DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
COMMITTEE
BURNLEY TOWN HALL
Thursday 12th March 2015 at 6.30 p.m.
Members of the public may ask a question, make a statement, or present a
petition relating to any matter within the remit of the Committee.
Notice in writing of the subject matter must be given to the Head of the
Chief Executive’s Office by 5.00pm three days before the meeting. Forms
can be obtained for this purpose from the reception desk at Burnley Town
Hall, Manchester Road or the Contact Centre, Parker Lane, Burnley or from
the web at www.burnley.co.uk/meetings.
Under current legislation members of the public can film or record this
meeting provided they don’t disrupt the meeting.
AGENDA
1.
Apologies
To receive any apologies for absence.
2.
Minutes
To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the last meeting held on
15th January 2015 available at www.burnley.gov.uk.
3.
Additional Items of Business
To determine whether there are any additional items of business which,
by reason of special circumstances, the Chair decides should be
considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.
4.
Declaration of Interest
To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to any
item on the agenda in accordance with the provision of the Code of
Conduct and/or indicate if S106 of the Local Government Finance Act
1992 applies to them.
5.
Exclusion of the Public
To determine during which items, if any, the public are to be excluded
from the meeting.
PUBLIC ITEMS
6.
List of Deposited Plans and Applications
To consider reports on planning applications for development
permission:
(i) APP/2015/0006 Innisfree, Hurstwood lane, Worsthorne
(ii) APP/2014/0490 Mount Zion Methodist Church, Burnley Road,
Cliviger
(iii) APP/2015/0003 Land Adj. 9 & 15 Southern Avenue, Burnley
(enclosed)
I.
MEMBERSHIP OF COMMITTEE
Charles Bullas
Frank Cant (Vice Chair)
Saeed Chaudhary
Jean Cunningham
Trish Ellis
Roger Frost
Sue Graham
John Harbour
Anne Kelly
Arif Khan (Chair)
Elizabeth Monk
Neil Mottershead
Tom Porter
Paul Reynolds
Ann Royle
Cosima Towneley
PUBLISHED:
Wednesday 4th March 2015
Please note that phones and other equipment may be used to film, record, tweet or blog from this
meeting. The use of those images or recordings is not under the Council’s control. No part of the
meeting room is exempt from public filming.
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
12th March 2015
INDEX
App No
Description
Location
Recommendation
Page
No
APP/2015/0006
Proposed kitchen
extension and garage
replacement
Innisfree,
Hurstwood
Lane,
Worsthorne
Recommended for
Approval
1
APP/2014/0490
Proposed extension to
church to provide
disabled access, a
reception area,
additional community
space and improved
w.c. facilities.
Mount Zion
Methodist
Church,
Burnley
Road,
Cliviger,
Burnley
Recommended for
Refusal
7
APP/2015/0003
Proposed erection of a
detached dwelling with
a detached garage (resubmission of
APP/2011/0570).
Land Adj. 9 &
15 Southern
Avenue,
Burnley
Recommended for
Approval
15
Application Recommended for Approval
Cliviger with Worsthorne Ward
APP/2015/0006
Full Planning Application
Proposed kitchen extension and garage replacement
INNISFREE HURSTWOOD LANE WORSTHORNE-WITH-HURSTWOOD
Background:
The application relates to a detached dwelling. Objections have been received.
Relevant Policies:
Burnley Local Plan Second Review
H13 - Extensions and conversion of existing single dwellings
National Planning Policy Framework
Site History: No applications.
Consultation Responses:
Highway Authority – No objections.
Neighbouring Resident – Two letters (one from the owner, one from the occupier of
the adjacent dwelling) making objections summarised as follows:





