Agenda and minutes

Due to the bad weather and flooding, Vice Chairman, Councillor Malcom Lamb, was unable to attend the Committee.

A nomination was made to elect Councillor Giles Archibald as Chairman.

RESOLVED – That Councillor Giles Archibald be elected as Chairman for the meeting.

Note - the Principal Specialist (Development Management) informed the Chairman that there was a new order for the meeting. Agenda Item No.9 would follow Agenda Item No.5 and the running order would then be Item No.8, Item No.6 then Item No.7.

To authorise the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 26 August 2021.

The Chairman highlighted a typographical error within the minutes that Councillor Audland and Councillor Dixon had been omitted from the attendance list.

RESOLVED – That the Chairman be authorised to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 26 August 2021 following the amendment to the attendance list being made.

To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda.

Members are reminded that, in accordance with the revised Code of Conduct, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests.  (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting.)

Members may, however, also decide, in the interests of clarity and transparency, to declare at this point in the meeting, any such disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, as well as any other registrable or other interests.

If a Member requires advice on any item involving a possible declaration of interest which could affect his/her ability to speak and/or vote, he/she is advised to contact the Monitoring Officer at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.

RESOLVED – That it be noted for the purpose of transparency:-

Councillors Giles Archibald, Chris Hogg and Susanne Long declared that they were Members of Kendal Town Council of whom had made representations with regards to Minute No. P/25 (Planning Application SL/2019/0743), Minute No. P/27 (Planning Application SL/2021/0764­) and Minute No.28 (Planning Application SL/2021/0883). They explained that they did not sit on the planning committee at Kendal Town Council and additionally had never heard of the applications before receiving the Agenda; as such they were not biased or predetermined and remained in the Assembly Room and took part in the discussion and voted on these items.

To consider whether the items, if any, in Part II of the Agenda should be considered in the presence of the press and public.

RESOLVED – That it be noted that there are no excluded Items on the agenda.

Any member of the public who wishes to ask a question, make representations or present a deputation or petition at this meeting should apply to do so by no later than 0:01am (one minute past midnight) two working days before the meeting.  Information on how to make the application can be obtained by viewing the Council’s Website www.southlakeland.gov.uk or by contacting the Committee Services Team on 01539 733333.

(1)        Planning Applications

            Planning applications for which requests to speak have been made.

(2)        Agenda Items

            Agenda items for which requests to speak have been made.

The Planning Solicitor informed the Committee that a local resident had been in contact with the Principal Planning Officer and had indicated in correspondence that he intended to speak in respect of Minute No. P/25 (Planning Application SL/2019/0743) Land North of Meadowbank Business Park, Shap Road, Kendal, LA9 6NY. However, the member of the public had not registered to speak under the Council’s public participation scheme therefore it would be the discretion of the Chairman if the member of the public were to be allowed to address the Committee.

To consider a hybrid application:-

(1)        Full Application for motor dealership (sui generis) including workshops, access roundabout, spine road and internal compartmentation area access junctions.

(2)        Outline Planning Application all matters reserved, apart from access, for employment business park (indicatively B1/B2 6400m2 & B8 2500m2).

The Principal Planning Officer presented Planning Application SL/2019/0743 which sought planning permission for a motor dealership including workshops, access roundabout, spine road and internal compartmentation area access junctions.

The Officer brought to the Members attention the supplementary Addendum Report which considered the late representations made against the application. The application site had been allocated within the Land Allocations DPD Policy LA1.8 (Local Employment Allocations). The Policy listed the “Acceptable Uses” for the site as those that fell within Classes B1 (Business) and B2 (General Industrial). The application being considered by the Committee was outlined in red on the displayed Plan.

The proposal was a hybrid application, part full and part outline scheme. The full element proposed a motor dealership with associated structures, together with an access roundabout on to the A6 and a new estate road. The site proposal included seven separate car parking areas which would provide a total of 333 spaces. The elevated building had an element of green wall that would face the South East approach. The Planning Officer presented two drawings of a KIA motor dealership that demonstrated the company’s corporate colours as an example to Members.

