(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Development Control And

Corporate, Customer and Community Services Directorate Legal and Democratic Services  Cumbria House 117 Botchergate, Carlisle, Cumbria CA1 1RD Tel 01228 606060  Email [email protected]

21 June 2019

To: The Chair and Members of the Development Control and Regulation Committee

Agenda

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

A meeting of the Development Control and Regulation Committee will be held as follows:

Date: Monday 1 July 2019 Time: 10.00 am Place: Council Chamber - County Offices, Kendal, LA9 4RQ

Dawn Roberts Executive Director – Corporate, Customer and Community Services

Enquiries and requests for supporting papers to: Nicola Harrison Direct Line: 01228 226906 Email: [email protected]

This agenda is available on request in alternative formats

Serving the People of Cumbria

1 MEMBERSHIP

Labour (6) Conservative (8) Liberal Democrat (3)

Mr A McGuckin (Vice-Chair) Mr RK Bingham Mr GD Cook (Chair) Mr F Cassidy Mr A Bowness Mr N Cotton Mr KR Hamilton Mrs HF Carrick Mrs BC Gray Mr W McEwan Mr D English Mr FI Morgan Mr LN Fisher Mr MH Worth Mr AJ Markley Mr D Wilson Mr CP Turner

Independent (1)

Mr JS Holliday

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

Agenda and Reports

Copies of the agenda and Part I reports are available for members of the public to inspect prior to the meeting. Copies will also be available at the meeting.

The agenda and Part I reports are also available on the County Council’s website – http://councilportal.cumbria.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CId=124&Year=0

Background Papers

Requests for the background papers to the Part I reports, excluding those papers that contain exempt information, can be made to the Legal and Democratic Services Unit at the address overleaf between the hours of 9.00 am and 4.30 pm, Monday to Friday.

2 A G E N D A

PART 1: ITEMS LIKELY TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

To receive any apologies for absence.

2 CHANGES IN MEMBERSHIP

To note any changes in membership.

3 DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

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

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

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

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

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

(b) Which has not been fully discharged.

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

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

6 Details of any tenancy where (to your knowledge)

(a) The landlord is the authority; and

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

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

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

(b) Either –

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

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

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

Note

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

4 EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

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

5 MINUTES

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of a meeting held on 23 May 2019. (Pages 7 - 20)

6 NL0065: - APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF LAND AT SCAWS DRIVE FIELD, PENRITH AS A NEW TOWN OR VILLAGE GREEN

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 21 - 92)

7 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 -SECTION 257 - APPLICATION TO STOP UP PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 412018 PARISH OF LAMPLUGH DISTRICT OF COPELAND

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 93 - 98)

8 HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 119 - APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 501018 PARISH OF ALDINGHAM: DISTRICT OF SOUTH LAKELAND

4 To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 99 - 104)

9 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 -SECTION 257 - APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 210015 PARISH OF BLINDCRAKE DISTRICT OF ALLERDALE

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 105 - 110)

10 HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTIONS 119 AND 25 - APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC BRIDLEWAY NO 138055 PARISH OF WETHERAL AND UPGRADING OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 138065 PARISH OF WETHERAL TO BRIDLEWAY: DISTRICT OF CARLISLE

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 111 - 122)

11 APPLICATION REFERENCE NO. 4/19/9003. PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF A NEW 2 STOREY HIGH ARCHIVE STORE TOGETHER WITH A NEW INFILL EXTENSION AND INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT, DEMOLITION WORKS, EXTERNAL WORKS AND THE REMOVAL OF 6 NO. TREES AND ASSOCIATED PLANTING. LOCATION: WEST CUMBRIA RECORD OFFICE, SCOTCH STREET, WHITEHAVEN, CA28 7NL

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 123 - 142)

12 APPLICATION REFERENCE NO. 2/19/9004. PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE FROM RESIDENTIAL CARETAKER'S BUNGALOW TO EDUCATIONAL USE WITH MEETING ROOMS. LOCATION: ASHFIELD INFANT SCHOOL, NEWLANDS LANE, WORKINGTON, CA14 3JG

To consider a report from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure (Pages 143 - 150)

13 APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

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

To note that these are applications that have recently been determined by the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure in accordance with the schemes of delegation. (Pages 151 - 152)

14 APPLICATIONS PROPOSED TO BE DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

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

To note that these applications that have been submitted to the County Council but are not ready/appropriate for presentation to the Committee of for determination under delegated powers and/or have been recently withdrawn or determined as invalid or not requiring planning permission etc. (Pages 153 - 154)

15 FORWARD PLAN

[Electoral Divisions: Various]

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

To note the Committee’s Forward Plan. (Pages 155 - 156)

16 DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting will be held on 13 August 2019 at 10.00am at County Offices, Kendal.

6 Agenda Item 5

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Minutes of a Meeting of the Development Control and Regulation Committee held on Thursday, 23 May 2019 at 10.00 am at Council Chamber - County Offices, Kendal, LA9 4RQ

PRESENT:

Mr GD Cook (Chair)

Mr A McGuckin (Vice-Chair) Mr KR Hamilton Mr RK Bingham Mr JS Holliday Mr A Bowness Mr W McEwan Mrs HF Carrick Mr FI Morgan Mr F Cassidy Mr MH Worth Mr N Cotton Mr CP Turner Mrs BC Gray Mr D Gawne Mr D English Mr K Hitchen Mr LN Fisher

Also in Attendance:-

Svetlana Bainbridge - Commons Registration Officer Mark Brennand - Lead Officer - Historic Environment and Commons Philippa Christie - Solicitor Richard Cryer - Lead Officer - Development Control Paul Haggin - Manager - Development Control and Countryside Management Louise Maving - Commons Officer Edward Page - Planning Officer Jason Weatherill - Commons Officer David Gibson - Senior Countryside Access Officer

Sarah Jakubiak - United Utilities

PART 1 – ITEMS CONSIDERED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PUBLIC AND PRESS

1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Mr T Markley and Mr D Wilson

2 CHANGES IN MEMBERSHIP

Mr Gawne had replaced Mr Wilson and Mr Hitchen had replaced Mr Markley as members of the Committee for this meeting only.

At the meeting of full Council held on 11 April 2019, the following changes were made to membership of the Committee:

 Councillor Paul Turner became a permanent member of the Committee  Councillors Deborah Earl and Karen Lockney became Substitute members of the Committee.

3 DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

The Chair announced that as a member of South Lakeland Local Committee Highways and Transportation Working Group, he had expressed a view in a recent meeting on Agenda item 13 (b) Application nos. 5/19/9001 and 5/19/9003. He would step down as Chair for this item and leave the room during consideration of the planning application.

Mr Cotton, Mr Bingham and Mrs Gray declared they were members of South Lakeland Local Committee Highways and Transportation Working Group and had expressed a view on Agenda item 13 (b) Application nos. 5/19/9001 and 5/19/9003 at a recent meeting.

Mr English declared in the relation to Agenda item 6, CA13/22 – Application to correct mistaken registration; part of CL38 Urswick Tarn, Church at Tarn Close, great Urswick and Agenda item 8, CA13/24, Application to correct mistaken registration: part of CL38 Urswick Tarn, Great Urswick, he was involved with the Church and had been married there.

Mrs Carrick declared that in relation to Agenda item 9, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Section 53 Application to delete a section of public footpath no 358020 in the district of Eden, she was the local member and would not vote on the application.

Mr Holliday declared that in relation to Agenda item 10, Localism Act 2011 Section 1(1) – Application to Create a Public Footpath at Distington in the Parish of Distington: District of Copeland, he was the Clerk of Distington Parish Council and written a letter several years ago regarding the application.

4 EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

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

5 MINUTES

Correction to Minute 139, first line, add in ‘ - Economy and Infrastructure’ after Director.

RESOLVED that, the minutes of the meeting held on 5 April 2019 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

2 8 6 CA13/22 - APPLICATION TO CORRECT MISTAKEN REGISTRATION; PART OF CL38 URSWICK TARN, CHURCH AT TARN CLOSE, GREAT URSWICK

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding CA13/22 – Application to correct mistaken registration; part of CL38 Urswick Tarn, Church at Tarn Close, Great Urswick. The report advised that Denise Chamberlain had applied to correct a mistaken registration in common land register unit CL38 Urswick Tarn, Church at Tarn Close, Great Urswick. The report asked members to make a decision as to whether the application should be granted and a correction be made to the Council’s Register of Common Land.

The Commons Officer guided members through the report and presented maps showing the land subject to the application. She recommended that the Committee accept the application to amend the Register of Common Land as the application was valid and the evidence provided demonstrated that the land was wrongly registered as common land.

It was moved by Mr McEwan and Seconded by Mr Bowness that the Committee accept the application and amend the Register of Common Land. Following a vote with 17 members in favour and 1 abstention, it was

RESOLVED that, the Committee accepts the application and amends the Register of Common Land on the grounds that the land in question, on the date of provisional registration and at all times since that date, has been covered by a building or within the curtilage of a building.

7 CA13/23 - APPLICATION TO CORRECT MISTAKEN REGISTRATION; CL451 COMMON LAND IN THE MANOR OF HOLME CULTRAM

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding CA13/23 Application to correct mistaken registration; CL451 Common Land in the Manor of Holme Cultram. The report advised that an application had been received from Ashley Harrison and Audrey Harrison to correct a mistaken registration in common land register unit CL451 Common Land in the Manor of Holme Cultram. The report requested members to make a decision as to whether the application should be granted and a correction made to the Council’s Register of Common Land.

The Commons Officer showed maps and photographs of the application land and briefed members on the application. The officer considered that the application had been validly made and evidence supported the claim that the land was not common land at the time of registration.

It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr English that the Committee accept the application and correct the common land register. Following a vote with members voting unanimously in favour of the motion, it was

3 9

RESOLVED that, the Committee accepts the application and corrects the common land register on the grounds that the land in question immediately before its provisional registration was not land subject to rights of common, waste land of a manor, a town or village green, or land specified in Section 11 of the Inclosure Act 1845.

8 CA13/24 - APPLICATION TO CORRECT MISTAKEN REGISTRATION; PART OF CL38 URSWICK TARN, GREAT URSWICK

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding CA13/24 Application to correct mistaken registration; part of CL38 Urswick Tarn, Great Urswick. The report advised that an application had been received from Thomas McPherson to correct a mistaken registration in common land register unit CL38 Urswick Tarn, Great Urswick. The report asked members to make a decision as to whether the application should be granted and a correction be made to the Council’s Register of Common Land.

The Commons Officer showed photographs of the site and guided members through the application details. He considered that all of the statutory criteria for deregistration had been met and recommended that the Committee accepted the application and amended the Register of Common Land.

It was moved by Mr English and seconded by Mr Morgan that the application be accepted and the Register of Common Land be amended. Following a unanimous vote in favour of the motion, it was

RESOLVED that, the Committee accepts the application and amends the Register of Common Land on the grounds that the land in question, on the date of provisional registration, and at all times since that date, has been covered by a building or within the curtilage of a building.

9 WILDLIFE & COUNTRYSIDE ACT 1981 – SECTION 53 APPLICATION TO DELETE A SECTION OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 358020 IN THE DISTRICT OF EDEN

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Section 53 Application to delete a section of public footpath no 358020 in the district of Eden. The report advised that an application had been received to delete a section of public footpath no 358020 near Penrith, from the Definitive Map. The report presented members with the evidence regarding the route and asked members to decide whether to proceed with the next stage of the process by making a legal order.

The Senior Countryside Officer outlined the history to the application and advised members of the evidence that had been taken into consideration. He did not

4 10 consider that there was enough evidence to show that the Definitive Map was incorrect. A member reported on the historical significance of the folly tower and considered that a path leading to it would be reasonable.

Mrs Carrick, the Local Member commented on the detail available in the report, on the evidence from the witness statements from local people and how the path wasn’t recorded on various maps over the years. She highlighted that it was a quarrying area and some maps showed a path used by workers travelling to the quarry and therefore it may have been mistaken as a footpath. She drew members’ attention to evidence relating to the lack of a viable field gate since 1926, evidence from a resident of 40 years and the description of the route on the original Schedule for path 358020. She highlighted that existence of the public right of way was not known until 1988. As the path had not been used, she queried the statement of the Ramblers Association that as it had been diverted, the route must have been a path. She considered that there had been a series of errors in the recording process, explaining that the tracks to the quarry may have been misinterpreted as a footpath, the connection between the field and tower had not existed until 1950. She noted that the judgement was based on a balance of probability but stated that she did not think the footpath existed and supported deletion of the path. Mrs Carrick did not vote on this application.

Discussion took place on which County Council department historically would have dealt with the recording of changes to the footpath and the date when the Definitive Map was created. In moving that the application be rejected, Mr McGuckin expressed his reticence to delete the footpath as he considered that the path existed but the way in which it had been interpreted had been a mistake. Mr Worth seconded the Motion. Members were advised that if the path was retained then a diversion would be an option.

Following a vote with 16 in favour of the motion, 1 against and 1 abstention (Mrs Carrick), it was

RESOLVED that, the application to delete a section of public footpath no 358020 in the parish of Penrith (shown A-B on the map appended to the report) be rejected

10 LOCALISM ACT 2011 SECTION 1(1) - APPLICATION TO CREATE A PUBLIC FOOTPATH AT DISTINGTON IN THE PARISH OF DISTINGTON: DISTRICT OF COPELAND

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Localism Act 2011 Section 1(1) – Application to create a public footpath at Distington in the parish of Distington: district of Copeland which advised that the County Council owned a piece of land at Prospect Lodge, Distington and proposed to dedicate it as a public footpath.

The Senior Countryside Officer guided members through the application, showing photographs of the footpath and a map of the area. He advised that if the application was agreed, a bollard would be removed at the end of the path to improve access.

5 11

In moving that the land be dedicated as a public footpath, Mr Morgan advised that he had walked the path for forty years. Mr English seconded the motion. It was noted that the Parish Council supported the application. Members welcomed that the path would be retained for the community. The Senior Countryside Officer explained the reason for removing the bollard and members were advised of the work being undertaken in order to restrict vehicular access yet allow wheelchair and pushchair access. A member advised that there was vehicular access close to the path.

Following a unanimous vote in favour of dedicating the land as a public footpath, it was

RESOLVED that, using the powers set out in the Localism Act 2011 at Section 1(1), the County Council dedicate that section of land as a public footpath marked A-B-C described in Appendix A and shown on the plan at Appendix B of the report.

11 WILDLIFE & COUNTRYSIDE ACT 1981 - SECTION 53 APPLICATION TO ADD A PUBLIC FOOTPATH AT CULGAITH - PARISH OF CULGAITH: DISTRICT OF EDEN

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Section 53 Application to add a public footpath at Culgaith – parish of Culgaith: District of Eden which advised that an application had been received from Culgaith Parish Council in 2008 to add a public footpath alongside the church at Culgaith in the parish of Culgaith. The report asked members to consider the evidence of public use of the way and decide whether it should be added to the Definitive Map and Statement.

The Senior Countryside Officer showed photographs of the route and a map of the area.

