requires that development make a positive contribution to the environment. In these circumstances, the Inspector dismissed the appeal.

Item 7

Appeal Decision: Dismissed. Appeal by Mr M Perry Against Refusal of Planning Permission for the Erection of Fodder and Implement Storage Building at Land Rear of 32 Dowcarr Lane, Woodall.

Ref.RB2006/1658

Recommendation

That the decision to dismiss the appeal be noted.

Background

Planning permission for the building was refused under delegated powers in June 2006 for the following reasons: Page 173 43

1. The site of application is within the Green Belt wherein only development essential for the use of agriculture cemeteries, or outdoor recreation will be allowed, unless there are very special circumstances. It is considered that the building is not essential for the use of outdoor recreation, that there are no very special circumstances and that the proposal will be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt by way of its size and location. The proposal will therefore be in conflict with Policy ENV1 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

2. It is considered that by way of its size siting and materials the building will constitute an unacceptable visual intrusion in the landscape, contrary to Policies ENV3, ENV3.1 and ENV3.2 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

The appointed Inspector considered the proposal in three respects: (i) Whether the development is essential for the use of open recreation. (ii) If there is any adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt. (iii) If there are any special circumstances to overcome the presumption against the granting of permission

(i) The Inspector noted that the building would be for the storage of substantial amounts of hay and other equipment, close by the existing stables, and concluded that the amount of storage was by no means essential for a number of reasons:-

a. The building would be substantially larger in floor space area and height than the stables it would serve. b. That some of the items to be stored do not need to be within a building. c. There is some existing storage. d. The stables are only used for three domestic horses. e. There is no evidence of substantial harm from the existing situation.

(ii) The building would be substantial and prominent in the landscape from Woodall Lane and would represent a further encroachment in the countryside eroding the openness of the Green Belt. It would take many years for any landscaping to mature. The Inspector therefore concluded that the building would be in conflict with Policies ENV 1 Green Belts, ENV 3.1 Development and the Environment, and ENV 3.2 Minimising the Impact of Development of the Unitary Development Plan.

(iii) The Inspector noted that the building was also for security purposes but was of the opinion that the stables were near to the applicant’s home and that the relationship is sufficiently close to provide an acceptable level of security.

Conclusions

Page 174 44

The Inspector was of the opinion that the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt and that there are no very special circumstances to overcome the presumption against the granting of permission for inappropriate development or measures possible to overcome the harm to the landscape.

Item 8

Appeal Decisions – Dismissed 1. Erection of a detached dwellinghouse with two detached outbuildings to form double garages with rooms over, formation of a vehicular access and alterations/partial demolition of boundary wall 2. Conservation Area Consent for lowering and partial demolition of boundary wall at land off Brampton Road, Brampton-en-le-Morthen

Refs. RB2006/1978 and RB2006/1977 (respectively).

Recommendation

That the decision to dismiss the appeals be noted.

Background

Applications for the erection of a detached dwellinghouse and two detached outbuildings and Conservation Area Consent for the lowering and partial demolition of a boundary wall to facilitate this development were refused at Planning Board on 21 December 2006. The reasons for refusal were as follows:

RB2006/1978 (Planning Permission)

“The site is not considered to constitute infill development as it does not result in the filling of a small gap in an otherwise built-up frontage. As such the proposal is considered to constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, which should only be allowed in very special circumstances which are not considered to arise in this case. As such the development is contrary to Policy ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ and ENV1.5 ‘Infilling within Green Belt Villages’ of the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: Green Belts (revised)”.

RB2006/1977 (Conservation Area Consent)

“The proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy ENV2.11 of the Rotherham UDP relating to development in Conservation Areas which states that the Council will not permit development, or demolition which would adversely affect the historic or visual amenity of the Conservation Area except in exceptional circumstances when compelling justification exists and there is an acceptable redevelopment scheme. It is considered that no such justification exists in this case”.

