south lakeland district councildemocracy.southlakeland.gov.uk/data/planning...

99 8.9.2005 Planning

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Minutes of the proceedings at a meeting of the Committee held in the Council Chamber at South Lakeland House, Kendal, on Thursday 8 September 2005, at 10.00 a.m.

Present

Councillors

Tony Rothwell (Chairman)

Paul Braithwaite Simon Butterfield Gill Cranwell Joss Curwen Graham Donning David Foot Brenda Gray Frank Hodson Howard Martin Gwen Murfin Reg Parker Brian Wilkinson

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Robin Brown, John Galbraith, Gordon Jenkinson, Janette Jenkinson, and Paul Little.

Officers

Sandra Fenwick for Executive Director (Central Services) Wendy Graham for Strategic Director (Customer Services) Margaret Graham for Committee Manager Nick Hayhurst for Strategic Director (Customer Services) Barry Jackson for Strategic Director (Customer Services) Jennifer Richards for Committee Manager Peter Ridgway Strategic Director (Customer Services)

P/063 MINUTES

RESOLVED – That, subject to the inclusion of Councillor Frank Hodson on the attendance list, the Chairman be authorised to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 9 August 2005.

P/064 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

RESOLVED – That it be noted that the following declarations of interest were made:-

(1) Councillor Tony Rothwell declared a personal interest in Minute P/066 (Planning Application No.SL./2005/0682);

(2) Councillor Paul Braithwaite declared a personal interest in Minute P/066 (Planning Application No.SL/2005/0835), Minute P/071 (Planning Applications Nos. SL/2005/0618 and SL/2005/0619), Minute P/073 (Planning Applications Nos. SL/2005/0841, SL/2005/0857 and SLl/2005/0901), and a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute P/072 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0845);

(3) Councillor Graham Donning and Councillor Brian Wilkinson each declared a personal interest in Minute P/066 (Planning Application No.SL/2005/0682), and Minute P/71 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0853);

100 8.9.2005 Planning

(4) Councillor Ms Gwen Murfin declared a personal interest in Minute P/072 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0845);

(5) In respect of Minute P/071, Councillor Howard Martin declared a personal interest in Planning Application No. SL/2005/0716, and a personal and prejudicial interest in Planning Applications Nos. SL/2005/0343 and SL/2005/0578), and a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute P/069 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0771);

(6) Councillor Frank Hodson declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute P/072 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0845); and

(7) Councillor Mrs Brenda Gray declared a personal interest in Minute P/072 (Planning Application No. SL/2005/0845).

P/065 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUDED ITEMS

RESOLVED – That it be noted that there were no items in Part II of the Agenda.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

P/066 Planning Applications

RESOLVED – That the following applications, for which representations have been received from members of the public, in accordance with Minute 1810 (1996/97), be determined in the following manner:-

SL/2005/0835 KENDAL: The Mount, 90 Burneside Road, Kendal. Change of use from flats to children’s day nursery and alterations to vehicular access. Sunnybrow Ltd.

The Ward Councillor, Mrs Jean Ewing, spoke in objection to the application. She referred to her submission on 5 July 2005, when the previous planning application had been refused, and had provided a full transcript of that submission. She said it was that it was very frustrating to have to address the Committee again.

Mrs Ewing said that she could see nothing in this latest application which addressed the traffic problem situation – a significant increase in traffic movements along Ashleigh Road, a residential street. The information provided by the applicant made no mention of the school minibus, refuse wagons, delivery vans etc, all of which would use Ashleigh Road. The Residents Parking Scheme had nothing whatsoever to do with the application. Huge traffic problems had built up over the past five years - Members would have had the experience of a site visit. Whilst the recognition of traffic problems at last by Cumbria County Council was welcomed, SLDC at present had neither the finance nor the manpower to police these schemes.

Much had been said and written about the loss of nursery provision, but very little about the feelings of residents about having 90 children literally on their doorsteps every day.

101 8.9.2005 Planning

Whilst delighted about the large increase of nursery provision, she had a duty to residents to allow them their right to a peaceful enjoyment of their homes. She asked the Committee not to allow an abuse of the planning process.

Mrs Ewing mentioned that there had been no comments on the application from Kendal Town Council, of which she was also a Member. She understood that the Town Council had not received any consultation documents.

A full transcript of Mrs Ewing’s submission has been placed on file.

Mr Don Maclennan spoke in objection to the application, on behalf of residents in Ashleigh Road and Burneside Road.

He said that residents were sympathetic to the need for nursery facilities in Kendal, but did not agreed that the need should be fulfilled in a residential community and in an area where traffic issues were already a cause for alarm and concern.