Mr Morgan moved that the Order be made and the Chief Legal Officer confirm the order. This was seconded by Mr Cotton. Following a unanimous vote in favour of the motion, it was

RESOLVED that,

1 An Order be made under Section 53(3)(c)(i) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the effect of which will be to add a new section of public footpath to the Council’s Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way in the parish of Culgaith District of Eden (shown A-B-C-D on the map annexed at Appendix B to the report) 2 The Chief Legal Officer confirm the order

12 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2018/19

6 12 A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding how well the respective Development Control, Countryside Access and Common Land/Historic Environment teams were performing against either national performance targets or the Council Plan.

The Lead Officer - Development Control reported on statistics relating to the number of planning applications determined in 2018/19 and advised that performance had improved in the last financial year regarding the number of applications determined in the statutory timescale. He reflected on a number of significant planning applications that had been determined by the Committee which included the care homes in Carlisle and Whitehaven, the energy from waste plant in Carlisle and the West Cumbria Mining planning application.

The Senior Countryside Officer reported on the successful Soddy Gap application and on the new priority scoring matrix which was used to prioritise outstanding footpath applications. He talked about flood recovery work, coastal access work, the Rights of Way Improvement Programme and National Trails. Members welcomed this work as it would benefit local residents. A query was made on the shortfall of money for flood recovery work. The Senior Countryside Officer advised on the funding already available and about future funding applications.

The Lead Officer Historic Environment and Commons reported on the number of applications processed and dealt with under delegated powers. He advised that the spike in historical severance applications had occurred because of the Commons Act (2006) and that a large proportion of those applications had to be determined by the Committee due to objections received from one member of the public. Historical Statutory Disposition was explained for members in relation to the Warcop Training Area application. The number of pending cases was reported.

RESOLVED that, the position be noted

A recess was held from 11.15am to 11.30am.

13 REPORTS ON APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

a Application Reference No. 1/19/9003. Proposal: Erection of a 2.4 m high green profile mesh security fence to replace existing 1.8 m high timber close boarded fence. Location: Newlaithes Infant School, Langrigg, Road, Carlisle, CA2 6DX

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding application reference No. 1/19/9003. Proposal: Erection of a 2.4 m high green profile mesh security fence to replace existing 1.8 m high timber close boarded fence. Location: Newlaithes Infant School, Langrigg, Road, Carlisle, CA2 6DX.

The Planning Officer presented a map of the area, a plan of where the school was situated, a map of the site and photographs of the current fence. Members asked questions on the height of the current fence and who would be responsible for litter

7 13 if any was caught in the fine mesh of the new fence. It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr Fisher that planning permission be granted subject to conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

Following a unanimous vote in favour of the motion, it was

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

b Application Reference Nos. 5/19/9001 & 5/19/9003.Proposal/Location1: Change of Use of land to the front and rear of County Hall and the Emergency Services buildings at Busher Walk, Kendal from office and storage uses (with associated parking) to a Car Park with associated development. Proposal/Location 2: Listed Building Consent for part demolition of a section of in curtilage wall and erection of car park related infrastructure, cycle shelter and other miscellaneous changes within the curtilage of County Hall, Busher Walk, Kendal .

Mr Bingham, Mr Cook and Mr Cotton left the room during consideration of this item. Mrs Gray remained in the room but did not participate or vote on the item.

Mr Mc Guckin in the Chair.

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding application reference Nos. 5/19/9001 & 5/19/9003.Proposal/Location1: Change of Use of land to the front and rear of County Hall and the Emergency Services buildings at Busher Walk, Kendal from office and storage uses (with associated parking) to a Car Park with associated development. Proposal/Location 2: Listed Building Consent for part demolition of a section of in curtilage wall and erection of car park related infrastructure, cycle shelter and other miscellaneous changes within the curtilage of County Hall, Busher Walk, Kendal.

The Planning Officer presented a map of the area, aeriel photographs, a site plan, a map showing Environment Agency Flood Risk Zones, a map showing the Kendal Conservation Area, a map showing the reduction in wall heights, photographs of the building, a landscape plan, photographs showing infrastructure and furniture, the proposed layout and the landscaping plan. All of the planning issues were outlined for members. Attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which identified modifications to the planning conditions. He recommended that planning permission be granted as modified by the amended planning conditions.

Discussion took place on the number of disabled parking bays in the proposal. It was highlighted that amongst the membership of the Council, there were more members requiring the spaces than those provided. The current provision of disabled spaces was considered to be more appropriate. It was queried why disabled spaces were split between the front and rear car parks as it may be difficult for someone to park at the back of the building and enter at the front.

8 14

The Planning Officer talked about the location of disabled bays, stating that they would be spread to allow the public to park in a disabled bay at the building’s rear then use the footpath along the river. He advised that changes could be made to the location of parking bays. A number of members did not support the number of and location of the disabled bays. A query was raised on the management of the barrier entrance and the potential for vehicles to queue whilst waiting to enter the car park.

The Planning Officer would report member comments on parking to the applicant and request changes be made. The Manager Development Control and Countryside Management stated that the issues raised by members were a material planning consideration and suggested that rather than defer the application, an extra condition be added in order that officers could address members’ issues.

A member questioned whether an Access for All survey should have been undertaken and would support the application on the understanding that this took place. It was confirmed that there would be pay and display car park at the front of the building. A short discussion took place on parking payment.

It was moved by Mr Morgan that planning permission be granted for application reference 5/19/9001 subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, with the additional condition that disabled parking provision be given full consideration. This was seconded by Mr Hitchen. Following a vote, 13 in favour, 0 against and 0 abstentions, the motion was carried.

It was moved by Mr Morgan and Seconded by Mr English that Listed Building Consent be granted for application reference 5/19/9003 subject to the conditions in Appendix 2 of the report. Following a vote, 13 in favour 0 against and 0 abstentions, the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that

1 Planning permission is granted for application reference 5/19/9001 subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report and an additional condition that disabled parking provision be given full consideration 2 Listed Building Consent is granted for application reference 5/19/9003 subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 2 to the report

Mr Bingham, Mr Cook and Mr Cotton returned to the meeting.

Mr Cook took the Chair.

c Application Reference No. 5/19/9002. Proposal: Engineering Operations to infill and level part Fields 8900 and 9108, Land South East of Strawberry Fields. Location: 1 Strawberry Fields, Kendal, LA9 7TA

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding application reference No. 5/19/9002. Proposal: Engineering

9 15 Operations to infill and level part Fields 8900 and 9108, Land South East of Strawberry Fields. Location: 1 Strawberry Fields, Kendal, LA9 7TA.

The Lead Officer - Development Control presented a map of the area, a photograph of the housing development, a photograph showing the hollow, a cross section of the land when infilled and photographs of the site. He advised members about the flood risk to the housing development and flood risk scheme at Strawberry Fields. He concluded that the application would not increase flood risk in the area or downstream.

Following member questions, the Committee was advised that the Public Right of Way would be protected and maintained, no builders rubble would be deposited in the hollow, material would be screened to ensure it was clean, the land was of low quality, the scheme adhered to flood protection legislation and the scheme was designed to the best of officers’ knowledge. Members queried the use of clay and the ability for water to percolate through the infill material. A number of members remained sceptical about the flood risk. The Lead Officer - Development Control understood member’s concerns regarding flooding but reassured members that technical experts had deemed the proposal to be satisfactory and advised the committee to grant planning permission. He advised members on how flooding was dealt with in the area, who would maintain the culverts and reassured members that there would be a Section 106 agreement in place.

It was moved by Mr McGuckin and seconded by Mr Fisher that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Following a vote in favour of the motion, with 10 in favour, 1 abstention (Mr Bingham) and 3 against (Mr Cotton, Mr Cook and Mrs Gray), it was

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

d Application Reference No. 5/19/9004. Proposal: Continued use of a temporary outfall from Kendal Wastewater Treatment Works up to 31st October 2021. Screening opinion also required. Location: Kendal Wastewater Treatment Works, Wattsfield Road, Kendal

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding application reference No. 5/19/9004. Proposal: Continued use of a temporary outfall from Kendal Wastewater Treatment Works up to 31st October 2021. Screening opinion also required. Location: Kendal Wastewater Treatment Works, Wattsfield Road, Kendal.

The Lead Officer - Development Control presented the background to the application and showed the location plan of the outfall location, the design of the outfall and photographs of the river, outfall pipe and testing of the water. He advised that a second application had been challenged but this had no impact on the application before members. He summarised the main issues for the Committee and advised that based on data, there would be no significant effects on water, flow or on species in the river. In explaining the extension of time he considered there was

10 16 currently no other viable alternative but a solution was being sought. He recommended that planning permission be granted.

A member queried whether there were mitigating actions in place should there be low rainfall for an extended period of time. A member highlighted his conservation concerns as the site was near a Roman fort and he hoped that the extension of time would improve the odour from the discharge area. The Lead Officer - Development Control advised that there was no evidence that flow or discharge would affect the Roman fort.

Ms S Jakubiak from United Utilities attended the meeting to address the Committee under the Public Participation Scheme. In urging the Committee to grant planning permission, she made the following points:

 The key consideration was the potential ecological impact on the designated site  Following an ecological assessment of the affected reach, there were no likely significant effects on the River Kent or on the SSSI features  Natural England agreed that extending the licence wouldn’t have a negative impact on the river Kent Special Area of Conservation  The Environment Agency had 2 probes monitoring water quality in the river and it had no objections to the proposal  A solution was being sought to progress a permanent solution which included reinstating a pipe under the river bed, reinstating a pipe further downstream and installing a pipe over the river  A number of assessments and surveys had taken place to assist with designing a solution  Throughout the process, United Utilities had engaged with Natural England and the Environment Agency and both supported the application  United Utilities were only on site between July and September  If the proposal was declined then there would be negative impacts in the area.

Members queried the benefits of installing the original outfall and whether water quality would improve if the original outfall was installed. Ms Jakubiak advised that the only issue was the location of the outfall as local anglers did not like where it was situated. As there had been opposition to the application, reinstatement in a more resilient way had been investigated but the hard rock had caused a number of problems. She confirmed that if the proposal was refused, sewerage would be expelled into the river.

Mrs Gray moved that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report as there was no other option available. This was seconded by Mr Cotton. Following a unanimous vote in favour of the motion, it was

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

11 17 e Application Reference No. 5/19/9005. Proposal: Section 73 planning application to vary condition 1 of planning permission 5/15/9004 extending the permitted duration of operations. Location: Land at Winder Moor, Willow Lane, Flookburgh, Grange over Sands, Cumbria

A report was considered from the Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure regarding application reference No. 5/19/9005. Proposal: Section 73 planning application to vary condition 1 of planning permission 5/15/9004 extending the permitted duration of operations. Location: Land at Winder Moor, Willow Lane, Flookburgh, Grange over Sands, Cumbria.

The Lead Officer - Development Control presented maps of the area, a photograph of the field, site phasing plans, site restoration plans, and a photograph of the site. The issues and impacts of the application were outlined for the Committee. The application would allow three more years for the site to be restored. Members were advised that the conditions would be amended to the year 2022.

Mr McGuckin moved that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report. This was seconded by Mr Morgan. Following a unanimous vote in favour of the motion, it was

RESOLVED that, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions (amended to 2022) set out in Appendix 1 to the report

14 APPLICATIONS/CONSULTATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

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

15 APPLICATIONS PROPOSED TO BE DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

The Development Control and Countryside Manager advised that a site visit may be held to Whitehaven Skips and Services Limited at Cleator Moor after Mr Morgan’s report that enforcement action may be required following complaints from the Parish Council and made to him personally.

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

16 APPLICATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED AT FUTURE MEETINGS

RESOLVED that, the list of applications to be considered at future meetings be noted

17 REPORTS AND UPDATES ON PLANNING ENFORCEMENT RELATED MATTERS

12 18 There were no updates on planning enforcement related matters made at the meeting

18 DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Committee would be held on 1 July 2019 at 10.00am at County Offices, Kendal

The meeting ended at 12.55 pm

13 19 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting date: 1 July 2019

From: Acting Executive Director – Economy & Infrastructure

NL0065: - APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF LAND AT SCAWS DRIVE FIELD, PENRITH AS A NEW TOWN OR VILLAGE GREEN

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Cumbria County Council is the registration authority for town and village greens under the Commons Act 2006.

1.2 An application has been received from Mrs Belinda Fox, Mrs Catherine Fenton and Mr Christopher Castle to register an area of land at Scaws Drive, Penrith as a new town or village green. The application was made under section 15(2) of the Commons Act 2006.

1.3 Section 15(2) specifies the legislative requirements for the registration of land as town or village green. For the application to be successful all statutory requirements must be met. Failure to meet one or more of the statutory requirements will result in the application being refused.

1.4 The purpose of this report is to request Members to make a decision as to whether the land should be added to the Council’s register of town and village greens.

2.0 POLICY POSITION, BUDGETARY AND EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS, AND LINKS TO COUNCIL PLAN

2.1 The relevant outcome in the Council Plan 2018 - 2022 is that people in Cumbria are healthy and safe.

2.2 This matter is a decision-making process of a quasi-judicial nature. There should be no policy or political consideration given and any potential financial implication should be ignored.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 It is recommended that the Committee accepts the application, on the grounds that the statutory criteria contained at section 15(2) of the Commons Act 2006 has been satisfied.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 On 5th August 2014 the Council, as registration authority for town and village greens (“the Registration Authority”), received an application (“the Application”) from Mrs Belinda Fox, Mrs Catherine Fenton and Mr Christopher Castle (“the Applicants”), for the registration of land referred to as “Scaws Drive Field”, Penrith (hereafter called the “Application Land”) as a new town or village green under Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 (“the 2006 Act”).

4.2 A copy of the Application and supporting documentation is attached to this report at Appendix 1 (please note that for pragmatic purposes I have only included a summary of the user evidence questionnaires received. A full copy of all questionnaires received can be provided on request).

4.2.1 You will note that the Applicants initially submitted the following evidence in support of the Application:

 29 user evidence questionnaires (6 of which were on detailed templates provided by third parties, and 23 of which were on a more concise template designed by the Applicants)

 A petition in support of the application signed by 111 individuals

4.3 The Application Land comprises of an area of maintained grassland, roughly 1.36 hectares in area, and located within a largely residential area of the Penrith East electoral ward. A plan showing the Application Land outlined in red is attached to this report at Appendix 2.

4.4 A Land Registry search confirmed that the registered proprietor of the Application Land is Eden District Council (“EDC”).

4.5 On 14th December 2016 the Application was deemed to have been duly made and notice of the Application was placed on site, advertised on Cumbria County Council’s website and also sent to all relevant interested parties in accordance with Schedule 7 of the Commons Registration (England) Regulations 2014 (“the 2014 Regulations”). Anyone wishing to make a representation to the Application had until 8th February 2017 to do so in writing.

4.6 No objections were received to the Application.

4.7 Several submissions of support were however received, namely from Penrith Town Council, a Penrith Town Councillor, local ward councillors, the chairman of the Scaws Tenants and Residents Association and other local residents. These submissions are included at Appendix 3.