Appeals against these refusals were lodged on 4 April 2007 and I have now been informed that the appeals have been dismissed. Page 175 45

The Inspector has noted that the detached dwelling would be sited within the Green Belt. The site is also largely within the Brampton-en-le-Morthen Conservation Area. Rotherham Unitary Development Plan (UDP) reflects the policy advice of PPG2: Green Belts. UDP Policy ENV1 specifies that the construction of new buildings inside the Green Belt is inappropriate development unless, amongst other purposes, it is for limited infilling in existing villages.

The Inspector is satisfied that the dwelling would be within the existing village which is identified in UDP Policy ENV1.5. This Policy defines infilling as the filling of a small gap in an otherwise built up frontage and specifies that generally this will be limited to a single dwelling, but that each will be considered on its merits with due regard to UDP Policy ENV3.2. What constitutes a small gap is not defined. The Inspector considers that it must therefore be a matter to be determined on the particular circumstances of the case. In this instance, the site would be some 23m in width. Whilst noting larger frontages elsewhere, this would be substantially wider than the widths of dwellings to either side. The plot is of such a size that without high boundary screening to obstruct views across it, it contributes to openness within the village. The filling of the gap, because of its effect on openness, would result in the loss of an important feature of the Conservation Area. Openness is also the most important attribute of Green Belts.

In addition, because the terrace to the south is set well back from the road, the frontage does not appear continuous and the gap does not appear set in an “otherwise built up frontage” in the street scene. It is noted that a Smithy existed close by, but this was on adjacent land and not on the application site. The site has been used as a vegetable garden and does not appear to have significantly been built upon in the past apart from a shed and greenhouse. There are no buildings on the site currently. The Inspector concludes that the development would not comply with the provisions of the UDP and would amount to inappropriate development.

Furthermore, the Inspector notes that the Council renewed planning permission for a dwelling elsewhere in the village and acknowledges the perceived inconsistency, but this inconsistency is not a matter which amounts to very special circumstances.

With regards to the proposed demolition of the boundary wall, Paragraph 4.27 of PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment advises that consent for demolition should not be granted unless there are acceptable and detailed plans for any redevelopment. This is reflected in UDP Policy ENV2.11. Therefore, albeit that the replacement semi-circular stone coping would be an improvement, and the alterations and access would fit in well with the proposed design, it would not be acceptable for the wall to be altered first without development plans for the site having been approved.

The Inspector therefore dismissed both appeals.

Page 176 46

Item 9

Application to vary Condition 34 attached to RB2005/0428 which states "Not less than 4645 square metres of the gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be occupied by a DIY/hardware retail operator. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under Condition 33 takes place" to "Not less than 2787 square metres of the gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be used for the sale of DIY, hardware, home improvement and garden goods. The wriiten approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under condition 33 takes place" at land at Rotherham Road Parkgate for Henry Boot Developments Ltd.

Ref. RB2007/0868

Recommendation

A) That the council enter into a substituted agreement with the developer under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to ensure the security of the follows matters being those agreed in the granting of the previous application RB2005/0428

(i) A commuted sum of 75% of the cost of resiting bus stop positions and installing a light controlled pedestrian crossing associated with the bus stop in A633 Rotherham Road in the vicinity of the Retail World Roundabout.

(ii) Prior to the first occupation of the development the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of the site

B) Consequently upon the satisfactory signing of such an agreement the Council resolves to grant permission for the proposed development subject to the following reasons for grant and conditions.

STATEMENT FOR REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

The Local Planning Authority has decided to grant planning permission:

3. Having regard to the policies and proposals within the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan and all relevant Guidance, as set out below, along with all other material planning considerations:

Page 177 47

Regional Spatial Strategy E1 (town and City Centres and SOC3 (Retail and Leisure Facilities) are also relevant to the proposal.

UDP POLICIES

RET4- New Retail Development RET4- Out of Centre Retail Warehouses EC1- Existing Industrial and Business Areas EC2- Sites for New Development EC3- Land Identified for Industry and Business Use ENV5.1 Allocated Urban Greenspace ENV2.2- Interest outside Statutory Protected Sites UTL1.2- Flood Defence outside Scheduled Washlands

Government Guidance contained within ‘Planning Policy Statement 6’ – Planning for Town Centres

4. For the following reasons:

Having given full consideration to the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application complies with the policies and Guidance referred to above, to do so would still fulfil the condition’s original objective to limit the amount of floor area for DIY/hardware goods and would not result in harm to the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

3. The foregoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission. More detailed information may be obtainted from the Planning Officer’s Report and the application case file and associated documents.