Nothing had changed since the decision to refuse the application considered on 5 July 2005, the whole premise of which was the flow of traffic. The application would mean a further 126+ cars a day on Ashleigh/Burneside Roads – not to mention delivery vehicles etc – the residents of which would have to live with the long term implications of noise, nuisance, traffic and associated safety factors.

He urged the Committee to ensure that the planning system was not used, or appeared to be used, for the benefit of businesses which gad taken on property commitments prior to receiving planning approval. The Mount was not an essential location for the provision of nursery facilities – there were alternatives – but the long term implications of a nursery there would have long-term adverse effects on the residents of Burneside Road and Ashleigh Road.

A copy of Mr Maclennan’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mrs Jennifer Brightman of 88 Burneside Road spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs Brightman said that the height difference between her home and the Mount meant that there was a 15 foot drop from the front garden of The Mount to her back yard – her only truly private family space.

One of the considerations whether or not to object to the application was whether the Mount would be used for pre-school children only. It was one thing having a group of small children playing in a garden 15 feet above her back yard , quite another to have groups of 11 – 14 years olds effectively “above their heads”.

102 8.9.2005 Planning

For privacy and safety reasons, Mrs Brightman asked the Committee to condition any planning permission to pre-school children (under 5 years); to stipulate that a fence, set away from the boundary, be put up to allow maintenance of trees along the boundary and provide a “catch zone” for the children and their toys; and that operating hours be restricted to 8.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m., Monday to Friday only, as a reasonable request based on the residential nature of the area.

A copy of Mrs Brightman’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mr Keith Watson spoke in objection to the application, on behalf of a number of residents of Ashleigh Road.

He said that out of 42 residents in Ashleigh Road, 32 (75%) were elderly and/or retired. Since the start of the Webbs development, residents had suffered the noise of machinery and dust flying all day. Although his house was double glazed and insulated, people and traffic going to and from The Mount could still be heard. They would have to contend with the noise of up to 90 children coming and going, at lunchtime, and at morning and afternoon playtimes. Surely elderly persons had a human right to a peaceful life. He could not stress strongly enough the noise and air pollution that this development, coupled with the Webbs development, would cause.

A copy of Mr Watson’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mr Anthony Mark Ince spoke in support of the application.

He referred to an article in the Westmorland Gazette which had reported that there were only 156 full-time places at day-care centres in Kendal – this equated to only a 10% provision for all babies discharged from the Helme Chase Maternity Unit during the years 2002, 2003 and 2004. 156 places, or even twice that number, was not sufficient to offer any real choice to working parents.

Sadly, nursery provision was left to private enterprise, and yet what encouragement did they receive? Land set aside for amenity use within the Local Plan was snapped for more lucrative use, as on the Heron Hill Estate. So, if the application was refused, what were the options - join the scramble for places elsewhere in Kendal for his son and a second baby on the way; his wife gives up teacher training, or the family move out of Kendal to somewhere with better provision.

A copy of Mr Ince’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mrs Jennifer Wilson spoke in support of the application. Her experiences of requiring child care in Kendal had highlighted the desperate need for additional places.

103 8.9.2005 Planning

She was acutely aware of the Government’s need to encourage parents back into the workforce following the birth of children; the local economy could not afford to lose workers from the retail sector, education, health and many other employments purely because there were no nursery places available to them.

House prices in the Kendal area had risen to the extent that many people were forced into a retaining a dual income in order to buy a family house locally.

The provision of nursery care had to be of a high quality for children to flourish. The proposed conversion of The Mount promised superior nursery provision in Kendal, providing spacious indoor facilities in a homely environment and safe outdoor play. Nobody liked change, but for Kendal to remain a vibrant, attractive community, it was essential to keep moving forward. In refusing the application, the Committee would be putting the concerns of a few local residents ahead of the needs of the wider community.

In conclusion, demand for childcare was growing but needed to be good quality, affordable, and meet the demands of parents. She was only one of 670 parents and concerned citizens who had signed the petition presented, which urged the Committee to approve the planning application.

A copy of Mrs Wilson’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mr M.A. Crossley spoke in objection to the application.

He said there was one significant inaccuracy in the Planning Officer’s report. The owners of 157 Stricklandgate (not 137 as stated in the report) had not given permission for staff parking for the Sunny Brow Nursery. At no time had they been consulted.

He was surprised to find that there had been no site notice at the postal address on Burneside Road. The only notice he had seen had been on the gates on Ashleigh Road, which had been mostly left open. He felt sure there should have been a notice on the entrance on Burneside Road where most people would have had the opportunity to view it.