One of the key considerations of the application was access. The new roundabout formed part of the full application on Shap Road and the new estate road would provide access to the new indicative plots. There were concerns from local residents who had access on the East side of Shap Road, namely, Summerhow House and the private agricultural access for Beck Mills Farm. The representations, which referred to the issues with access, were detailed in the Officer’s Addendum Report. The Principal Planning Officer also clarified that these issues were given consideration during the site visit.

Despite no objections being received from the Highway Authority, following the further objections being received from the public, the Planning Officer approached the Highway Authority in order for further consideration to be given to the agricultural access issues. However, no further comments or objections were received. The Planning Officer had asked the applicant to use a tracking diagram, a picture was presented to the Committee which demonstrated the change within the roundabout which allowed for improved tractor and trailer access. The reconfigured access meant the geometry of the roundabout would improve access which in turn would slow the traffic speed. The Planning Officer presented to Members a photograph provided by the applicant which evidenced that the verge, adjacent to the entrance for the agricultural land, was being  driven on, demonstrating that vehicles were having to take the entrance at a wider angle, suggesting that the current access was not convenient or easily accessible.

The Officer also discussed the Kendal Northern Access Route. Cumbria County Council had received funding from the Department of Transport to complete an Outline Business Case for a Kendal Northern Access Route. Within the Cumbria County Council report there was an indication for a preference for a Northern route option. The Officer explained this was a nebulous position, the prospect of  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/25

To consider an application for the removal/variation of Condition 4 (BREEAM) attached to SL/2019/0093 (extension to the Technical Fibre Products building with relocation of existing canopy onto the side of the proposed extension, associated ground works including access road and additional hardstanding).

The Specialist (Development Management) presented Planning Application SL/2020/0099 which sought the removal/variation of Condition 4 (BREEAM) attached to SL/2019/0093 (Extension to the Technical Fibre Products building with relocation of existing canopy onto the side of the proposed extension, associated ground works including access road and additional hardstanding). The application raised a number of considerations, including BREEAM requirements, the application and relevance of local and national policy, the achievability of a BREEAM ‘excellent’ standard and the suitability of alternatives with regard to Sustainable Construction Statements.

The Council’s Local Plan Policy Review report commented on policy CS8.7, while it noted that the Policy required significant updating, the Specialist considered that it was not out of date in requiring a BREAAM excellent standard for new commercial buildings over 1000 sq m. The Specialist drew Members’ attention to the BREEAM frontloaded process to achieve a high standard which was required at the beginning of the planning process, prior to an application being submitted. Members were asked to consider the applicant’s Sustainable Construction Statement. At the site, sustainable construction methods and renewable energy were already being used. 

The Chairman thanked the Specialist for a thorough presentation and thanked the applicant for the diplomatic way in which they had dealt with the application. The Chairman welcomed questions from Members.

Members noted that thermal modelling was not addressed within the Sustainable Construction Statement alongside other important elements that formed part of the BREEAM Conditions. Members agreed that a comparison of BREEAM to the Construction Statement would allow for a beneficial assessment. Members discussed the danger of setting a precedent if BREEAM was a technical standard. The Principal Specialist (Development Management) stated that the building was quite large and rare, although there may be a danger in setting a precedent, this would be very limited given the circumstances in this case which would mitigate the likelihood of an application occurring in any future development.

Members stressed the importance of the decision since it related to the variation of environmental conditions and gave considerable weight to the Construction Statement which they believed should be revised in order to have a stronger incorporation of the BREEAM Conditions.

The Principal Specialist (Development Management) drew Members’ attention to Clause B of Condition 3 which acted as a trigger point, it sought the production of a validation report to ensure that the applicant would comply with the Sustainable Construction Statement. He added that officers were in a position to request any missing elements within the Statement and could request a revised document.

A motion to approve the application was proposed and seconded and it was

RESOLVED – That the application be approved, subject to the following conditions:-

Officers seeking some revisions to the sustainable construction statement submitted by the applicants, to include additional detail to ensure it adequately addressed the relevant BREEAM categories, including thermal content.

Condition (1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance

with the following approved plans:

·         Location Plan, Drawing No. 1626/P-01

·         Proposed Site Plan, Drawing No.  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/26

To consider an application for a single-storey rear extension.