Conditions

01 Before the commencement of the development, details of the siting, design and external appearance of the buildings and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

02 Within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development, trees and/or shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for species, siting, planting distances, programme of planting and maintenance to establishment and any plants dying, removed or destroyed within five years of planting shall be replaced in a manner to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

03 A detailed landscaping scheme, for the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the Earl Fitzwilliam Canal, and the south eastern corner of the site around the approved access road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the approved scheme shall be implemented within the first available planting season after the commencement of the development.

Page 178 48

04 The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water.

05 No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any balancing works and off-site works, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

06 No piped discharge of surface water from the site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall for surface water have been completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences.

07 No buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.

08 Surface water from vehicular parking and hardstanding areas shall be passed through an interceptor of adequate capacity prior to discharge to the public sewer. Roof drainage shall not be passed through any interceptor.

09 Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through trapped gullies installed in accordance with a scheme previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

10 There shall be no discharge of foul or contaminated drainage from the site into either groundwater or any surface waters, whether direct or via soakaways.

11 Inspection manholes shall be provided and clearly identified on foul and surface water drainage systems, in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the scheme shall be retained throughout the life of the development.

12 Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a settlement facility for the removal of suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works shall be provided in accordance with details previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained throughout the construction period.

13 Before the commencement of the development, a scheme to alleviate flooding between the development site and the adjoining depot site to the south west and provision for all necessary compensatory flood storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented before the development is occupied.

14 The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved flood risk assessment incorporating the accepted mitigation measures into the construction of the development.

Page 179 49

15 Surface water discharge from the development shall be balanced to a maximum rate of 5 litres/sec/ha.

16 Before the commencement of the development detailed surveys as recommended in the preliminary ecological assessment dated 26 January 2005 by ECUS shall be undertaken. The results of the surveys and detailed development plans showing how and when the recommendations will be incorporated into the development shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The surveys shall be in relation to water voles, amphibians, reptiles and dittander. The approved details shall be implemented.

17 Before the commencement of the development details and plans which identify areas of vegetation to be retained and other areas identified as being of ecological importance shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include measures for the protection of the identified areas during the construction and post construction phases. The approved details shall be implemented according to an agreed programme.

18 No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until:

(b) Detailed proposals for the removal, containment or otherwise rendering harmless any contamination (the ‘Reclamation Method Statement’) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

19 No development approved by this permission, other than that necessary to implement the Reclamation Method Statement, shall be commenced until the works specified in the Reclamation Method Statement have been completed in accordance with the approved scheme, and a closure report, which provides verification that the required works to remediate the site have been carried out satisfactorily, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

20 If during reclamation works any contamination is identified that has not been considered in the Reclamation Method Statement, then additional remediation proposals for this material shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval. Any approved proposals shall thereafter form part of Reclamation Method Statement.

21 Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund.

Page 180 50

22 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 brought into use.

23 No part of the land other than that occupied by buildings shall be used at any time for the storage of goods, components, parts, waste materials or equipment without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

24 The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed signal controlled junction with A633 Rotherham Road shown in draft form on the submitted plan, indicating the positions of bus stops, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the development is first brought into use.

25 The on-site road network shall be designed and constructed to prospectively adoptable standards to a point coincidental with the western site boundary.

26 The detailed layout of the site shall include the provision of pedestrian/cycle links between the site and the public right of way adjacent to Earl Fitzwilliam Canal and between the site and the subway under the railway line on the north-western boundary of the site, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, implemented and retained as such.

27 The detailed layout of the site shall include car parking based on the Local Planning Authority’s Interim Maximum Parking Standards and secure cycle parking spaces based on the Local Planning Authority’s Cycle Parking Guidelines for New Developments, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, implemented and retained as such.

28 Before each building within the development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives and modal split targets, together with a time bound programme of implementation, monitoring and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of, and give prior approval in writing to, any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the programme of implementation.