4.8 During the notice period the Applicants chose to provide further user evidence in the form of photographs of the site, as well as further written submissions. I attach this additional supporting evidence at Appendix 4.

4.9 All submissions were sent to the Applicants for their information and comment. Due to the positive nature of the submissions the Applicants did not feel that any formal response was required.

4.10 Following an initial assessment of the Application and all subsequent material received, along with evidence gathered from a site visit and my own research, it was felt that further information and clarification was required before a robust recommendation could be made.

4.11 Photographs taken on the site visit are included and numbered at Appendix 5 and will be referred to later in this report.

4.12 The Registration Authority exercised its powers under Regulation 27(7) of The Commons Registration (England) Regulations 2014. Both the Applicants and landowner (EDC) were invited to make oral representations to clarify particular aspects of the Application and the Application Land, predominantly with regards to the land designation and signage in place. EDC were also asked to provide clarification on specific points prior to their oral representations, and an excerpt of this correspondence can be found at Appendix 6.

4.13 The Applicants took the opportunity to provide oral representations and on 17th November 2017 their oral representations were heard. It was agreed, at the Registration Authority’s discretion, that EDC could make their submissions in writing; however, EDC confirmed on the 18th April 2019 that they no longer intended to provide written submissions.

The Law

4.14 The 2006 Act governs town and village greens, Section 15 sets out the requirements which must be met if an application to add land to the town and village green register is to be successful.

4.15 Section 15(C) of the 2006 Act states:

Registrations of Greens – Exclusions; The right under Section 15(1) to apply to register land as a town or village green ceases to apply if an event specified in the first column of the Table set out in Schedule 1A has occurred in relation to the land (“a trigger event”).

Eden District Council, the Planning Inspectorate and Cumbria County Council’s planning department have confirmed that they were not aware of any such trigger event at the time the Application was submitted, and therefore the Application has not been rejected on these grounds.

4.16 The Application is made under Section 15 (1) of the 2006 Act which states:

“Any person may apply to the commons registration authority to register land as a town or village green if subsection 2… applies”

4.17 Section 15(2) provides that a town of village green has come into existence where:

“a) a significant number of the inhabitants of any locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality, have indulged as of right in lawful sports and pastimes on the land for a period of at least 20 years; and

b) they continue to do so at the time of the application.”

4.18 The statutory conditions referred to in Section 15 (1) and (2) above can be broken down as follows:

i. A significant number;

ii. of the inhabitants of any locality or any neighbourhood within a locality;

iii. have indulged as of right;

iv. in lawful sports and pastimes;

v. on the land;

vi. for a period of at least 20 years and continue to do so at the time of the application.

4.19 For land to qualify as a town or village green under the 2006 Act, the use of the land must satisfy all the statutory tests. Failure to meet any one of the tests means that the application land cannot be registered as village green.

The application of the law to the facts and evidence of the application:

4.20 The application complies with the formal requirements as to form and content contained in the 2006 Act.

4.21 The statutory criteria as set out above is considered in relation to the application as follows:

i. A significant number:

“Significant” does not mean considerable or substantial. What matters is that the number of people using the land in question has to be sufficient to indicate that their use of the land signifies that it is in general use by the local community for informal recreation, rather than occasional use by individuals as trespassers.

29 Questionnaires were received in support of the application, along with a petition containing 111 signatures. The questionnaires indicated that the majority of the respondents used the Application Land themselves; but also revealed that all respondents have witnessed other individuals using the land.

I consider that the evidence provided is sufficient to show that a significant number of local residents have used the Application Land and therefore, in my opinion, this element of the criteria is satisfied. ii. Of the inhabitants of any locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality:

The Applicants identified Penrith East electoral ward as the locality. The Courts have defined a ‘locality’ as being an area capable of being defined by reference to some division of the country known to the law. Penrith East electoral ward is a legally recognised administrative area and therefore is considered to qualify as a locality. iii. Have indulged as of right:

“As of right” is a legal term meaning that for the land to become a town or village green it must be used without force, without secrecy and without permission.

There has been no indication that the use of the land has been through force or secrecy. The user evidence questionnaires support this notion, and indeed my site visit of 20th October 2016 found the Application Land to be open and easily accessible from Scaws Drive to the South, with no barrier or fence to inhibit access (as shown at Appendix 5.1). Woodland trails also provided access from the eastern boundary (as shown at Appendix 5.4).

The matter of whether the Application Land was used “as of right” will therefore turn on the permission aspect. Permission can be expressly given or implied from the landowner’s conduct.

Implied permission arising from a landowner’s conduct can occur in various ways. One of such is where a landowner exerts such control over the use of the land so that it is apparent to a reasonable user that they are using the land subject to the landowner’s implied permission. Examples include precluding entry to the land from time to time, imposing a charge to use the land from time to time, and erecting appropriate signs on the land.

Signage

In terms of signage, our site visits, coupled with photographic evidence, have identified three types of signs on the land:

a. A “NO GOLF TO BE PLAYED…..” sign on the southern boundary of the land facing south which is currently blank as the wording has faded over time. It is understood that it continued with words to the effect “…IN THE AREA” or “…ON THIS AREA”. (see Appendix 7 and Appendix 5.2)

b. Two signs stating “Clean up after your dog” / “No camping”, one in the south-eastern corner of the land facing south-west and one on the eastern boundary facing west. (see Appendix 5.4 for an example)

c. A “SCOOP THAT POOP” sign on a lamp post on the western part of the southern boundary of the land. (see Appendix 5.6)

The “NO GOLF” sign is in principle capable of demonstrating to users that they were using the land with Eden District Council’s implied permission. If the land were registered as a village green, local inhabitants would have the right to undertake all lawful sports and pastimes on the land, including golf. By stating that such a recreational activity was not permitted on the land the sign could amount to an exertion of control by the landowner over the use of the land.

However, the sign was, at the time of our site visit of 20th October 2016, completely illegible (as shown at Appendix 5.2). Our knowledge of the wording of the sign is purely derived from a Google street view image taken in March 2009 (attached as Appendix 7). I therefore needed to determine if the sign was effective in demonstrating to users that the land was being used with the landowner’s permission. Ultimately I needed to be satisfied that, for a material part of the relevant 20 year period the sign was clearly visible to users, legible, clear in its meaning, referable to the land, users of the land would reasonably have been aware of it, and it was erected by Eden District Council. With that in mind I wrote to EDC on 8th February 2018 and they provided a response on the 29th March 2018 (as included at Appendix 6). By EDC’s own admission there is no record of the date the sign was erected, or by whom, and there is no evidence to show how long the contents of the sign were visible for. I am therefore unable to confirm that the sign had been effective at demonstrating implied permission.

The other signs (listed as items ‘b’ and ‘c’ above) appear less likely to demonstrate implied permission. The “No Camping” signs, given their location, may to a reasonable user relate to the wooded area to the East. Again, given their location, many users may even be unaware of the signs if they were accessing the land from the South, which would presumably be the main direction of access for many. Further, the sign must be an exertion of control by the landowner over the recreational use of the land, namely “sports and pastimes”. Certain forms of camping, such as camping solely as a place to sleep whilst visiting the area or otherwise would be classed as non-recreational, as they would not generally be regarded as a “sport or pastime”. The dog fouling signs do not seem to amount to an exertion of control over the recreational use of the land as the failure to clear up a dog’s waste in a public place is a criminal offence in any event, which would be the position whether the land was village green or not.

Designation of the land

The Supreme Court’s decision in Barkas v. North Yorkshire County Council held that recreational land provided and maintained by a local

authority pursuant to section 12 of the Housing Act 1985 or its statutory predecessors was used by the public “by right” and not “as of right” within the meaning of Section 15 of the 2006 Act.

Where land is held by an authority for the statutory purpose of recreation, members of the public who then use the land for that purpose are using the land pursuant to a statutory right to do so, and are therefore not trespassers. In EDC’s letter of 29 March 2018 (see Appendix 6) they state that they have “no evidence as to why the land was originally acquired. However land acquired in the surrounding area under the same transfer was used as development land for housing”. We therefore have no evidence that the land was acquired for the statutory purpose of recreation.

The Application Land was designated as “Amenity Open Space” in the Eden Local Plan, and subsequently as “Open Space and Recreational Land” in the Eden Core Strategy. However, it is my opinion that such planning designations are insufficient in themselves to establish that the land is held by Eden District Council for public recreational purposes. That is particularly due to the relevant policies protecting such open land for its amenity value, irrespective of whether there is public access to it. EDC do state in their letter of 29 March 2018 that “the land is maintained by the Council as informal open recreational land and has been maintained as such at all times as far as the Council is aware”, but I do not believe this is enough to establish that any use would be “by right”.

Taking into account all of the material received to date I believe that, on the balance of probabilities, the use of the land has been without force, without secrecy and without permission. In my opinion the use of the land has therefore been “as of right” and this element of the criteria is therefore satisfied. iv. In lawful sports and pastimes:

It was established in the Sunningwell case that lawful sports and pastimes do not have to be either organised sports or have a communal element. Solitary and informal activities, such as dog walking or children playing are sufficient, as long as there is an established pattern of use and it is not ‘trivial and sporadic’.

The evidence provided by the Applicants suggest that the Application land was being used on a regular basis, daily in some cases, for a variety of sports and pastimes. The sports and pastimes listed included football, cricket, rounders, kite flying, picnicking, dog walking, blackberry picking, children playing and walking.

I consider this element of the criteria to be satisfied. v. On the land:

The more detailed questionnaires submitted show a plan of the land to which they refer, that land being the Application Land. The

remainder of the questionnaires refer to “Scaws Drive Field” a well- known local name for the Application Land. There is therefore very little doubt that the user evidence all relates to the Application Land itself. Further additional evidence submitted, including photographs of activites being carried out (see Appendix 4), also show the use being on the Application Land itself.

In view of the above I consider that this element of the criteria is satisfied.

vi. For a period of at least 20 years, and continue to do so at the time of the application

The application was received on the 5th August 2014 and as such the period of use claimed runs from 5th August 1994 to the 5th August 2014. The user evidence submitted via the 29 questionnaires indicates a constant level of use throughout this 20 year period, with many respondents indicating that they’d used the Application Land for the entirety of the 20 year period.

I consider this element of the criteria to be satisfied.

In order for the Application to be successful the Applicants must prove that all of the statutory criteria set out in section 15(2) of the 2006 Act have been met. In my opinion the Applicants have, on the balance of probabilities, proven every element of the criteria.

5.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

5.1 The Council has a statutory duty to keep a register of Common Land and since the implementation of Part 1 of the 2006 Act, has the power to amend the register. The Council’s Constitution at Part 2G 2.1) f) i) delegates this responsibility to the Development Control and Regulation Committee.

5.2 In considering the Application, Members must consider all of the evidence available to them, and must be satisfied that the evidence shows that each aspect of the statutory conditions set out at Section 15(2) of the 2006 Act have been met. The burden of proof in this regard is firmly upon the Applicants to provide the required evidence. The standard of proof to be applied is the usual civil standard “on the balance of probabilities”, i.e. it must be more likely than not.

5.3 The role of this Committee is to reach its own determination on the matters of fact and law arising as a result of the Application. It is for Members to determine the Application fairly, putting aside any considerations of the desirability of the land being registered as a town or village green or being put to other use.

5.4 Although the findings of the Officer Recommendations are for the Committee to proceed with determination and acceptance of the Application, the

Committee is not bound to follow the Recommendation; providing that in reaching its decision it applies the correct legal principles and duly considers the evidence. Therefore Members are free to accept or reject any of the Recommendations in the report. If the members reject the Officer’s findings and decide either not to determine the Application, or to reject the Application and not add the Application Land to the register of town and village greens, the Committee should set out their reasons at the meeting.

5.5 There is no right of appeal against a Committee decision. The route for any challenges would be via judicial review in the High Court, where the issue would be whether the Committee had misdirected itself in law. Should a judicial review application be successful, the Council would be obliged to re- determine the Application, a successful judicial review application would not of itself determine that the Application Land was or was not a town or village green.

5.6 All other legal considerations, issues and implications have been addressed within the detail of the report.

6.0 OPTIONS

6.1 The Committee may accept or reject the Recommendation.

6.2 If the Recommendation is accepted the register of town or village greens will be amended to include the Application Land as a registered town or village green.

6.3 Members should note that the decision of the Committee in relation to an application to register a new town or village green is a legal decision and is not a matter of policy or discretion.

7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 I am of the opinion that the evidence that has been provided by the Applicants is sufficient to satisfy the criteria set out in section 15 (2) of the 2006 Act.

7.2 I consider it reasonable that this Committee resolve that the Application be accepted and the Application Land is added to the register as a new town or village green.

Angela Jones Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure 11 June 2019

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Application Form and Supporting Evidence Appendix 2 – Plan of Application Land Appendix 3 – Submissions of support Appendix 4 – Additional evidence and photographs provided by Applicants Appendix 5 – Site visit photographs Appendix 6 – Correspondence with Eden District Council Appendix 7 – Google image from 2009

IMPLICATIONS

Staffing: None Financial: There would be cost implications in the event of an application for judicial review, however the Council is the registration authority and therefore has a statutory duty to decide applications. Property: None Electoral Division(s): Penrith East Human Rights: The Council as registration authority has to make a decision in accordance with the law and in particular with the provisions of the 2006 Act, given these legal criteria a decision must reflect the legislation despite any other rights of individuals.

PREVIOUS RELEVANT COUNCIL OR EXECUTIVE DECISIONS

No Previous relevant decisions

CONSIDERATION BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

Not considered by Overview and Scrutiny

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Commons Act 2006 Commons Registration (England) Regulations 2014 Defra Part 1 of the Commons Act 2006: Guidance to Commons Registration Authorities and the Planning Inspectorate 2015. Commons Registration Act 1965 R (Barkas) v North Yorkshire County Council [2014] R v Oxfordshire County Council and others, ex parte Sunningwell Parish Council, (House of Lords, 1999)

Contact: Jason Weatherill, 01228 221028, [email protected]

31 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 1

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Appendix 2

53 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 3

55 56 57 58 59

PENRITH TOWN COUNCIL 14 February 2017

Dear Sir Application to Register Land as a Town or Village Green NL0064 (Scaws Drive Field) and NL0065 (Croft Terrace) On Monday 13 February the Planning Committee of Penrith Town Council considered the two applications to register land in Penrith as a town or village green. You stated that under the Commons Registration (England) Regulations 2014 there is no provision to allow for extensions to statutory notice periods and that we were not a statutory consultee although a Parish Council would be. As I already stated, Penrith Town Council is constituted as a Parish Council (like others within Cumbria), however legally changed its name only not its constitution. I believe you were wrong in your consultation and that we should have been consulted. Penrith Town Council would like to unreservedly support both applications. The pieces of land in question have been used by residents of the town for a large number of years, some residents using the land for recreation as long as 60 years ago. It is important to preserve our green spaces within the town and we hope that these applications will be approved. Yours sincerely

Rosalyn Richardson Deputy Town Clerk

Penrith Town Council, Council Office, First Floor, St. Andrew’s Place, Penrith, Cumbria, CA11 7XX Tel: 01768 899773 Email: [email protected] 60

Appendix 4

61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Appendix 5 5.1 : Signage and street furniture to the South of the site.