He understood that work had already been undertaken on installing new internal soil drainage for infants’ toilets without planning or building regulations approval.

The residents had been told originally that there could not refer to the proposed construction on the former Webbs garden site. Why, therefore, were the new traffic regulations being stressed in the applicant’s re-submission, when nothing had been decided and the work had not been implemented?

104 8.9.2005 Planning

He had seen wagons unloading on Horncop Lane, despite the applicant stating that he did not have delivery wagons to his present premises. Was it the applicant’s assertion that he would not have delivery wagons calling at the Mount? Mr Crossley thought not.

The crux of the matter was traffic. For the applicant to suggest that traffic disruption would be minimal was nonsense when there would be over 90 children there every day.

A copy of Mr Crossley’s full submission has been placed on file.

The applicant’s agent, Mr Bruce Payne of PFK Planning, responded on his behalf.

Mr Payne sought to clarify the issues concerned with the applicant’s re-submission, and referred to the previous refusal on the grounds of significant increase in traffic. He confirmed that he and the applicant were working with SLDC and Cumbria CC officers to resolve these issues.

He stressed that the provision of day-care facilities in Kendal was badly needed; it was important that children were properly cared for.

The objections from the Highways Authority were at the crux of the matter, on the grounds that visibility splays would be obscured. He did not see parking as an issue. Residents of Ashleigh Road had objected for this reason. The Highways Authority had made it clear that this was a safety issue rather than a parking issue. If the prospective Traffic Regulation Order from the County Council was implemented, there would be double-yellow lines at the junction, and if this could be done immediately it could remove any such objection. However, the reality was that it could take some weeks before a decision was made and implemented.

The Committee had to consider whether – to approve the application; to delegate power to officers (subject to conditions); or to refuse.

His client wanted to maintain high standards of child-care, in a suitable location such as The Mount, and could not see why the application should be refused.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) advised the Committee that Kendal Town Council had been sent a copy of the application, under cover of a letter dated 19 July 2005.

At the site visit Members had had the opportunity to see for themselves the traffic and parking difficulties. The previous planning application had been refused because it was felt that the development would cause a significant increase in traffic movement, thus exacerbating the situation - which would be harmful to road safety.

105 8.9.2005 Planning

The proposal was for opening hours of 7.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. for up to 99 pre-school age children. The applicant had two other day-care facilities in the town at Beezon Fields and Horncop Lane.

In respect of the comments from the County Council Area Engineer, it was understood that there would be a meeting of the CC Local Area Committee on 13 September which would consider whether double-yellow lines should be introduced on Ashleigh Road/Burneside Road junction. If approved, this would remove the Highways Authority objections. There would be a call-in period on the decision of 8 days (21 September), but it could be the New Year before work was completed.

Members agreed that this was a most difficult decision – having to balance the residents’ objections and concerns about increased traffic against the need for additional child-care facilities. Many felt that the application should be supported, but that the restrictions requested by objectors should be taken on board. Others were concerned whether the proposal to introduce double-yellow lines would be approved and, if so, when it would be implemented. It was felt that SLDC did not have the resources to police the situation. Members were aware that the traffic problems had existed for years before the current proposal. Although The Mount is an attractive building standing in fine grounds, its use as a nursery could only make the traffic situation worse.

Some Members felt that the situation had in fact not changed since the previous application and proposed refusal of the application.

However, other felt that the proposal had merits if the traffic situation could be resolved and the approval could be subject to appropriate conditions in respect of on-site parking, number of children, opening times, the erection of a boundary fence between The Mount and No.88 Burneside Road, and an upper age limit for children using the nursery.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) be authorised to grant the application, subject to appropriate conditions being attached, and subject to the decision notice not being issued until the double yellow lines have been applied to the road surface at the junction of Ashleigh Road and Burneside Road.

Note: In accordance with the Constitution of the Council, Part 4 – Rules of Procedure (Paragraph 15.6), Councillor Simon Butterfield requested that his vote against the above resolution be recorded.

106 8.9.2005 Planning

Note:

Councillors Graham Donning and Brian Wilkinson each declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that they were Members of Ulverston Town Council.

Councillor Tony Rothwell declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that his wife was employed by the Morecambe Bay NHS Primary Care Trust.

SL/2005/0682 ULVERSTON: Ulverston Health Centre, Victoria Road, Ulverston. Demolition of existing centre and erection of ten dwellings. Morecambe Bay NHS Primary Care Trust.

Councillor Norman Bishop-Rowe, SLDC Member for the Ulverston Central Ward, spoke in objection to the application.