Leaves little access space for maintenance of adjoining dwelling (Comment –
This is not a material planning consideration)
Loss of 4 trees (Comment – Some very small garden trees would be removed.
In any event, these could be removed as part of the ongoing garden/property
renovation)...
Existing parking arrangements at the adjacent house will be adversely affected
by the proposal. (Comment – There are no proposals to alter the existing
access from the highway and the development will not affect the parking
arrangements within the neighbouring property)).
Comments about that the property boundary should not be changed (Comment
– If there is a dispute regarding boundaries this is a private matter between the
parties involved).
Sunlight and daylight would be blocked to the adjacent dwelling. (Comment –
The garage would not be unduly high, 2.9m above floor level of the dwelling,
and unlikely to affect daylight or sunlight to the objectors dwelling).
Planning and Environmental Considerations:
The application relates to one of two bungalows in the rural area, fronting the west
side of Hurstwood Lane. A location plan and images of the property are copied below
for ease of description.
Application site
From Hurstwood Lane
Rear of application site
Adjacent bungalow
The proposal is to replace the small detached garage at the side of the dwelling with
an attached garage. It would be 4m wide and 8.4m long. It would be set 0.54m inside
the side boundary with the adjacent bungalow. There is a similar garage, alongside
the boundary, at the adjacent dwelling.
At the rear, the garage would project 1.8m to the rear of the building. In that position it
would be alongside a small sun lounge at the adjacent bungalow. Whilst some outlook
and a small amount of sunlight would be lost to that sun lounge it would not warrant
refusal of the application.
A small dining room extension would be erected at the rear of the bungalow,
projecting 2.8m and 4.3m wide. It would have a flat roof because, as explained by the
applicant, the intention would be that (at a later date) a solar water heating plant would
be placed on the roof.
Between the dining room extension and garage a small area of raised decking would
be placed. It would be at the floor level of the existing building and adjacent property
and unlikely to result in any loss of privacy.
Because the land slopes steeply downward from Hurstwood Lane, the rear of the
garage and extension would be quite high above ground level, although at a normal
single storey height in relation to the floor levels of both bungalows. On a level site,
such extensions would be ‘permitted development’.
The existing building is constructed of red brick with some pebbledash render to the
rear. The proposed materials are rendered blockwork. As the adjacent property is
also rendered these materials will be in keeping with the two dwellings.
Recommendation:
That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:
1. The development must be begun within three years of the date of this decision.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the application details
and the drawings listed above
Reasons
1. Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase
Act 2004.
2. To ensure that the development remains in accordance with the development
plan
AR 25.2.2015
Application Recommended for Refusal
Cliviger with Worsthorne Ward
APP/2014/0490
Full Planning Application
Proposed extension to church to provide disabled access, a reception area, additional
community space and improved w.c. facilities.
MOUNT ZION METHODIST CHURCH WALK MILL BURNLEY ROAD CLIVIGER
BURNLEY
Background:
The proposal is to erect an extension at the front of the church building.
Members of the Council have called-in the application for determination by the
Committee.
Relevant Policies:
Burnley Local Plan Second Review
CF14 - Provision, retention and enhancement of community facilities
E15 - Locally important buildings, features and artefacts
GP1 - Development within the Urban Boundary
GP3 - Design and Quality
Relevant Policies:
Burnley Local Plan Second Review
GP3 – Design and quality
GP5 – Access for all
E15 – Locally important buildings and artefacts
CF14 – Provision, retention and enhancement of community facilities
Site History:
1993/0336: Extension to rear to provide teaching room and replacement of existing
boiler room, along with storage space – Granted
2014/0113: Proposed extension to church to provide disabled access, a reception
area, additional community space and improved w.c. facilities.- Withdrawn
Consultation Responses:
Highway Authority – No objection.
Planning and Environmental Considerations:
Mount Zion Methodist Church.is set at the end of Walk Mill, a part of Cliviger, fronting
the north side of Burnley Road.
The building occupies a prominent elevated position. Its front elevation has simple,
symmetrical proportions, facing Burnley Road across a frontage grassed
embankment. There is an entrance path with low-rise steps formed to create a shallow
gradient pedestrian access from the Burnley Road footway to the central front door.
Front elevation (from Burnley Road)
The church seeks improved access (necessitating a lift), and additional
accommodation that can be accessed for community purposes without the need to
enter the main church building. Also, this would provide access to the rear of the
church hall, as presently the central access doorway is in some conflict with existing
arrangements, particularly during a church service or other meeting.
The existing and proposed plans and elevations are copied below for ease of
description.
Existing floor plan
Proposed floor plan
Existing elevation to Burnley Road
Proposed elevation to Burnley Road
Proposed side elevations
Policy and assessment
The Church has a clearly stated need for the additional accommodation to enable
enhancement of its community activities. This is supported by Policy CF14, and the
extension is acceptable in principle.
Pre-application discussion has established that only a front extension would provide
the necessary accommodation.
The planning issue is the design of the proposed extension.
Policy GP3 requires development be of good design and quality and to make a
positive contribution to to Burnley’s distinctive character. Policy E15 requires that
reasonable measures are taken to avoid unnecessary damage to locally important
buildings. In this case, the damage would be to the appearance of the building.
Extending at the front of the building will inevitably result in the simplicity and
symmetry of the existing building being lost. This impact appears unavoidable, and on
balance, it is acceptable, provided the extension itself respects the character of the
existing building. The proposed extension fails in that respect.
The particular failing of the design is the window treatment on the front elevation and
the choice of external materials, although other beneficial amendments appear
practical.
Accordingly, the applicant was advised that in order to be acceptable the elevation of
the extension facing Burnley Road should be changed.
The suggested changes to the front elevation were:
 Window openings to match the existing building.
 External materials to match the existing building (stone rather than
stone and render as proposed).