5.2 : Close up of the ’blank’ sign to the South of the site.

77 5.3 : Eastern portion of the land taken from the South East corner

5.4 : Signage along the eastern boundary of the land

78 5.5 : View across the land facing South towards Scaws Drive

5.6 : “Scoop that poop” sign towards the South West corner of the land

79 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 6

81 82 83 84 85 86

Your Reference: Our Reference: MDF/

Enquiries to: Lisa Tremble

Direct Dial: (01768) 212249

Email: [email protected] Date: 29 March 2018 Town Hall, Penrith, Cumbria CA11 7QF Tel: 01768 817817

Sent via email: [email protected]

Mr Jason Weatherill Commons Officer Commons Rgistration Lady Gillford’s House Petteril Bank Road CARLISLE CA1 3AJ

Dear Mr Weatherill

Application for the registration of land as a Town or Village Green Scaws Drive Field, Penrith

Thank you for your letter of 8 February 2018.

I have now had comments back from relevant officers and can reply to each of your points as follows:

1. Unfortunately the Council can find no record of when the sign at Appendix 2 and 3 was erected or by whom.

2. The Council is unable to confirm or provide any evidence to show how long the contents of the sign were visible.

3. The sign appears to say “No golf to be played” and has an Eden District Council logo.

4. The sign with the faded lettering is positioned close to the edge of the field in a central position, it could be presumed that most reasonable users would be able to see it. The dog fouling sign is still legible and is positioned in a central position close to the edge of the wood and again would be accessible and easily observed by reasonable users.

5. There is in place the ‘Eden District Council Dog Fouling Designated Areas Order 1998’ which came into force on 10 August 1998, made under the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996. A copy of the order is attached.

6. The Council has no evidence as to why the land was originally acquired. However land acquired in the surrounding area under the same transfer was used as development land for social housing. The land was acquired in a conveyance dated 28 January 1946 between The Lowther Estates Limited, The Legal and General Assurance Society Limited and The Urban District Council of Penrith. www.eden.gov.uk Matthew Neal Solicitor Deputy87 Chief Executive (Monitoring Officer) 7. The land is maintained by the Council as informal open recreational land and has been maintained as such at all times as far as the Council is aware. Works undertaken include grass cutting, litter picking and works to shrub growth and the surrounding trees.

I hope the above information is of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely

Lisa Tremble Assistant Director Legal Services

Encs

www.eden.gov.uk Matthew Neal Solicitor 2 Deputy88 Chief Executive (Monitoring Officer) 89 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 7

91 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting date: 1 July 2019

From: Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 –SECTION 257 – APPLICATION TO STOP UP PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 412018 PARISH OF LAMPLUGH DISTRICT OF COPELAND

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 An application has been received to stop up public footpath no 412018 at Eskett Quarry in the Parish of Lamplugh.

1.2 This can be done by an order under section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and consultations have taken place so as to assist members to reach a decision as to whether or not an order should be made.

2.0 POLICY POSITION, BUDGETARY AND EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS, AND LINKS TO COUNCIL PLAN

2.1 The relevant corporate theme is “To ensure places in Cumbria are well- connected and thriving”.

2.2 The relevant procedure is an “administrative quasi-judicial” one. The conditions which must be satisfied for an order to authorise the stopping up or diversion of a footpath under section 257 of the Town & County Planning Act 1990 are that it is necessary to do so to enable development to be carried out in accordance with planning permission granted under Part III of the 1990 Act

2.3 Members have discretion as to whether or not to make an order, but such discretion must be exercised reasonably.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 That, pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g)(ii) of the Council’s Constitution, an order be made under Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 to stop up that section of public footpath no 412018 in the parish of Lamplugh as shown marked on the plan at Appendix A and that all necessary action be taken to confirm the order.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 Planning consent for mineral workings at Eskett Quarry was granted under planning permission 4/89/0871 and 4/95/9014 and more recently 4/06/9012 First Periodic Review (Environment Act 1995) granted on 1 March 2007.

4.2 A diversion Order made by the Department of Transport in 1991 for the nearby footpath 412019 resulted in 412018 being disconnected from the rights of way network at its eastern end.

4.3 The western termination of the cul-de-sac path 412018 was at Eskett Farm which was subsequently lost to quarrying. This, combined with the 1991 diversion, has left the entire length of the path unreachable and unusable by the public for some time.

4.4 All costs associated with processing of this stopping up order will be paid by the applicants.

Consultation

4.5 The statutory undertakers have been consulted and none are affected.

4.6 A consultation has been carried out with

Lamplugh Parish Council – no response received

Copeland Borough Council – no response received

Ramblers – no response received

Local Ramblers representative – no response received

Cumbria and Lakes Local Access Forum (CALLAF) – supports the stopping up

Byways and Bridleways Association – no response received

British Horse Society – no response received

Open Spaces Society – no response received

Cyclists' Touring Club – no response received

British Driving Society – no response received

Auto Cycle Union – no response received

Landowners – the landowner has no objection to the stopping up of the footpath

4.7 The local member for Cleator Moor East and Frizington, Arthur William Creighton Lamb has been consulted but has not made a response

5.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

5.1 Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows a competent authority to make an order stopping up or diverting any footpath, bridleway or restricted byway if they are satisfied that it is necessary to do so in order to enable development to be carried out –

(a) in accordance with planning permission granted under Part III, or

(b) by a government department

5.2 The stopping up is necessary to enable the development, the subject of the planning permission to be carried out.

5.3 Under Part 2G, paragraph 2.1(g)(ii) of the Constitution, the Committee has power to stop up footpaths and bridleways.

6.0 OPTIONS

6.1 The Committee may accept or reject the recommendation. If the recommendation is accepted by Members and an order is made any objector will have an opportunity, before the order is confirmed to submit a further objection. The matter will then be referred to the Secretary of State for a decision as to whether or not the order should be confirmed in circumstances where the objection is not withdrawn.

7.0 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION

7.1 No objections have been received as a result of consultations.

7.2 As set out above, the footpath has been already been lost on the ground and as quarry workings are continuing under a relevant planning permission the path will need to be stopped up to allow the development to be carried out.

7.3 I therefore conclude that the proposed stopping up passes the legal tests set out in Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and Members are urged to approve the recommendation in this report.

Angela Jones

Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

June 2019

APPENDICES

A Stopping up Order Plan

IMPLICATIONS

Staffing: Nil Financial: Nil Electoral Division: Cleator Moor East and Frizington – Arthur William Creighton Lamb

PREVIOUS RELEVANT COUNCIL OR EXECUTIVE DECISIONS [Including Local Committees]

No relevant decisions

CONSIDERATION BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

Not considered by Overview and Scrutiny

BACKGROUND PAPERS

No background papers.

Contact: Geoff Fewkes, Countryside Access Officer Email: [email protected]

Appendix A

97 This page is intentionally left blank

Agenda Item 8

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting date: 1 July 2019

From: Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTION 119 – APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 501018 PARISH OF ALDINGHAM: DISTRICT OF SOUTH LAKELAND

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 An application has been received to divert a section of public footpath no 501018 at Moat Scar in the parish of Aldingham, District of South Lakeland.

1.2 This can be done under Sections 119 of the Highways Act 1980 and consultations have taken place so as to assist members to reach a decision as to whether or not a diversion order should be made.

1.3 The plan at Appendix A shows the proposal.

2.0 POLICY POSITION, BUDGETARY AND EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS, AND LINKS TO COUNCIL PLAN

2.1 The relevant corporate theme is “To ensure places in Cumbria are well- connected and thriving”.

2.2 The relevant procedure is an “administrative quasi-judicial” one. The conditions which must be satisfied for an order to be made and confirmed are that it should appear to Members “that it is expedient” for the public footpath to be diverted and that there is a need to make an order on the grounds set out in paragraph 5.1 of this report. Members have discretion as to whether or not to make an order, but such discretion must be exercised reasonably.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 That, pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g)(iii) of the Council’s Constitution, an order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert that section of public footpath no 501018 in the parish of Aldingham shown A-B to a new route A-C-D-E-B as shown on the plan at Appendix A and that all necessary action be taken to confirm the order.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 The proposed diversion order is in the interests of the landowner.

4.2 The existing definitive route of the path crosses three fields in agricultural use passing through two hedged boundaries via stone and wooden stiles.

4.3 The proposed diversion route has the same start and finish points however walkers will no longer be required to walk through the middle of fields containing livestock and crops as it will follow the seaward periphery providing extensive views across Morecambe Bay and of the 12th century motte and associated defensive ditch.

4.4 The applicant landowner will install BS 5709 compliant wicket gates at Points C and E as shown on the plan at Appendix A and the County Council will install waymark posts at Points A and D.

4.5 The proposed diversion route is to be included in the proposal for the Stretch 5 of the England Coast Path.

4.6 All costs associated with processing of the diversion order will be paid by the applicant landowner.

Consultation

4.7 The statutory undertakers have been consulted and none are affected.

4.8 A consultation has been carried out with

Aldingham Parish Council – support the diversion

South Lakeland District Council – no response received

Ramblers – no response received

Local Ramblers representative – no objection to the diversion

Cumbria and Lakes Local Access Forum (CALLAF) – support the diversion

Byways and Bridleways Association – no response received

British Horse Society – no response received

100

Open Spaces Society – no response received

Cyclists' Touring Club – no response received

British Driving Society – no response received

Auto Cycle Union – no response received

Landowners – Consent has been received from the affected landowners

4.7 The local member for Low Furness, Janet Willis has been consulted but has not made a response

5.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

5.1 Under Section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980 we must be satisfied that in the interests of the owner, lessee or occupier of land crossed by the path or way or of the public, it is expedient that the line of the path or way, or part of that line, should be diverted.

5.2 The diversion must not alter any point of termination of the path, other than to another point on the same highway or a connected highway (Section 119(2) Highways Act 1980) and which is substantially as convenient to the public.

5.3 Further, under Section 119(6) of the Highways Act 1980, if no objections are received against the made order, we must be satisfied that the public footpath diversion is expedient and will not be substantially less convenient to the public in consequence of the diversion and that it is expedient to confirm the order having regard to the effect which:-

5.4 The diversion would have on public enjoyment of the path or way as a whole;

5.5 The coming into operation of the order would have as respects other land served by the existing right of way; and

5.6 Any new public right of way created by the order would have as respects the land over which right is so created and any land held with it.

5.7 Under Section 119(6A)(b) of the 1980 Highways Act, our Rights of Way Improvement Plan has been considered.

5.8 Under Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g) (iii) of the Constitution, the Committee has power to divert footpaths and bridleways.

6.0 OPTIONS

101

decision as to whether or not the order should be confirmed in circumstances where the objection is not withdrawn.

7.0 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION

7.1 No objections have been received as a result of consultations.

7.2 I am satisfied that the proposed diversion will not prove to be substantially less convenient to use compared to the existing definitive route. Although slightly longer the added distance eases the gradient and with the addition of BS complaint gates the path will be more accessible.

7.3 I conclude that the proposed diversion passes the legal tests set out in Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 and, if Members approve the recommendation in this report, the order should be made in the interests of the landowner.

Angela Jones Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure June 2019

APPENDICES

A Plan showing proposed diversion

IMPLICATIONS

Staffing: Nil Financial: Nil Electoral Division: Low Furness – Janet Willis

PREVIOUS RELEVANT COUNCIL OR EXECUTIVE DECISIONS [Including Local Committees]

No relevant decisions

CONSIDERATION BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

Not considered by Overview and Scrutiny

BACKGROUND PAPERS

No background papers.

102

Contact: Geoff Fewkes, Countryside Access Officer Email: [email protected]

103 APPENDIX A APPENDIXAppendix AA PPENDIX A A

Appendix A

104 Agenda Item 9

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting date: 1 July 2019

From: Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 –SECTION 257 – APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 210015 PARISH OF BLINDCRAKE DISTRICT OF ALLERDALE

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 An application has been received to divert a section of public footpath no 210015 at Moota Quarry in the Parish of Blindcrake.

2.0 POLICY POSITION, BUDGETARY AND EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS, AND LINKS TO COUNCIL PLAN

2.1 The relevant corporate theme is “To ensure places in Cumbria are well- connected and thriving”.

2.3 Members have discretion as to whether or not to make an order, but such discretion must be exercised reasonably.

105

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 That, pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g)(iii) of the Council’s Constitution, an order be made under Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 to divert that section of public footpath no 210015 in the parish of Blindcrake as shown marked A-I to a new route A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I on the plan at Appendix A and that all necessary action be taken to confirm the order.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 Planning consent for an extension to the applicant’s quarry operation was approved by this Committee on 17 November 2014, when it was reported to the Committee that it would be necessary for the applicant to apply for an order to divert public footpath no 210015 around the extended boundary of the site. The current route of the footpath will need to be physically removed as it will be directly affected by the quarrying operations in the extension area. The planning permission does not require the reinstatement of the original topography to enable the path to be put back to its present alignment after the quarrying activities are completed.

4.2 A similar application was considered by this Committee at its meeting on 16 November 2015 when it was resolved that an Order be made. The diversion order was made on 26 November 2015, to which no objections were received.

4.3 Due to unforeseen circumstances the new path was constructed on an alignment that did not accord with the route on the made Order. To rectify the situation the applicant was advised to submit a new application.

4.4 The 2015 diversion order will be revoked if a new Order is made.

4.5 All costs associated with processing of this diversion order will be paid by the applicant landowner.

Consultation

4.6 The statutory undertakers have been consulted and none are affected.

4.7 A consultation has been carried out with

Blindcrake Parish Council – no response received

Allerdale Borough Council – no response received

Ramblers – no response received

Local Ramblers representative – no response received

Cumbria and Lakes Local Access Forum (CALLAF) – supports the diversion

106

Byways and Bridleways Association – no response received

British Horse Society – no response received

Open Spaces Society – no response received

Cyclists' Touring Club – no response received

British Driving Society – no response received

Auto Cycle Union – no response received

Landowners – no other landowners are affected

4.7 The local member for Bothel and Wharrels, Alan Bowness has been consulted but has not made a response

5.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

(a) in accordance with planning permission granted under Part III, or

(b) by a government department

5.2 The diversion is necessary to enable the development, the subject of the planning permission to be carried out.

5.3 Under Part 2G, paragraph 2.1(g)(iii) of the Constitution, the Committee has power to divert footpaths and bridleways.

6.0 OPTIONS

7.0 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION

7.1 No objections have been received as a result of consultations.

107

7.2 As set out above, the footpath will need to be quarried to allow access to the extension area authorised under planning permission 2/14/9006 and will need to be diverted to allow the development to be carried out.

7.3 It is concluded that the proposed diversion passes the legal tests set out in Section 257 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and Members are urged to approve the recommendation in this report.

Angela Jones

Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

June 2019

APPENDICES

A Diversion Order Plan

IMPLICATIONS

Staffing: Nil Financial: Nil Electoral Division: Bothel and Wharrels – Joseph (Alan) Bowness

PREVIOUS RELEVANT COUNCIL OR EXECUTIVE DECISIONS [Including Local Committees]

DC&R Report 16 November 2015

CONSIDERATION BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

Not considered by Overview and Scrutiny

BACKGROUND PAPERS

No background papers.