29 The retail units hereby approved shall not exceed 7,900 square metres net sales floor space, and no additional floor space shall be created without the

30 The retail units hereby approved shall not be subdivided to create individual units less than 929 square metres gross floor space unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

31 ‘Notwithstanding the provisions of the town and country Planning Use Classes Order 1987, or the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted) Order 1995, or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying these orders, there shall be no display for retail sale of any of the following goods within the retail units hereby approved: food; alcoholic drinks; tobacco; books; newspapers and magazines; clothing and footwear; chemists’ Page 181 51 goods; jewellery; silverware; watches and clocks; bicycles and cycling accessories; toys; sports equipment; caravans; camping and boating equipment; pets and pet supplies; luggage; unless sold as ancillary to the sale of other types of goods permitted within the development’ at land at Rotherham Road, Parkgate.

32 Not less than 2,787 sq. m of the gross retail floor space hereby permitted shall be occupied by a DIY/hardware retail operator. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under condition 33 takes place.

33 Trading from the retail floor space hereby approved shall not commence until the construction (not including internal features) of at least 929 sq. m gross of employment floor space on the site has been completed.

Reasons:- 01 [PR00] No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority. 02 [PR38] 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’. 03 [PR38] 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’. 04 [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’. 05 [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’. 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 [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 [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’. 09 [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’. Page 182 52

10 [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’. 11 To ensure adequate access to foul and surface water drainage systems are provided at all times. 12 [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’. 13 To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area. 14 To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area. 15 To ensure adequate measures are put in place to prevent flooding of the area. 16 To ensure an up-to-date ecology survey is undertaken and appropriate mitigation needs can be addressed. 17 To ensure the appropriate protection and mitigation of areas of ecological importance. 18 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 19 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 20 [PR92] In the interests of safe redevelopment and afteruse of this site and in accordance with UDP Policy 4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’. 21 [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’. 22 [PR44] In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 23 [PR67] To prevent the land from becoming unsightly in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’. 24 In the interest of road safety. 25 In the interest of road safety. 26 To ensure the development encompasses satisfactory sustainable access ways. 27 To ensure adequate car and cycle parking facilities are made available with the development. 28 [PR95] In order to promote sustainable transport choices. 29 Page 183 53

To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre. 30 To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre. 31 To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre. 32 To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre. 33 To restrict the retail element of the proposal to that hereby approved in the interest of security the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

Page 184 54

Page 185 55

Notes for RB2007/0868

Background

Members will recall that Outline planning permission under reference RB2005/0428 was granted on this site in August 2006 for non-food retail and industrial development at Rotherham Road, Parkgate for Henry Boot following a public inquiry into non-determination.

This application, submitted on 4 March 2005 was a twin track application being identical to an original proposal ref RB2004/1556 which members resolved to grant permission for at their board meeting of the 24 November 2005.

However prior to this decision on the 23 June 2005 the applicants appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against non-determination of the latter application which resulted in a public inquiry being undertaken in June 2006

The permission granted in August 2006 for the ‘Erection of non-food retail (use class A1) industrial development (use class B2) and associated car parking and landscaping including details of means of access’ was subject to numerous conditions imposed by the Inspector in his report into the appeal and accepted by the then Secretary of State in his decision letter.

Members will recall that they gave consideration to the variance of condition 33 (retail of goods) imposed on this same application site at their last meeting at which time they resolved to grant conditional consent subject to the satisfactory completion of an agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Development Plan Allocations and Policy

The development plan includes the Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber to 2016 (RSS 12), published in December 2004, and the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan (UDP), adopted in June 1999.

Regional Spatial Strategy E1 (town and City Centres and SOC3 (Retail and Leisure Facilities) are relevant to the proposal.

Most of the application site is allocated for Industrial and Business Use within the adopted Rotherham Unitary Development Plan, the western section of the site is identified as an employment site E20. However a ‘J’ shaped section of the site on the Page 186 56 eastern boundary is allocated for Urban Greenspace. The site is also a Heritage Site HS229 for key habitat and natural history. The following policies are the most relevant to this site:-

Government Guidance contained within ‘Planning Policy Statement 6’ – Planning for Town Centres and

Site Description

The site, some 6.44 ha in area, lies to the north west of Rotherham Road, in the Parkgate area, a kilometre or so north of the town centre. The site has been the subject of previous decontamination and reclaimed from its former use as power station railway sidings, and has been given a level development platform. It is bound to the north and south by railway lines, to the west by a Council Highway depot, and to the east by the Earl Fitzwilliam canal. The site is clear of vegetation except round its edges and except for dense, localised vegetation associated with the canal.