Consider placing the lift internally, possibly bringing the extension
forward a small distance to compensate for any loss of internal
floorspace.
Alternatively: placing the lift shaft central to the gable of the
extension, to provide symmetry.
The applicant has responded that the proposed development is not solely a pastiche
of the existing church, but represents a new addition to the existing building; and that
the application be determined as submitted.
Conclusion
Lasting, visual harm would result from the proposal (as it presently stands). This is
sufficient to warrant a recommendation that the application be refused.
Recommendation:
That the application be refused for the following reasons:
The proposed extension, by reason of its external appearance (in particular its window
design and wall materials), and its position in front of the existing building, would
adversely affect the visual amenities of the Burnley Road streetscene, contrary to
Policy GP3 of the Burnley Local Plan, Second Review, currently saved.
AR
25.2.2015
Application Recommended for Approval
Gannow Ward
APP/2015/0003
Full Planning Application
Proposed erection of a detached dwelling with a detached garage (re-submission of
APP/2011/0570).
LAND ADJACENT 9 & 15 SOUTHERN AVENUE BURNLEY
Background:
The proposal is for the erection of a dwelling on a plot between 9 and 15 Southern
Avenue.
Planning permission was granted for two dwellings on this and the adjacent plot in
1993 and one dwelling, on the adjacent plot, has been constructed. In 2002
permission was granted for an amended house type on the remaining plot and this
was renewed in 2007 and 2011. The current application now seeks to renew the 2011
permission.
An objection has been received.
Plot location off Southern Avenue
Summary of Reason for Decision:
The development is generally in accordance with the Development Plan, in particular
the policies listed below, and there are no other material considerations to indicate
that planning permission should not be granted:
Relevant Policies:
Burnley Local Plan Second Review
GP3 - Design and Quality
H1 - Land for new housing development
H2 - The sequential release of further housing land for development
H3 - Quality and design in new housing development
Site History:
12/85/0235 – Outline application for residential development: Refused
12/85/0778 – Outline application for residential development of 2 dwellings: Granted
12/93/0523 – Erection of two dwelling houses: Granted
12/98/0236 – Amended House type: Granted (adjacent plot now constructed)
12/02/0624 – Proposed revised house design: Granted
APP/2007/0937 - Proposed re-submission (app/2002/0624) of revised house design
– granted
APP/2011/0570 – Erection of detached dwelling with a detached garage
(resubmission of APP/2007/0570)
Consultation Responses:
1
Highway Authority – the proposal has no highway implications and therefore no
objections are raised on highway grounds. This would be providing the same
conditions were imposed on any permission as were applied in 2011, relating to
the blocking up of the access through to Southern Court and the making up of
the back street.
2.
One letter from a nearby resident makes the following comments:

Access from the single track back street does not seem to have been
evaluated. Eight properties Nos 15 – 29 already use the back street.
There is limited parking and room for turning for delivery vehicles. The
refuse collection arrangements appear unsatisfactory.

The dwelling has the potential to have four cars and there is no space for
visitors. The wider implications of this should be considered.

The dwelling on the adjacent plot No.9 Southern Avenue (the adjacent
plot) gains access from Southern Court and conditions on the planning
permission requiring access from the back street and the blocking of the
access to Southern Court have not be complied with or enforced. If the
application property uses the same access via Southern Court it would
further increase the likelihood of a serious accident. Vehicles are
regularly forced to reverse dangerously and blindly out into Ightenhill
Park Lane if vehicles try to enter / exit at the same time.

The land is not open land as stated in the application, it is part of the
garden area of No. 9. An established tree would have to be removed.