Contact: Geoff Fewkes, Countryside Access Officer Email: [email protected]

108 â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â Legend

â Footpath to be Extinguished

â Footpath to be Created â D = 314716 536566 A A â â â â â â â â â C = 314722 536562 Routes to remain â A â - â

â Issues

â B â 5 â 3 01 â

â â E = 314714 536564 â

â Pond

â â

â F = 314604 536400

â â

109

â â

B = 314910 536418

â â

A â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â A â

â â â â

â â

â G = 314591 536344 â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

Mast â â â

â â

â A â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â 5 â

â 1 â

â â

â 0 â

â 0 â â â â â

â 1 â

2 â â â

P â

â â â â

Moota Hill A F â â â

H = 314606 536299 â

â â â

Moota Quarry â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

(limestone) â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â â â

â â

â â â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

A = 314895 536390 â

â â â â

â â

A â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

A â â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â Masts â

I = 314602 536293 S E A L

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Section 257 Public Footpath 210015 Diversion Order Scale 1:1500 @ A3

Moota Quarry, Moota nr Cockermouth 0 25 50 100 m

(c) Crown Copyright and Database Right 2019 Ordnance Survey Licence Number 1000019596 This page is intentionally left blank

Agenda Item 10

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting date: 1 July 2019

From: Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 SECTIONS 119 AND 25 – APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC BRIDLEWAY NO 138055 PARISH OF WETHERAL AND UPGRADING OF PUBLIC FOOTPATH NO 138065 PARISH OF WETHERAL TO BRIDLEWAY: DISTRICT OF CARLISLE

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 An application has been received to divert a section of public footpath no 138055 at Cocklakes, nr Cumwhinton in the parish of Wetheral, District of Carlisle.

1.2 This can be done under Sections 119 of the Highways Act 1980 and consultations have taken place so as to assist members to reach a decision as to whether or not a diversion order should be made.

1.3 The applicant landowner has also agreed to enter into an Agreement under Section 25 of the Highways Act 1980 to upgrade public footpath 138065 to a bridleway.

1.4 An overview plan at Appendix A shows the proposals

2.0 POLICY POSITION, BUDGETARY AND EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS, AND LINKS TO COUNCIL PLAN

2.1 The relevant corporate theme is “To ensure places in Cumbria are well- connected and thriving”.

111

such discretion must be exercised reasonably.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 That, pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g)(iii) of the Council’s Constitution, an order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert that section of public bridleway no 138055 in the parish of Wetheral shown A-B to a new route A-C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J- K-L as shown on the plan at Appendix B and that all necessary actions be taken to confirm the order; and

3.2 That, pursuant to the power set out at Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g)(i) of the County Council’s Constitution, the County Council enter into an Agreement with the landowner under Section 25 of the Highways Act 1980 to upgrade public footpath no 138065 in the parish of Wetheral to a bridleway shown A-B on the plan at Appendix C.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 The proposed diversion order is in the interests of the landowner and the public.

4.2 Bridleway 138055 follows an old lane which crosses directly over the former British Gypsum workings of Cocklakes Mine. The workings date from a time when mine design was not well understood and safety standards were lower than modern day. As a result, there have been a large number of subsidence events in this part of Cocklakes Mine. Such events can result in very deep, and often open holes at the surface and some have the potential to allow access into dangerous old mine workings.

4.3 The present bridleway was directly affected by subsidence in January 2000 and the route was initally temporarily closed by way of a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. An informal diversion was then put in place to circumvent the collapsed area, but this was never formalised by legal Order.

4.4 Public highways across the area affected by the mine (U1165 & 1167) were stopped up in 2001 and a new road constructed to bypass the former workings area to the north and east.

4.5 The land above the workings has subsequently been taken out of agricultural use due to safety risks. The affected area has been planted with a substantial number of trees to ultimately create a large woodland area. Access to the site is strictly controlled by the landowner.

4.6 British Gypsum believes that the health and safety of anyone who may be affected by their operations is of paramount importance. The crossing of Bridleway 138055 over unstable mine workings at Cocklakes does not accord with this principle. The Company is very concerned that future subsidence events could put the general public at serious risk.

4.7 The proposals are part of a wider scheme which will incorporate the

112

diversion as detailed here which will use as much land unaffected by the mining workings as possible and the upgrading of footpath 138065 to bridleway.

4.8 Additionally and outwith consideration of the diversion Order, a Cumbria County Council designed and approved scheme on the adjacent carriageway (C1040) will provide a dedicated safe crossing point to link to Bridleway 138048 and traffic management measures between the terminations of 138055 and the upgraded 138065.

Establishment Works

4.9 To ensure the new bridleway will be as accessible as possible, the applicant has to construct a 3 metre wide compacted stone track, with associated drainage, for the entire length of the diversion. The track will run in an approximately 6 metre wide corridor with a high fence segregating the bridleway from rest of the site. The route will be ungated throughout.

4.10 The applicant has also agreed to fund the aforementioned road crossing point and associated traffic management measures.

4.11 Further, a management agreement will be entered into with the applicant to cover the maintenance of vegetation adjacent to the new bridleway and the roadside hedgerow at point K on the map at Appendix B to maintain the vison splay. Thereby reducing the future maintenance burden on the Council.

4.12 All costs associated with the works detailed above and the processing of the diversion order and creation agreement will be paid by the applicant landowner.

Consultation

4.13 The statutory undertakers have been consulted and none are affected.

4.14 A consultation has been carried out with

Wetheral Parish Council – no response received

Carlisle City Council – no response received

Ramblers – no response received

Local Ramblers representative – no response received

Cumbria and Lakes Local Access Forum (CALLAF) – is supported by the CALLAF rather than the possible alternative closure, but with all necessary attention to drainage and surface construction of the diverted route within the quarry boundary.

The upgrading of FP138065 is supported on the basis of an improvement to the bridleway network and interconnectivity.

Byways and Bridleways Association – no response received

113

British Horse Society – no response received

Cumbria Bridleways Society - no response received

Open Spaces Society – no response received

Cyclists' Touring Club – no response received

British Driving Society – no response received

Auto Cycle Union – no response received

Landowners – no other landowners are affected

4.7 The local member for Wetheral, Nick Marriner has been consulted but has not made a response

5.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

5.4 The diversion would have on public enjoyment of the path or way as a whole;

5.5 The coming into operation of the order would have as respects other land served by the existing right of way; and

5.6 Any new public right of way created by the order would have as respects the land over which right is so created and any land held with it.

5.7 Under Section 119(6A)(b) of the 1980 Highways Act, our Rights of Way Improvement Plan has been considered.

5.8 Under Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g) (iii) of the Constitution, the Committee has power to divert footpaths and bridleways.

5.9 Under Section 25 of the Highways Act 1980 a local authority may enter into an agreement with any person having the necessary power in that behalf for the dedication by that person of a footpath, bridleway or restricted byway over land in their area.

114

5.10 Under Part 2G paragraph 2.1(g) (i) of the Constitution, the Committee has power to create footpaths and bridleways.

6.0 OPTIONS

7.0 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION

7.1 I am satisfied that the proposed diversion will not prove to be substantially less convenient to use compared to the existing definitive route and no objections have been received as a result of consultations.

7.2 With landowner agreement to surface the bridleway, the new route, whilst offering a different termination point, will be as commodious to the user as the present route.

7.3 The differing termination point (at Point K on the map at Appendix B) provides a more direct link to the Bridleway 138048.

7.4 It is concluded that the proposed diversion passes the legal tests set out in Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 and, if Members approve the recommendation in this report, the order should be made in the interests of the landowner and the public.

7.5 Also, the Creation Agreement to upgrade Footpath 138065 will add to the availability of bridleways in the area and provide an equine link to the former termination point (Point B on the plan at Appendix B), albeit via a short road link.

Angela Jones Acting Executive Director – Economy and Infrastructure June 2019

APPENDICES

A Overview Plan showing proposals B Diversion Order Plan C Creation Agreement Plan

115

IMPLICATIONS

Staffing: Nil Financial: Nil Electoral Division: Wetheral – Nicholas Henry Marriner

PREVIOUS RELEVANT COUNCIL OR EXECUTIVE DECISIONS [Including Local Committees]

No relevant decisions

CONSIDERATION BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

Not considered by Overview and Scrutiny

BACKGROUND PAPERS

No background papers.

Contact: Geoff Fewkes, Countryside Access Officer Email: [email protected]

116 APPENDIX A APPENDIXAppendix AA PPENDIX A A

Appendix A

117

This page is intentionally left blank â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â â ââ â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â 66.0m â â â Two â Legend â â G = 345798 551730 â Bridleway to be Extinguished â

D = 345716 551664 â

Bridleway to be Created â â

2 Dale â â â â â â â â â â

Routes to remain â â

G â â â

4 â â

A = 345679 551678 AT â

E â â

le â

a - â â

D â

66.7m â â

â â

â Works â â

â â â

â â

A â â

â â

L = 346032 551579 â â

A â â â

â 8 â â

â 4 â â

0 â

â 8 â â

A â

â 3 â

â 1 â A â

â â

W â â â â

â B â

â â â A

â â â

â â

E = 345725 551655 â â

â â â â â 70.4m â

â â â Pond â â â â

â A â â

â â â A

â â

â â A â

â â

â â B A â â W â â

â 1 â 3 â 8

C = 345687 551675 0 H = 345941 551614 A K = 346030 551575 â â 5 â 5 â â â â k â c â a

â r â â T F = 345726 551656 â â â â

â I = 345951 551608 â â â The Willows â

â 1 â

â â

2 75.4m â

â â

Pond â

â â

â â The

â â

J = 346028 551571 â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â

Cocklakes â Pond â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â n â

i â â

D â â â

â â â

T â

râ â â

a â

câ

k B = 346068 551155 â

â â â â

â â â

Yard â â

â â â

â â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â â â

â A â

â â â â â â

Sewage Worksâ

â â â â â â â 5 â 6 â â 0 â â 8 â 3 â â â 1 â â P â F â â â â â â â â â â 72.1m â â S E A L â â 78.4m â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â Highways Act 1980 Section 119 and Wildlife and Countryside Act Section 53 â â â â â Public Bridleway 138055 Diversion Order and Public Path Modification Order Scale 1:2000 @ A3 0 30 60 120 m â â â â â â â Cocklakes, nr Cumwhinton, Carlisle â â â â â â (c) Crown Copyright and Database Right 2018 Ordnance Survey L119icence Number 1000019596 â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â This page is intentionally left blank â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â â â

â â

â â â

â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â â â â â â â â â â â

â â â â â â

â â â â â â â

â â â â

â â â â â

â â â â â â â

â â â â â

â â â â â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

â â

â â â â

â Legend Farm â

â â â â â

Footpath to be â

â â

â â â

upgraded to Bridleway â â

â â â â â â â â â â â â 1 â â

Other Rights of Way t â â â o â

Alby Lodge â

â 4 â â

â â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â â

P Pond â

â â E â â

T â â

â E â

R 9 â â

3 â

â G 0 â

â A 8 â â

â T 13 â

â â

â E P

F â â

â â

â â â

â â

â â h â

- rtâ â a â â â

âG

â â â

âe

â uâs â

â âo â

â â H

â B = 346314 551281 â â

â â

â ALBâ â

â â

â â â â 1 â

â â â

â â Alby Terrace â

6 â

â â â

â â

â â â â

â â â

k â

â c â

â ra â â â T â

â â

â â â

â B â

â W â â

â â

â 1

3 â â

â 8

â â 0 â â

5 â â â 5 â

â â â â

â Sewage Works â â

â â â â â â â 5 â â 6 â 0 â â 8 â â 3 â 1 â â P â â â

F â â

â â â â A â â â â 72.1m â A = 346137 551106 â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â Pond â â â Pond â â Cocklakes 76.1m â â â â â â â â â â â â 041â â â 138â â FPâ â â â â â â â â â 73.0m S E A L

Highways Act 1980 Section 25 Public Path Creation Agreement Scale 1:2000 @ A4 FP 138065 Parish of Wethetral Cocklakes, nr Cumwhinton 0 25 50 100 m 121 (c) Crown Copyright and Database Right 2018 Ordnance Survey Licence Number 1000019596 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 11

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE 1 July 2019 A report by the Acting Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure ______

Application Reference No. 4/19/9003 Application Type: Full Planning Permission Proposal: Erection of a new 2 storey high Archive Store together with a new infill extension and internal refurbishment, demolition works, external works and the removal of 6 no. trees and associated planting. Location: West Cumbria Record Office, Scotch Street, Whitehaven, CA28 7NL Applicant: Cumbria County Council Date Valid: 1 May 2019 Reason for Committee Level Decision: Application made by Acting Executive Director of Economy and Infrastructure ______

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That planning permission be Granted subject to conditions set out in Appendix 1 to this report.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Planning permission is sought for a two storey extension to the south east elevation, two storey extension to the front and alterations to the car parking layout. In addition, the following alternations to the building are proposed;

- Creation of new publicly accessible spaces to first floor level (i.e. multi use learning library/events room/multi-purpose room and office accommodation with associated welfare facilities) with the introduction of a gallery link to a newly formed internal fire escape stair which also connects to the new archives store which houses a new platform lift;

- The first floor levels contains existing staff and public toilet facilities; to be retained along with the passenger lift;

- Ground floor level, the existing building is to receive a new double height publicly accessible foyer and information hub space extension which will be an extension with an accessible disabled WC along with a ground floor archive store and processing room extension;

- Ground floor has been remodelled to accommodate office provisions for Registrar use and a public library/IT, archive research and transport deliveries office;

- Newly formed fire escape door and the introduction of an associated ramp will be constructed to the north east facing elevation of the building;

- Around the new archive extension it is proposed to install a secure 2400mm high security fence and associated gates. Emergency escape ironmongery 123

will be provided to the new gates;

- To the rear of the newly formed disabled car parking bay a timber shadow box fence with a secure access gate will be constructed to house mechanical condenser units seated on a plinth; and

- In order to accommodate the new main entrance atrium extension the existing lean-to porch and draught lobby are to be demolished.

2.2 The Library, Whitehaven Records and Archive Office are currently located in various buildings in the centre of Whitehaven. The extension to the building would combine the services of Library, Records Office and Archive Office into a “one stop shop”.

2.3 Access to the Records and Archives Office is from the A5094, this provides pedestrian and vehicular access to the building.

2.4 The extension/alterations would be constructed of the following materials; walls to be breeze block with StoRend Flex Cote render system, blue facing brickwork and plinth, roof will be in slate to match the existing tiles. New windows to be in aluminium, some with security bars, new timber windows, some with security bars; doors will be polyester powder coated steel fire rates door plus door guards, new PPC double glazed aluminium automated sliding door; external boundary 2.4m single fire escape gate and fence and 2.4m double access gates and single fire escape gate and fence and 2m high double boarded timber fence to enclose external AS units. The proposed extension’s would provide 494m² of additional floorspace, the currently building has 854m² a total of 1348m² of floorspace would be made created within the existing building and proposed extensions.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 West Cumbria Records Office is a detached sandstone building located on Scotch Street. Scotch Street forms part of the A5094 which runs through the centre of Whitehaven and connects on to the A595(T).