The site is visible from Rotherham Road, which rises to cross the railway line and the Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation Canal to the south of the site. In the wider context, extensive commercial and industrial uses are located nearby, with Retail World warehouse park to the north east.

Proposal

The present condition no.34 states as follows:

‘Not less than 4645 sq.m. of gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be occupied by a DIY/hardware retail operator. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under condition 31 takes place

The variation of condition 34 proposes to state:-

‘Not less than 2787sq.m of the gross floorspace hereby permitted shall be used for the sale of DIY, hardware, home improvement and garden goods. The written approval of the Local Planning Authority must be given before any subsequent change in occupation of that unit by a retail operator selling any of the other categories of goods permitted under condition 31 takes place’

The proposed variation is justified by the applicant as the future identified operators of the DIY/hardware unit only require 2787 sq.m. for it’s store Page 187 57

Publicity

The application has been publicised in the local press and on site notices have been posted in the immediate surrounding vicinity to the application site.

In addition to the above publicity individual letter were sent to adjacent neighbour/businesses informing them of the proposal and inviting their comments.

No comments have been received as a result of the publicity carried out.

Consultations

Transportation Unit have appraised the transportation Statement accompanying the application and concluded if approved the variation as proposed would result in generating fewer vehicle movements than that previously as such no objections to the proposed amended condition have been offered.

Appraisal

As previously reported this application and its associated conditions were determined at appeal and neither the Inspector nor the Secretary of State saw any need to alter or vary the conditions suggested by Rotherham Borough Council on the basis that they did not comply with the Government advice in Circular 11/95 as claimed by the applicant.

This being said the application must be viewed on its own merit, and it is open to the LPA to impose a differently worded condition, so long as the intention behind the original condition is not undermined. In itself, such a reduction in the amount of DIY floor space would be acceptable in principle, given that any associated impacts on existing DIY store, whether in the town centre or out of town, would be reduced accordingly.

However, the corollary of the reduction in the DIY floor space proposed in the replacement condition is that the amount of other bulky goods retail floor space within the permitted development will rise. Bearing this in mind and having regard to the sequential test of the proposal but also taking into account a recent appeal decision into a reserved matters application at the Satnam site at Westgate which was allowed, it is not considered that there has been any material change in circumstances relating to availability of alternative sites within or on the edge of Rotherham Town Centre that would warrant a differing decision on this application.

A further issue relating to the sequential test is whether the increased scale other bulky comparison retail floor space that would arise from this proposed variation of condition, could be accommodated within or on the edge of Rotherham Town Centre. Condition 30 attached to the permission however prevents the subdivision of any retail unit in the scheme to create individual units less than 929 sq.m.\gross floor area. It is therefore considered that any additional other bulky comparison goods floor space arising from the variation to condition 34 would still have to be accommodated in relatively large retail units and such units cannot be found within or adjacent to the Town Centre. Page 188 58

In respect of the likely impact of the proposal associated with the likely increased turnover of the schemes should the condition be varied. The additional impact is assessed at around 0.8% on the comparison goods turnover should the variation be granted. This somewhat insignificant amount is considered not likely to undermine the Town Centres vitality and viability.

Initially some concern was felt to the necessity to vary the imposed condition and professional opinion was sought from an independent retail consultant. In his report the retail consultant concurred that the variation to the condition proposed would not undermine the objective of proposing the condition in the first place, nor would it result in harm to the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.

Summary and Recommendation

In the light of the advice received from the independent retail consultant, full considerations of the Development Plan and all other material considerations, it is considered that the application to vary condition 34 as proposed should be recommended favourably, to do so would still fulfil the conditions original objective and would not result in harm to the vitality and viability of Rotherham Town Centre.