The effect of another large dwelling would create an undesirable terrace
effect when viewed from the north end of Southern Avenue and would
remove the space next to the large detached house. It would affect the
amenity value of the garden and space which contributes to the
streetscape.

There are no compelling reasons why a dwelling is needed in this
location.
Planning and Environmental Considerations:
The principle of a dwelling on this site has already been established by the previous
planning permissions. Circumstances have not changed since the development was
approved in 2011 and the same considerations would apply.
Housing Issues
The land is within the urban boundary and within a residential area. There is a local
centre within walking distance and the site is served by public transport with the
quality bus route on Padiham Road close by.
The site is greenfield land where Policy H2 sets out that greenfield sites will only be
released for development when completions, brownfield allocations and brownfield
windfall sites cannot meet 5 years housing provision. At present the Council can meet
the housing requirement and there is no shortage of brownfield sites within the urban
boundary. Greenfield sites would not normally be released in advance of brownfield
sites unless there are other material considerations which outweighed the Greenfield
issue.
In an appeal case on a nearby greenfield site, (APP/2008/0553) an Inspector
considered the release of a Greenfield site and determined that the appeal site was
located in a sufficiently sustainable location with a regular bus service and an
adequate range of services available nearby. He allowed the appeal.
The Inspector’s decision was taken into account as a material consideration as the
circumstances of the site are very similar. The bringing forward of this Greenfield site
is therefore acceptable in the circumstances. The Council is still not is a position of
oversupply and there is scope for allowing development in appropriate locations.
Design and Residential Amenity
The scale of the dwelling is in keeping with the neighbouring surrounding large
properties including the adjacent property constructed in 1998. The proposed
materials are natural stone and blue slate. The proposed design of the dwelling is the
same as that approved in 2011 and in keeping with the neighbouring dwelling and the
surrounding area. It is acceptable and in line with Local Plan policies.
The property will not adversely affect any neighbouring dwellings by way of privacy,
outlook or loss of light and would be in keeping with the character and appearance of
the area. Southern Avenue is characterised by large dwellings with similar plot widths
to the application plot.
Proposed design
Adjacent dwelling (No 9)
The layout of the development will have some effect on a large tree in the
neighbouring garden at No. 15 Southern Avenue. However, the tree is not covered by
a Tree Preservation Order and no objections have been received from the
neighbouring residents. The principle of the layout of the plot has already been
established by the previous planning permissions granted.
Highway Safety
The access to the rear of 15 to 29 Southern Avenue (back Stephenson Drive) is an
adopted back Street, and the access to the rear of 1 to 7 Southern Avenue is a private
road.
The Highway Authority has indicated that access should be from Stephenson Drive
and the back street to the rear of Nos 15 to 29 Southern Avenue which is an adopted
Highway. The access through to Southern Court should be permanently closed.
Providing conditions are included in this respect the Highway Authority raise no
objections. The same conditions as imposed on the previous approval in 2011 are
recommended.
The adjacent plot, No. 9 Southern Avenue currently uses the access off Southern
Court, not in line with the planning conditions imposed when the house was built.
Having regard to the breach of the condition for a period of more than 10 years, it is
not possible to take enforcement action to require the access to be from the back
street.
Summary
The current proposal is a resubmission of the planning permission granted in 2011
and as circumstances have not changed since that decision, there would be no overriding reason to refuse the application.
The proposal is in line with Local Plan policies and is acceptable.
Recommendation: That the application be granted subject to the following
conditions,
1.
The development must be begun within three years of the date of this
decision.
2.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the application plans
and details.
3.
Before the house is first occupied, a landscaping scheme for the site shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
landscaping scheme shall be implemented in the first planting season
following substantial completion of the dwelling.
4.
Before the house is first occupied the access road to the rear of the proposed
dwelling from the boundary with No 15 to the boundary with No 9 shall be
made up to adoptable standards including the provision for street lighting.
5.
Access shall be taken from the back street leading from Stephenson Drive.
Before any development commences a scheme for the blocking up of the
access road to the rear on the boundary with No 9 Southern Avenue to
prevent vehicular access to Ightenhill Park Lane shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details
shall be implemented in full prior to occupation of the approved dwelling and
maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority at all times
thereafter.
Reasons:
1.
Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase
Act 2004.
2
To ensure continued compliance with the Development Plan.
3.
To ensure a satisfactory landscaping scheme in the interests of residential
amenity.
4.
To ensure adequate vehicular access
5.
In the interests of Highway Safety