3.2 North east of the Records Office is the Old Town Hall and Masonic Hall both Grade II Listed Buildings. South east is the former Telephone Exchange building and Salvation Army, to the south west is Cumbria Constabulary. West Cumbria Record’s Office lies within Whitehaven Town Centre Conservation Area.

3.3 Access to the Record Office is via a shared access with Cumbria Constabulary. This is through a sandstone arch with “Fire Brigade Station” engraved into the arch. This only allows one vehicle to access/exit at one time, meaning vehicles either have to wait on the A5094 or wait within the site to allow the vehicle in or out.

4.0 SITE PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 There has been two previous planning permissions on the site, 4/90/0158 change of use and alterations to provide county records office and 4/90/0157, demolition of outbuildings.

5.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Copeland Borough Council Planning Department: The principle of 124

development is supported by Copeland Local Plan Local Plan Policies SS4 and ER8. With regards to impacts on the iconic building concern is raised with regards to the design of the proposed extensions.

5.2 Copeland Borough Council Environmental Health: No response received.

5.3 Whitehaven Town Council: No response received.

5.4 CCC Highway Authority: It is noted that the proposal is going to lead to a reduction in the provision of on-site parking from 11 spaces to 1 disabled bay plus 1 motor cycle hoop and 3 bicycle spaces, while increasing the size of the building, this is not ideal but there are constraints on the size of the site and alternative public car parking and transport links are available in the town centre that should be able to accommodate users needs, on this basis I would not object to the proposal from a highway point of view.

The design & access statement makes reference to the securing of an on-site turning area for the disabled bay, to protect this facility for the future a sign and markings should be agreed with the applicant to highlight the affected area as this has been used for parking in the past.

It is also noted that as part of the works there is to be a temporary access created onto Scotch Street, these works will need to be agreed with this authority and the applicant should contact us to agree their proposals.

5.5 CCC Lead Local Flood Authority: No response received.

5.6 CCC Historic Environment Officer: Historic map evidence shows that it is very unlikely the construction of the proposed development will impact upon significant buried archaeological assets. I therefore do not consider any archaeological work is necessary in the event planning consent is granted. In terms of the cumulative impact of the proposed extensions upon the designated heritage assets – the adjacent listed grade II Old Town Hall and the Whitehaven Conservation Area - I agree with the submitted heritage statement that they will cause less than substantial harm. The design of the rear extension is bland and its largely featureless elevations fail to complement the fine detailing of one of Whitehaven’s most important undesignated buildings. At least this extension will be of a proportionate scale and massing so that it will be mostly obscured from public view thereby reducing the negative impact. The proposed glass extension may have a more positive effect however, and I agree with the heritage statement that it has the potential to add some value and diversity to the street scene. The cumulative harm caused by the proposed extensions to the conservation area and the setting of the listed grade II Old Town Hall will need to be considered against the test outlined in paragraph 196 of the NPPF. In determining the application you should therefore balance this harm against any public benefits provided by the scheme. One public benefit is mentioned in the heritage statement – the retention of the building in public use.

There is one element of the proposed development that I currently object to. This is the proposed demolition of the wall of the former magistrate’s court. While I note that the intention is for the ‘…careful removal & storage of the stonework for possible re use…subject to its suitability…’, I consider that the wall is of sufficient significance to merit preservation within the proposed development and that assurances should be sought to secure this. The magistrate’s court was constructed in the first half of the 19th century, at the same 125

time as the police station that now forms the record office. The wall was part of the magistrates retiring room and was the only wall of the whole magistrate’s court that featured any architectural embellishment – dressed stones, semi- circular arches and imposts, a stringcourse, and a roundel. This presumably was the reason why, when the decision was taken to demolish the magistrates court in 1995, the wall was retained, albeit moved four feet from its original location. I consider that the wall has historical, evidential and aesthetic significance and that it makes a positive contribution to the conservation area. No justification has been provided in the application for the demolition of the wall and no evidence has been provided to show that the wall is an impediment to a successful redevelopment of the site. I have no objection to the careful demolition of the wall and its reconstruction elsewhere within the site, given that it was reassembled in 1995, but I do consider that provisions are included in any planning consent that may be granted to commit the applicant to do so. The wall should be preserved as part of the proposed development.

5.7 Environment Agency: No response received.

5.8 United Utilities: Drainage needs to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Guidance, the site should be drained on a separate system with foul water draining to the public sewer and surface water draining in the most sustainable way. Conditions are recommended for surface water.

5.9 Cumbria Constabulary – Secure by Design: There are no specific references to crime prevention measures in the published documents. I therefore offer these comments and recommendations to the applicant in order to reduce the opportunities for crime and to demonstrate compliance with Council Policy.

 New exterior doors and ground floor windows – to be compliant with LPS 1175 SR1 as a minimum standard and include a pane of laminated glazing (BS EN 356:2000 P2A) as appropriate  Exterior lighting scheme – low intensity illumination of the new elevations and exterior spaces throughout darkness with ‘white’ light sources but the scheme to exhibit high uniformity and CRI values  External waste bin store to remain secure when not in use to mitigate against exploitation of bins as climbing aids or arson risk, e.g. padlocks compliant with LPS 1654 or ‘Sold Secure’ certification  (Noted inclusion of 2.4m metal railing type fencing and gates to establish external Fire Escape route, with shrouded push pads to deter tampering)  Review and extension of intruder alarm system to include new spaces and exterior doors as necessary (if police response is required, the system must be compliant with National Police Chief’s Council Security Systems Policy)  The new pram store and cycle stands cannot be directly observed from inside the building. These items should therefore be placed in a more prominent position, e.g. utilising the space occupied by the raised planter behind the archway  The adjacent gas meter cupboard will be concealed from casual supervision from the street. This feature should be resistant to vandalism and include a steeply raked lid to deter sitting / loitering  Internal access controls – robust separation of public spaces from private offices / stores / plant rooms, etc.  (Noted provision of storage for staff personal belongings in G14 – also presence of Registrar’s safe) 126

 CCTV – if present. Review and reconfiguration of system to include external and internal spaces, integration with the intruder alarm and permitting secure remote access to authorised users. The system must be capable of capturing evidential quality images and remain compliant with Data Protection legislation

This development is directly adjacent to Cumbria Police estate (Whitehaven Police Station) and there is shared access via the ornate archway in Scotch Street to an external space (in the ownership of the Constabulary) for car parking purposes. It is acknowledged that this space will be unavailable whilst construction takes place.

Prior to any approval being granted and construction work being undertaken then CCC will need to agree with the Constabulary alternative parking arrangements (at the expense of CCC) for the duration of the building works.

5.10 Copeland Disability Forum: We would appreciate some clarity on the following:

1] Will the new front entrance be automatic opening or provide a push – pad for people with disabilities? .We would want this included in the proposals.

2] The parking space – as shown on the plans does not have the yellow “hashed” area on both side of the parking space. We ask that this be corrected. This allows for both a disabled driver and disabled passenger to use the space at the same time – both would need the wide opening facility to get into and out of the car.

3] The upstairs disabled toilet door seems to be opening inwards – to comply it should open outwards.

4] Are there going to be alarms fitted in both the disabled toilets?

5] The new ramp proposed outside – does this have a guidance “lip” for the full length of the ramp? Is there a level platform at the top of the ramp

6] We note there is the provision of a platform lift within the building – would this be available for a wheelchair user to use independently?

7] What consultation would be done with Copeland Disability Forum regarding the internal fit out. We would want to see, contrasting colours used throughout the building as well as signage suitable for the visually impaired. Loop systems provided in the meeting rooms. In the public areas there needs to be a variety of seating provided – e.g. higher chairs with arms, a bariatric chair etc. Normally CDF is consulted at the fit out stage for public buildings to ensure all the toilet fittings e.g. mirrors, toilet roll holders, hand drying machines are placed at the appropriate height and in the appropriate place. We would very much welcome being consulted before the fit out so that provision of facilities is suitable for all.

5.11 Councillor Bransty Ward : Councillor GRPM Roberts.

5.12 One letter of objection has been received which raises concern with regards to reduction in library services, lack of wedding venue within the town, lack of parking to The Record’s Office, design of the proposed extensions and the impact on the Listed Building.

127

6.0 PLANNING POLICY

6.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides that planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Government policy is a material consideration that must be given appropriate weight in the decision making process.

6.2 Copeland Local Plan 2013-2029 - Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD (CLP-CS&DMP) - adopted 5 December 2013.

- Policy ER7 – Principal Town Centre, Key Service Centres, Local Centres and other service areas : roles and functions;

- Policy ER8 – Whitehaven Town Centre;

- Policy SS4 – Community and cultural facilities and services;

6.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012. The national online Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) suite was launched in March 2014. Both are material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The following sections and paragraphs of the NPPF and/or PPG are considered to be relevant to the determination of this application:

Paragraph 11 – There is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Paragraph 38 – Local Planning Authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way … Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development.

Paragraph 42 – Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Paragraph 80 – Planning policies and decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development.

Paragraph 83 – Planning policies and decisions should enable the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business in rural areas.

Paragraph 102 – Transport issues should be considered at the earliest stage of plan making and development proposals so that … opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport uses are identified and pursued …

Paragraph 103 – The planning system should actively manage patterns of growth in support of these objectives. Significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes.

Paragraph 124 – The creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a 128

key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities …

Paragraph 175 – When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following … development whose primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be supported.

Paragraph 195 - Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significance of) a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply: a) the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and b) no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and c) conservation by grant-funding or some form of not for profit, charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and d) the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.

Paragraph 196 - Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.

7.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

7.1 The key planning issues relevant to the proposed schemes are considered to be How will the design of the proposed extensions impact on Whitehaven Town Centre Conservation Area; How will the construction and demolition activities impact on the amenities of local residents and highway network; Once the building works are complete how will the loss of parking within the Records Office impact on the area; and what environmental impacts would the works to the Archive Office have on the area?

Background to the proposed alterations

7.2 The proposed alterations to the Records Office is to provide new publicly accessible spaces to provide a new community hub which would accommodate the local Heritage Archive, a public lending library, registrar services and a series of flexible community spaces. Similar alterations are being undertaken at Barrow Library.

How will the design of the proposed extensions impact on Whitehaven Town Centre Conservation Area?

7.3 The National Planning Policy Framework, at paragraph 124, states that the creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities

7.4 Conservation areas exist to manage and protect the special architectural and historic interest of a place - in other words, the features that make it unique. Every local authority in England has at least one conservation area and there are 129

now over 10,000 in England. Conservation Areas status is not there to stifle development nor preserve areas as museum pieces. Conservation Areas are allowed to evolve to meet changing needs and demands. The Council are legally obliged to ensure that the special architectural and historic character of conservation areas are not eroded when taking Development Control and planning decisions.

7.5 The Records Office lies within Whitehaven Town Centre Conservation Area, however, it is not a Listed Building, but an iconic building within a Conservation Area. The existing building is faced in red sandstone with cast iron rain water goods, wooden sliding sash windows and a slate roof. A structure/building has stood on this site since around 1736, this was replaced with the existing building which emerged between 1815 and 1865. The existing building would have formed the Police, Fire Station and Magistrates Court.

7.6 The design of the proposed extension on the front elevation (facing onto the Police Station) is modern and light weight compared to the existing extension which is a 1960/70’s extension with very little design character. The rear extension (facing onto BT Exchange Building) is a modern extension which would be seen in the context of BT Exchange building to the rear, which is a 1960’s building four storey building with mixed elevations of render and tin sheeting.

7.7 The primary elevation/entrance to The Records Office would be the entrance to the extension which would form the main access to the building, this would be predominately glass building providing an open space allowing natural light into the foyer/information hub. Whilst this is the main entrance on the front elevation, it is screened from the A5094 as the orientation of the building means the side gable wall adjoins the A5094 and the entrance archway, the extension would be facing directly onto the Police Station which is a 1970’s block and smooth rendered building. The rear two storey extension again would not be visible from any public view points as this would face onto the BT Exchange building, again a 1960’s building.

7.8 The Old Town Hall, to the north east of the Records Office, is a Grade II Listed Building. The boundary between the Old Town Hall and Records Office consists of a dwarf wall with railings at the front adjoining Scotch Street and a sandstone 2m high wall to the rear.

7.9 The existing sandstone archway with “Fire Brigade Station” etched into the sandstone and the sandstone plinth which formed part of the original Magistrate’s Court which is currently located to the side The Records Office are to be retained. The sandstone arch and the plinth form key features to the existing building which both have been dismantled and relocated during renovation works in the 1980’s. The archway would be protected during construction works however, it is proposed to dismantle and relocate the arch to the north east boundary. The County Archaeologist is happy with the protection of the archway and the relocation and retention of the plinth within the Records Office.

7.10 The County Archaeologist has commented “that whilst the rear extension is bland and largely featureless elevations fail to complement the fine detailing of one of Whitehaven’s most important undesignated buildings, at least this extension will be of a proportionate scale and massing so that it will be mostly obscured from public view thereby reducing the negative impact”. He also goes onto to comment with regards to the front extension “The proposed glass extension may 130

have a more positive effect however, and I agree with the heritage statement that it has the potential to add some value and diversity to the street scene. The cumulative harm caused by the proposed extensions to the conservation area and the setting of the listed grade II Old Town Hall will need to be considered against the test outlined in paragraph 196 of the NPPF.”

7.11 Historic England whilst having no objection to the proposal in principle, have raised concern with regards to the design of the extensions and the impact of the extensions on the iconic building. The design is very poor and utilitarian and pays insufficient regard to the historic building.

7.12 In light of the comments from County Archaeologist and Historic England the proposal needs to be tested against paragraph 196 of the NPPF which states “Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use”. In this instance the extension on the south eastern elevation would be seen in light of the BT Exchange Building which is a 1960/70’s building with limited character, the south west extension faces onto Police Station which is a 1980/90’s building which again is lacking in character. The use of the building is the key as to whether the proposal is acceptable under the tests of paragraph 196 of the NPPF. In this instance the building would provide a much needed facility to the community of Whitehaven and surrounding areas by providing services which currently aren’t available and combining other services to make a one stop shop.

7.13 In weighing up the balance of the use of the building over the impact of the proposal on the character of the building and that of the Conservation Area. The proposed extensions would not be visible to passing member of the public on foot or in vehicles due to the extensions being to the side the front of the building and orientation of the building as the front faces directly onto the Police Station and not directly onto Scotch Street. The use of the building would provide a much needed facility and service to the local community, which is currently not available within the town. I therefore consider in weighing the balance of the impact on the appearance of a significant building and a much needed service to the local community the facilities of the community far outweighs the balance of the impacts on the setting of the iconic building.

How will the construction and demolition activities impact on the amenities of local residents and highway network?

7.14 During construction activities there would be some disruption to local residents and highway users. This would be for a temporary period of time approximately 38 weeks (approximately 9 months). The impacts would be construction traffic, general working noise, noise, dust, vibration, delivery of materials etc.