The Senior Specialist (Development Management) presented the application on behalf of Simon Lloyds, the Case Officer for the application. The application sought permission to demolish an existing conservatory and rear extension and to erect a rear extension measuring 5.35m x 3.71m at No. 24 Castle Oval, Kendal, LA9 7BD.

The application was reported to the Planning Committee as the applicant was a member of staff. This was in accordance with the Council’s Constitution and the Scheme of Delegation. Members were asked to note the existing fencing to the neighbouring property and the neighbour’s conservatory. The main issue for Members to consider was whether the proposal would have a significant impact on the visual and residential amenity of the area. The net gain for biodiversity was a proposal for a bird box on site.

Kendal Town Council made a representation that the net biodiversity gain was insufficient with a single bird box and that the positioning of the box should ensure their location was appropriate to achieve an actual net biodiversity gain. It was considered that the bird box would be more successful if located at eaves level and the applicant was agreeable to this. An amended plan was submitted to evidence this. It was considered that the proposed measures were an appropriate net biodiversity gain in context of the development proposed.

Members sought clarification if the Council had a policy with regards to what proposals applicants needed to make to produce a net biodiversity gain. The Senior Specialist stated that small gains were advised for applications such as the one being considered. However, for minor applications the small site DEFRA metric is applied and on major applications the DEFRA metric 3.0 is applied. For residential properties, applicants are requested to include small scale mitigation measures such as erecting bat or bird boxes or planting a fruit tree or flowering plants. The Planning Team Lead reiterated that there was a list as set out in Policy DM4 however the key point, for householder development, was proportionality.

A motion was proposed and seconded and that it was

RESOLVED – That the application be granted, subject to:-

Condition (1)   The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

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

Condition (2)   The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

                        Exisiting and Proposed Floor Plans and Elevations, Location and Site Plan: Drawing No. A1.SG.07.21 Rev 1

                        As received by the Local Planning Authority 12 October 2021

Reason:          For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Condition (3)   The development hereby permitted shall be constructed of the materials details of which are shown on Drawing No. A1.SG.07.21 Rev 1, received 12 October 2021. The approved materials shall be retained thereafter, unless otherwise approved in writing by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/27

To consider an application for a single-storey front, side and rear extension.

The Senior Specialist (Development Management) presented the application on behalf of Simon Lloyds, the Case Officer for the application. The application sought permission for the construction of a single storey front, side and rear extension at No. 61 Scafell Drive, Kendal, LA9 7PE. The main issue for Members to consider was whether the proposal would have a significant impact on the visual and residential amenity of the area. The application was reported to the Planning Committee as the applicant was a member of staff. This was in accordance with the Council’s Constitution and the Scheme of Delegation. The Specialist highlighted to Members on the opposite side of the application there were many other properties with similar extensions.

Kendal Town Council made an objection to the application and had commented on the visual design of the extension and concern for construction access requirements due to the closeness of the neighbouring property. The Specialist clarified that any issues relating to impact on party walls or access for construction was a civil legal matter and was not a material planning consideration.

Members’ sought clarification if there was a requirement to have extra noise insulation if the extension were to be living accommodation instead of a garage. The Specialist clarified that this would be addressed through building control, and noted that the application was intended to be for the use of a garage at the front and a utility room and WC that was not likely to promote any noise issues.

One Member requested that the outline of the old building be provided in order to demonstrate the existing structure, and the new, and that this should be provided for all future applications. The specialist highlighted where this was shown on the plans submitted.

On the subject of net biodiversity gain, Members considered that this application gave the impression that it had more of an impact on the environment than the previous application (Minute No. P/27 Planning Application No. SL/2021/0764). Despite the replacement or remedy being the same in respect to net biodiversity gain. Members sought clarification if there was an opportunity to request additional biodiversity gain.

The Senior Specialist explained to Members how the Council applied Policy DM4 in relation to householder applications and appreciated that more clarity was required in this area and would need to be considered more widely as part of the Local Plan review.

The Chairman stated that if a biodiversity gain was to be expected then the Council should be confident that we were indeed receiving a gain. He stressed that the construction would be impacting on the environment considerably and that the measure was not proportionate; but he did take on board the comments of the Senior Specialist. He undertook to follow this point up with the relevant Portfolio Holder.

A motion to approve the application was proposed and seconded and it was

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to:-

Condition (1)   The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/28