7.15 It is proposed to demolish the wall which borders the police station car park and Scotch Street and allow HGV’s to access the site via the existing police staff car park, this would create an opening of 8m to allow HGV’s to access the site. The police staff car park would be relocated for a temporary period whilst construction activities are undertaken, there are parking facilities within the existing police station and there is also a public car park on Schoolhouse Lane, approximately 46m from the police station.

7.16 The main impact on the amenities of local residents and users of the A5094 131

would be the movement of HGV’s particularly at peak times of the day in the morning and afternoon. Scotch Street is a three lane highway and forms A5094 which is a one way system which is the major arterial route through the town. To obtain access into the site HGV’s would need to swing out into other lanes and to get into the site they would also need to reverse out of the site onto A5094 due to the limited turning space within the site.

7.17 A condition is proposed to restrict HGV movements at these key times and ensuring there is a banksman on site directing traffic and protecting pedestrians on Scotch Street. A condition is also proposed restricting hours of operation so the amenities of the residents on Scotch Street are not disrupted during early evening.

7.18 CCC Highways have raised no objection to the proposed extension and alterations as they consider the proposal occupies a town centre location and are satisfied that there are public car parks and bus stops in close proximity and is within walking distance of Whitehaven Town Centre.

Once the building works are complete how will the loss of parking within the Records Office impact on the area?

7.19 NPPF Paragraph 102 states that transport issues should be considered at the earliest stage of plan making and development proposals so that … opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport uses are identified and pursued …

7.20 The redevelopment of The Record’s Office involves the loss of 11 car parking spaces. The proposal would be to have only 1 disabled parking bay, 1 motor cycle bay and 3 bicycle bays. There is a public car park approximately 60m from The Record’s Office on Schoolhouse Lane.

7.21 Whilst the loss of 11 car parking spaces is significant, the siting of The Records Office in a town centre location it is easily accessible for staff and visitors and there is a public car park within easy walking distance and numerous others within walking distance.

7.22 CCC Highways have raised no objection to the proposed extension and alterations and consider as the Record Office occupies a town centre location the loss of the parking would not have a detrimental impact on the use of the building as there are a number of public car parks and bus stops in close proximity to The Record’s Office.

7.23 I consider the loss of the parking within The Record’s Office would not have any detrimental impact on accessibility of users. NPPF paragraph 102 supports and promotes walking, cycling and public transport to development proposals.

What environmental impacts would the construction activities to The Record/Archive Office have on the area?

7.24 The site is surrounded by various mixed use development including office, police station, residential properties and social premises. Any construction activities would need to consider the environmental impact on the amenities of these business and residential uses, during the temporary construction timescales:

7.25 Noise: during construction and demolition operations noise could be an issue. 132

The nearest residential properties are 22-27 Scotch Street, approximately 15m north west of the Records Office. The nearest office facilities are Cumbria Constabulary who share the same access as The Records Office and is within 7m of the Record’s Office, thereby construction noise would not be an issue.

7.26 Vibration: during construction and demolition operations vibration could be an issue. This would potentially have an impact on the operations on the north eastern side of the adjacent Police station due to the close proximity of the boundaries between the Records Office and Police Station. There is a distance of 7m between both buildings, thereby construction vibration would not be an issue.

7.27 Dust: during construction and demolition works dust could be an issue especially during periods of dry weather. A dust suppression system would be required during demolition works to ensure dust does not become an issue to local receptors or on highway users.

7.28 Impact on the amenities of local residents: during construction and demolition operations, there is likely to be some impacts on local residents. The nearest residential receptors are on Scotch Street directly opposite The Record’s Office, approximately 14m away. There is the main arterial route from Whitehaven Town Centre separating the two elements. The construction and demolition operations would be for a temporary period of time and hours of operation would be controlled by an appropriately worded condition.

7.29 I consider that environmental impacts will be primarily temporary impacts which would be for a maximum period of 9 months. Once the construction operations have ceased the use of the building would continue as existing and there would be no significant additional impacts above and beyond the existing operations. I consider any temporary impacts can be adequately controlled by an appropriately worded conditions.

Comments raised by Copeland Disability Forum

7.30 Copeland Disability Forum have raised some comments and concerns with regards to the opening of doors, automatic push pad’s, hatching of disabled parking bay, fitting of fire alarms to disabled facilities, use of platform lift and internal colour scheme, signage and audio equipment. These items have been forwarded to the applicant for clarification, these elements would be addressed as part of any Building Regulations submission and need to comply with Disabled Discrimination Act 1995.

Concern raised by a Local Resident

7.31 One letter of concern has been received with regards to the proposed development, their concerns relate to a reduction in library services, lack of wedding venue within the town, lack of parking to The Record’s Office, design of the proposed extensions and the impact on the Listed Building:

Reduction in Library Services: There would be no reduction in library services as the revised facilities would provide a modern service combining modern technology and still providing a traditional service.

Lack of Wedding Venue: it is unclear whether the records office would be used as a wedding venue. However the relocation of wall from the old Magistrates 133

Court could be used for wedding photos, it has been indicated by the applicant.

Lack of parking to the Record’s Office: There are currently no parking facilities at the current Library on A5094/Catherine Street. The nearest public car parks are on Catherine Street approximately 190m and School House Lane approximately 160m. The relocation of library services would bring the School House Lane car park within a closer distance.

Design of the proposed extension: paragraphs 7.3 to 7.12 set out the balance of the design of the proposed extension against the retention of the much needed service

Impact on the Listed Building: The Record’s Office is not a Listed Building designated by Historic England. The Record’s Office is located within Whitehaven Town Centre Conservation Area.

7.32 In weighing up the balance of the existing services and the proposed services the proposed services would provide an enhancement to the services which are currently available to residents of Whitehaven and provide a one stop shop.

Removal of trees within Conservation Area

7.33 As part of the proposed works a number of trees within the grounds of the records office are proposed to be removed. An application to remove/undertake pruning works to trees within the Conservation Area has been submitted to Copeland Borough Council who are the determining Authority for tree works. The application was submitted to Copeland Borough Council on 3 June 2019.

8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 I consider the design of the proposed extensions whilst not architecturally enhancing to the existing iconic building, do not result in substantial harm to the heritage asset and are outweighed by the public and community benefits of the proposal and would provide a much needed service for the community of Whitehaven. The main principle visual elevations of the building, namely the elevation on Scotch Street and facing The Old Town Hall of the iconic building would not be affected by the proposed extensions and their character would be retained. As such, I consider the proposals to meet the tests of paragraph 196 of the NPPF.

8.2 Whilst it is appreciated that during construction and demolition works there would be an impact on the amenities of local residents and users of Scotch Street, these impacts will be temporary and controlled by appropriately worded conditions. Once construction activities are complete The Record’s Office would operate in line with normal arrangements.

8.3 In summary, it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the development plan, there are no material considerations that indicate the decision should be made otherwise and with the planning conditions proposed, any potential harm would reasonably by mitigated. Furthermore, any potential harm to interests of acknowledged importance is likely to be negligible and would be outweighed by the benefits of the development. It is therefore recommended that this application be granted subject to conditions.

Human Rights

134

8.4 The proposal will have a limited impact on the visual, residential and environmental amenity of the area. Any impacts on the rights of local property owners to a private and family life and peaceful enjoyment of their possessions (Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998) are minimal and proportionate to the wider social and economic interests of the community.

8.5 The Human Rights Act 1998 requires the County Council to take into consideration the rights of the public under the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 8 of the Convention provides that everyone has the right to respect for his private life and home save for interference which is in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of, amongst other things, public safety, the economic wellbeing of the country or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Article 1 of Protocol 1 provides that an individual’s peaceful enjoyment of his property shall not be interfered with save as necessary in the public interest and subject to conditions provided for by law. For any interference with these rights to be justified the interference needs to be proportionate to the aims that are sought to be realised. The County Council has a duty to consider the policies of the development plan and to protect the amenities of residents as set out in those policies.

Angela Jones Acting Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure

Contact: Jayne Petersen

Electoral Division Identification: Bransty

135

Appendix 1 Ref No. 4/19/9003 Development Control and Regulation Committee – 1 July 2019

Appendix 1 - PROPOSED PLANNING CONDITIONS

Time Limit for Implementation of Permission

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Approved Scheme

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out, except where modified by the conditions to this permission, in accordance with the following:

a. The submitted Application Form – 11 April 2019 b. Design and Access Statement – April 2019 Rev A 25.04.19 c. Heritage Statement – April 2019 d. Whitehaven Community Hub – Proposed refurbishment including Archive Project m. Plans numbered and named: i) 03-12-17-1-1255- NPS-DR-A-011 Rev P1 – Existing site plan ii) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-014 Rev P12 – Proposed site plan iii) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-013Rev P1 – Existing topographical survey iv) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-025 Rev P9 – Proposed GA Plans v) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-100 Rev P1 – Existing elevations vi) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-110 Rev P7 – Proposed elevations vii) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-010 Rev P1 – Site location plan vii) 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-015 Rev P1 – Existing n. The details or schemes approved in accordance with the conditions attached to this permission.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out to an approved appropriate standard and to avoid confusion as to what comprises the approved scheme.

3. Notification of the date of commencement of the development shall be made in writing to the County Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement.

Reason: To enable the County Planning Authority to monitor the development to ensure compliance with this permission.

Contamination

4. If during the construction phase of the development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the County Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted to, and obtained written approval from the County Planning Authority for, an amendment to the

136

remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The approved amendment to the remediation strategy shall be carried out as part of the development.

Reason : To ensure that the risk of on site contamination is kept to a minimum.

Construction Traffic Management Plan

5. No development shall commence on site until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The CTMP shall include details of:

• access gates will be hung to open away from the public highway no less than 5m from the carriageway edge and shall incorporate appropriate visibility displays; • retained areas for construction personnel vehicle parking, manoeuvring, loading and unloading for their specific purpose during the development; • details of construction compound and staff parking area; • construction vehicle routing; the scheduling and timing of movements, routing, details of escorts for abnormal loads, temporary warning signs and banksman; • details of how residents will be notified of large HGV movements; • clearing of debris from the highway; • methods to prevent noise, dust and vibration during construction works

Reason: To ensure the construction is carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Construction Activities

6. No site construction work, delivery or removal of materials shall take place on the site outside the hours of:

07:30 to 18:00 Monday to Friday 08:00 to 13:00 Saturday

There shall be no delivery/removal of construction materials or demolition waste to/from the site between the hours of:

08.00 to 09.30 and 15:30 to 17:00 Monday to Friday

No site construction work, delivery or removal of materials shall take place on Sundays; Bank Holidays and other Public Holidays.

Reason: To ensure the construction is carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and there is no impact on the amenities of nearby residents.

7. Temporary construction lighting shall not be used (with the exception of extraordinary activities including power floating of concrete slabs, testing and commissioning works and emergency works or similar activities) on the site outside the hours of:

137

18:30 to 07:00 Monday to Fridays (Except Public Holidays) 13:00 to 08:00 Saturday (Except Public Holidays)

No temporary construction lighting shall be used (with the exception of extraordinary activities including power floating of concrete slabs, testing and commissioning works and emergency works or similar activities) on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Reason: To ensure the residential amenities of local residents are protected from light pollution.

Demolition Activities

8. No development shall commence on the demolition of the existing site until a Demolition Management Plan (DMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The DMP shall include the details of :

- Timescale of demolition works i.e. hours of operation and estimated timescale for demolition - The scheduling and timing of movements, routing, temporary warning signs and banksman - Parking provision within site for parking of construction operatives - Manoeuvring of HGV’s/vehicles within the demolition area - Demolition waste loading onto HGV’s - Details of how residents will be notified of demolition works - Details of avoiding conflict with users of the A5094 during demolition works, users of the A5094 will be given priority during demolition works. - Methods to prevent noise, dust and vibration during demolition works - Parking provision for staff during demolition works - Cleaning of the highway during demolition works - All HGV loads shall be covered prior to leaving the site

Reason: To ensure the demolition work is carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Storage of Fuels

9. No fuels, oils, chemicals or other potentially polluting liquids shall be stored within the site unless stored within tanks to be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls that enclose an area and with a wall height that is capable of containing 110% of the largest tank, or, if there is more than one tank, the combined volume of the multiple tanks. All fill and draw valves and sight glasses shall be located within the bund and all fill and draw valves must be set to discharge downwards into the bund.

Reason: To avoid the pollution of any watercourse or groundwater resource.

Ecology/Arboriculture

10. No trees, bushes or hedges within the development site shall be removed,

138

lowered or pruned during the bird nesting season between 1 March and 31 July inclusive. If areas cannot be cleared outside this time, they should be checked for breeding birds in accordance with Natural England’s Guidance and, if appropriate, an exclusion zone set up around any vegetation to be protected. No work shall be undertaken within the exclusion zone until birds and any dependant young have vacated the area.

Reason: To protect nesting birds during the bird nesting season.

11. No development shall commence until the Construction Exclusion Zone for the protection of trees to be retained on site has been put in place.

Reason: To ensure that during the course of development the roots and trees are protected.

Surface Water Drainage

12. No development shall commence until a surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The drainage scheme must include:

i) Investigation of the hierarchy of drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance (or any subsequent amendment thereof). This investigation shall include evidence of an assessment of ground conditions and the potential for infiltration of surface water; ii) A restricted rate of discharge of surface water agreed with the County Planning Authority (if it is agreed that infiltration is discounted by the investigations); and iii) A timetable for its implementation.

The approved scheme shall also be in accordance with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015) or any subsequent replacement national standards.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved drainage scheme.

Reason : To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution.

13. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution.

14. The former magistrates wall shall be relocated to the position indicated on Drawing No 03-12-17-1-1255-NPS-DR-A-014 Rev P12 – Proposed site plan and shall be permanently maintained and repaired on site.

Reason: In order to preserve the iconic structure with Whitehaven Conservation Area.

15. Prior to commencement of development a method statement shall be submitted

139

to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority detailing the method of protection during construction works of the Fire Brigade Station Arch.

Reason: In order to preserve the iconic structure with Whitehaven Conservation Area.

Informative

Notice of intent to remove trees in a conservation area under section 211 of the TCPA 1990 the removal of trees must be in place prior to any removal of trees within the application site. It is a criminal offence to undertake works to trees within a Conservation Area, without receiving formal approval.

The application may wish to discuss Sustainable Drainage issues with United Utilities. Josephine Wong by email [email protected].

The contractor’s compound may require planning permission, details of this should be submitted prior to construction operations on site to determine if planning permission is required.

Comments by Cumbria Constabulary’s Secure by Design Officer should be considered in the design process.

140

Appendix 2 Ref No. 4/19/9003 Development Control and Regulation Committee – 1 July 2019

Appendix 2 - PLAN OF SITE LOCATION/EXTENT

141 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE 1 JULY 2019 A report by the Acting Executive Director for Economy and Infrastructure ______

Application Reference No. 2/19/9004 Application Type: Full planning permission Proposal: Change of use from residential caretaker’s bungalow to educational use with meeting rooms. Location: Ashfield Infant School, Newlands Lane, Workington, CA14 3JG Applicant: Ashfield School Date Valid: 22 May 2019 Reason for Committee Level Decision: Application made by Acting Executive Director of Economy and Infrastructure ______

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to this report

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Planning permission is sought for the change of use of the existing caretakers bungalow to educational use with meeting rooms at Ashfield Infant School, Newlands Lane, Workington CA14 3JG

2.2 The existing caretakers building has been unoccupied for a period of time now, and this proposal seeks to find an alternative beneficial use for the building.

2.3 The rationale behind the proposals is to allow the creation of additional and private meeting/working accommodation for school staff in order to hold meetings and consultations with parents – the existing school building is lacking in such appropriate accommodation.

2.4 The proposal will also provide a relaxed environment for staff to work during non- contact time and will also provide a base for on-site training for staff as required.

2.5 Finally, the proposal will also offer office accommodation to help serve the needs of the special educational needs co-ordinator.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 The school is located to the southeast of Workington town centre and consists of the modern school buildings, an area of woodland to the west and north and access from Newlands Lane to the southeast of the site.

3.2 The former caretaker’s bungalow is located to the front of the site, between the main school buildings and the highway, and is of modern design being constricted of brick with a flat roof. The building is not currently in use.

3.3 The main access to the site is from Newlands Road which in turn leads to the A596 (High Street). 143

3.4 Residential properties are located within the vicinity of the site to the south and south-east.

4.0 SITE PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 No directly relevant planning permissions.

5.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Allerdale Borough Council Planning Department: no objection in principle

5.2 CCC Highway Authority: no objection on the basis of the use being ancillary to the school – should the use be made available for external use, a review of the parking provision may be required

5.3 CCC Lead Local Flood Authority: no objections

5.4 Allerdale Borough Council Environmental Health Department: no objections to the proposal

5.5 Crime prevention officer: observes that the site has good natural surveillance from the main highway – consideration should be given to trimming or removal plants to optimise views into the site. Also suggests an appropriate eternal lighting scheme and for external doors and windows to be complaint with PAS 24:2016 or LPS 1175 SR1, together with external waste bin management and review of the CCTV scheme.

5.6 Environment Agency: no reply received at the time of report preparation – any response subsequently received will be reported to Members on the update sheet.

5.7 Workington Town Council: no reply received at the time of report preparation – any response subsequently received will be reported to Members on the update sheet.

5.8 St. Johns and Clifton - Mr. Holliday, has not commented

5.9 No representations had been received at the time of report writing – the publicity period expires on 20 June 2019, any representations subsequently received will be reported on the update sheet.

6.0 PLANNING POLICY

6.2 Allerdale Local Plan Part 1: Strategic and Development Management Policies 2014-2029 (ALP Part 1) - adopted July 2014. The key policies of relevance are:

 S1 – presumption in favour of sustainable development 144

 S4 – design principles  DM14 – standards of good design  S15 – Education and skills

6.3 Allerdale Borough Council Local Plan (Part 2): Site Allocations Development Plan Document . The adopted (July 2014) version of this plan will be superseded in due course by an updated version of this document. The Examination of the updated or ‘Submission’ version of this document by an independent Planning Inspector has recently taken place (May 2019) and the outcome is awaited.

6.4 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in a revised form in July 2018. The national online Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) suite was launched in March 2014 and is regularly updated. Both are material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The following sections and paragraphs of the NPPF are considered to be relevant to the determination of this application:

 Section 2: Achieving sustainable development  Section 8: Promoting healthy and safe communities, paragraph 94  Section 11: Making efficient use of land, paragraph 121

7.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

7.1 I consider the key planning issues relevant to the proposed scheme are:

7.2 Is the use of the building for ancillary use in connection with the school acceptable in principle?

7.3 The proposed change of use of the building from use class C3 (dwelling house) to a use ancillary to the school (use class D1), is considered acceptable in principle and would not be contrary to any policy with the adopted Allerdale Local Plan. In fact, policy S15 of the Allerdale Local Plan offers some support for the proposal where it recognises the need for development of educational facilities. The change of use would enhance provision at the school for training and improve staff accommodation and work areas. In addition, paragraph 94 of the revised NPPF states that great weight should be given to the need to create, expand and alter schools through preparation of plans and planning decisions on applications – I consider the proposal to accord with the spirit of this paragraph. Paragraph 121 of the revised NPPF also offers support for the proposal as it promotes the efficient use of sites that provide community facilities which include schools. In this case, a redundant building on the site will be put to positive use to directly support the operation of the school. Given the above, I therefore conclude that the proposal is acceptable in principle.

7.4 The proposal will result in the loss of a small residential property which is regrettable, however, given the location of the building close to the school building and within the school site, private residential use of the building is not likely to be acceptable on safeguarding and amenity grounds. It should be noted that the building could be reverted back to ancillary residential use connected with the school relatively easy as the modifications to the building needed for the proposed use are quite limited.

7.5 Will the change of use be harmful to residential amenity? 145

7.6 The existing bungalow building is located to the front of the school site and is located around 80 metres from the nearest residential properties located on High Street to the east of the site. A residential care home is located close to the site to the south (within 25 metres). Given the change in the use of the building, there will be some intensification of use in comparison with the past use as a dwelling house due to its proposed use in connection with the school. As such, there will be some additional activity at the building, however, this activity will be ancillary to that of the school and it is not intended that the use of the building will operate independently of the school. Its use will also be confined to the times that the school site is actively used and during term time only and most activity associated with the use will be contained within the building, reducing any further impacts. I do not consider it appropriate or justified to restrict the hours and periods of the use of the building as there will be limited impacts on the amenities of local residents from the proposed use. I consider therefore that the level and type of activity at the building as a result of this proposal would not lead to significant additional impacts on residential amenity above that already created by the school.

7.7 No significant changes are proposed to the form and scale of the building which would result in any additional physical impacts on surrounding properties.

7.8 How will the proposal affects parking and highway safety?

7.9 The existing parking provision at the school site will remain and this parking will be utilised by users of the building following its change of use as the building will be predominantly used by teaching staff as detailed in the proposal description. There will not be any increase in staff or pupils numbers as a direct result of the proposal and therefore additional traffic generation is unlikely to occur as no external use of the building is proposed. I therefore consider the level of parking provision on the school site as existing will be sufficient to serve the proposed use of the building without undue highway safety implications.

7.10 What effects will the proposal have on visual amenity?

7.11 Given that the proposal consists of the change of use of the existing building, most of the alterations required for this are to be carried out to the interior of the building. The existing gas fire terminal on the roof of the property will be removed. As a consequence, there will be limited effect upon the external appearance of the building. The main changes externally will be a new access ramp and replacement main entrance door, neither of which will have any significant effect on the visual character of the existing building or its surroundings.

Other Material Considerations

7.12 Secured by design considerations

7.13 In order to address the principle of secured by design and to accord with policies DM14 and S4 of the Allerdale Local Plan, the applicant has confirmed that the building will have an alarm system, CCTV signs are displayed in the car park bordering the building, the building has existing external security lighting and the replacement door to the front of the building will be installed to meet the required safety standards and resistance to forced entry. Furthermore, blinds will be installed to all windows to reduce visibility into the building from outside and the building will not have additional bins which could be used as climbing aids. The 146

location of the building also means it is readily overlooked from the main highway and access road and parking areas of the school which serve to provide high levels of natural surveillance. I consider these measures and factors will make the building secure and accord with the requirements of secured by design and policies DM14 and S4 of the Allerdale Local Plan and I am satisfied that crime prevention measures have been taken into account as part of the design of the scheme.

7.14 Impacts during construction works

7.15 In order to implement the change of use of the building, most of the works required will be internal remodelling works to the building, with the exception of the proposed disabled access ramp. Given this, I consider it unlikely that any significant disruption would result during construction works which would warrant the submission and approval of a construction management plan. Hours of construction can be limited by condition to protect the amenity of nearby residential properties.

8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 The proposed scheme is supported by the National Planning Policy Framework and the Allerdale Local Plan whereby significant weight is attributed to the improvement of schools through their creation, alteration and expansion. The proposed change of use of the redundant building to a use to support the function of the school and offer improved working facilities for members of staff is acceptable and the proposal will also make efficient use of a building on the site not currently in use or positively contributing to the operation of the school. Balancing this against the limited impacts of the proposals in terms of highway safety, impacts on the surrounding residential properties and almost negligible effects on the visual character of the building or its surroundings, I conclude the proposal is acceptable.

8.2 In summary, I consider that the proposed development is in accordance with the development plan, there are no material considerations that indicate the decision should be made otherwise and with the planning conditions proposed, any potential harm would reasonably by mitigated. I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted, subject to conditions.

Human Rights

8.3 The proposal will have a limited impact on the visual amenity of the area / residential amenities in the area / environmental amenity of the area. Any impacts on the rights of local property owners to a private and family life and peaceful enjoyment of their possessions (Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998) are minimal and proportionate to the wider social and economic interests of the community.

Angela Jones Acting Executive Director for Economy and Infrastructure

Contact: Mr Richard Cryer

Electoral Division Identification: St. Johns and Great Clifton

147

Appendix 1 Ref No. 2/19/9004 Development Control and Regulation Committee – 1 July 2019

Appendix 1 - PROPOSED PLANNING CONDITIONS

Time Limit for Implementation of Permission

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Approved Scheme

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out, except where modified by the conditions to this permission, in accordance with the following:

a. The submitted Application Form – dated 14 May 2019 b. Plans numbered and named: i) KBS1171, 01, revision B, dated 29/05/2019

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out to an approved appropriate standard and to avoid confusion as to what comprises the approved scheme.

Construction phase

3. No construction work nor delivery or removal of materials shall take place on the site outside the hours of:

07:30 to 18:00 Mondays to Fridays 08:00 to 13:00 Saturdays

No site construction work, delivery or removal of materials shall take place on Sundays; Bank Holidays and/or other Public Holidays.

Reason: To minimise the impact of the carrying out of the proposed development upon on residential amenity.

148

Appendix 2 Ref No. 2/19/9004 Development Control and Regulation Committee -

Appendix 2 - PLAN OF SITE LOCATION/EXTENT

149

150 Agenda Item 13

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL & REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting Date: 1 July 2019 From: The Acting Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

NOTE: These are applications that have been recently determined by the Assistant Director of Economy & Environment in accordance with the scheme of delegation.

Authority Area/ Proposal / Date Valid Decision Ref. No. (Web-link) Site Location / Application & Date Applicant - (Case Officer) Received

Carlisle

Nil

Allerdale

Nil

Eden

Nil

Copeland

4/19/9002 Section 73 application to vary Condition 2 of Planning 23.04.19 04.06.19 Marshalls Permission 4/15/9001 so as to allow for a revised scheme of Stancliffe Stone working and progressive restoration and minor amendments to the final restoration plan

Birkhams Quarry, Sandwith, Whitehaven, CA28 9UU

South Lakeland

Nil

Barrow

Nil

151 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 14

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL & REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting Date: 1 July 2019 From: The Acting Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure

APPLICATIONS PROPOSED TO BE DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

NOTE: These are applications that have been submitted to the County Council but are not yet ready/appropriate for determination under delegated powers and/or have been recently withdrawn or determined as invalid, or do not require planning permission, etc.

Authority Area/ Proposal / Date Valid Ref. No. (Web-link) Site Location / Application Applicant - (Case Officer) Received

Carlisle

1/19/9004 Importing waste soils and inert material under the provisions of a Recovery 04.06.19 North West Permit, issued by the Environment Agency, in order to extend an embankment Recycling Ltd supporting a residential property. Initial Planning consent approved 09/09/2013.

Cargo Hill Farm, road leading from Kingmoor Road junction to bridge south of Rockcliffe Estate, Cargo, Carlisle, CA6 4AL (DH)

1/19/9005 Section 73 Variation of Condition 2 of Planning Permission reference 1/17/9019 03.06.19 North West to permanently extend the hours of operation on the site (not including Recycling Ltd operating times of waste carrying vehicles).

North West Recycling Ltd, Unit A Kingmoor Park Rockcliffe Estate, Rockcliffe, Carlisle, CA6 4RW (DH)

1/19/9006 Section 73 Variation of Condition 2 of Planning Permission reference 1/17/9019 03.06.19 North West to permanently extend the hours of operation on the site (not including Recycling Ltd operating times of waste carrying vehicles).

North West Recycling Ltd, Unit B and Site K Kingmoor Park Rockcliffe Estate,Rockcliffe, Carlisle, CA6 4RW (DH)

Allerdale

2/19/9005 Construction of one ferric dosing kiosk and one motor control kiosk - one to 11.06.19 United Utilities regulate the PH of the final effluent and one to control the dosing regime.

Aspatria Wastewater Treatment Works, Comely Bank off Station Road (B5301), Aspatria, Cumbria, CA7 2BE (JP)

Eden

Nil

Copeland

4/17/9004 Yard for Skip Hire, Storage and Sorting of Waste. 15.02.17

Whitehaven Skips Whitehaven Skips and Service Ltd, 12, Leconfield Industrial Estate, Cleator and Services Ltd Moor, CA25 5QB (DH)

153 Authority Area/ Proposal / Date Valid Ref. No. (Web-link) Site Location / Application Applicant - (Case Officer) Received

South Lakeland

5/18/9005 New stormwater detention tank, kiosk, pressure balance stack and associated 26.02.18 United Utilities land reprofiling to address an Unsatisfactory Intermittent Discharge associated Plc with the existing Dragley Beck Combined Sewer Overflow.

Low Mill Business Park, Ulverston, LA12 9EE (DH)

Barrow

6/18/9006 Review of Minerals Permission (ROMP) Application for Permission Ref.6/03/9020 18.12.18

Burlington Goldmire Quarry, Dalton in Furness, (DH) Aggregates Ltd

154 Agenda Item 15

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL & REGULATION COMMITTEE

Meeting Date: 1 July 2019 From: The Acting Executive Director - Economy and Infrastructure

FORWARD PLAN

Committee Date Reference/Proposal/Site Location

13 August 2019 Commons Registration

CA10/41 Application to correct the register, CL495 Kitchin’s Ground (SB)

CA13/26 Application to correct mistaken registration, CL495 Kitchin’s Ground (SB)

NL0057 Application to register land as a Town or Village Green, Land at Cumrew (JW)

Countryside and Access

05.02.357 (WCA/HA) - Amendment of public footpath no 126016, Nicholforest

05.02.241 (WCA/HA) - Amendment of public footpath 126003, Nicholforest

05.01.423 (HA) - Diversion of Bailey Lane, Grange over Sands

05.02.337(WCA) – Add path at Centurions Walk, Carlisle

18 September 2019 Commons Registration

CA13/25 Application to correct mistaken registration, land at High Stile Farm, Torver (SB).

Countryside and Access

05.01.341 (HA) - Diversion of path 327007 at Hartley

05.01.444 (HA) - Diversion of path 331015 Hunsonby (HA)

05.01.443 (HA) - Diversion of paths 536260/261 Kendal (HA)

05.02.270 (WCA) – Claimed bridleway ext 258023 Westward

155 This page is intentionally left blank