He said that the last thing the residents of Victoria wanted to see was the former Health Centre site become a derelict unit and playground for others, and that they would welcome development on this site. However, the proposed development failed to comply with the Council’s Planning Policy H4 on the grounds that

- the proposal was over-intensive and unneighbourly (10 dwellings in a mixed development of two and three storey dwellings on an area some 50 x 60 yards, and close to existing residential homes)

- the access/egress was to be by one point only

- no consideration had been given to potential noise pollution during construction, and afterwards from occupancy levels;

- there had not been a full Highway safety audit

- the trees which enhance the area and provide a valuable asset in reducing levels of pollution were at risk

- no environmental impact study has been carried in relation to land drainage, sewage capacity and wildlife which use the trees as a food source

- the level of parking provision was below that recommended by the planning authority for similar developments.

Councillor Bishop-Rowe said that Members were being recommended to give approval to what amounts to a blank cheque for the developer, without the safeguards in the Council’s planning policies being in place, and urged the Committee to refuse the application.

A copy of Councillor Bishop-Rowe’s full submission had been placed on file.

107 8.9.2005 Planning

No-one was present to respond on behalf of the applicant.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) felt that the “indicative layout” proposed had clouded the issue. He confirmed that he was concerned about the parking provision shown on this plan.

It was reported that 5 letters of objection, and two letters of comment, had been received. The Highways Authority had commented that a full safety audit was required, and that the road would need to be brought up to adoptable standards. However, the principle of redevelopment was acceptable on this brownfield site, and residential use was compatible with the existing uses.

He suggested that, if Outline Planning Permission was granted, it should be conditioned to the subsequent approval of reserved matters to address the issues of tree protection, access, parking, siting, density, design, and layout.

Members felt that the Planning Officer’s recommendation to approve the application should be supported, but there was a need to impress on the applicant the requirement for adequate car parking within the site, and an affordable housing element.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) be authorised to GRANT the application, subject to conditions.

SL/2005/0749 HOLME: Woodland between Holme Beck and Moss Lane, Holme. Archery and small bore rifle shooting range and associated building. Channel Rings Target Sports Centre.

Mrs Jo Marsden of Station Road, Holme, spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs Marsden said she used the narrow access lane daily, and was concerned about increased traffic and the danger to recreational users of the lane – walkers, cyclists and horse/pony riders.

The parish magazine had described the proposal as a “centre for sporting excellence for archery and target sports. If the intention was to provide a facility for archery for local youth, this could be done without this particular development. A rifle range was a different matter. There would be far more demand from people from a very wide area to travel to a rifle range than there would be for archery. This would be for the use of experienced shooters only, and she failed to see how this could become an asset to the village.

The applicants insisted that noise would not be a problem, but traffic noise from the other side of the valley could be heard on Station Road. The proposed site was in the middle of the valley.

108 8.9.2005 Planning

Residents will hear the shots from the rifle range, and the intermittent nature of the noise would make it hard to ignore. She understood that sound levels had been taken but, as no notice had been given, she was unable to hear for herself. One test within the existing wood was not a good guide to future noise levels once trees had been cleared, and with different weather conditions. If permission was given for the development, it was most unlikely that it would ever revert to agriculture or woodland. Moss Lane would cease to be a country lane, and the noise of rifle shot could permanently blight residents’ weekends and summer evenings in their gardens.

A copy of Mrs Marsden’s full submission has been placed on file.

Mr Alan Hall responded on behalf of the applicant. He said that the proposal was for a Centre of Excellence to promote two minority Olympic Sports.

The two main areas of concern which had been raised at a recent public meeting had been –

Noise – there was very little noise from a small bore rifle. In a test undertaken by the Council’s Environmental Protection Officer, the closest neighbours had not been able to hear the shots and grazing horses and cattle had not been startled. The results of the test were awaited.

Traffic issues – these had been discussed with the Highways Authority and the applicant was prepared to look into the need for passing spaces if required.

Mr Hall felt that he had answered all the planning queries. There would be only four major tournaments per year, and the centre would provide an amenity for the village.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reported that the Committee had visited the site. The site was 5 acres of coniferous woodland to the west of Holme village, accessed by a narrow twisting lane, with a public footpath to the north of the site. The proposal was to fell the trees, except around the perimeter, and construct earthwork butts around the shooting range. The Environmental Protection Officer had not raised objections, but did want to include conditions. Cumbria Wildlife Trust had asked that no trees be felled during March/August so as not to disturb nesting birds. Holme Parish Council had supported the proposal unanimously. There had been no response so far from the Ramblers Association, United Utilities, or Cumbria Constabulary.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reported that 56 letters of objection had been received, and read out in full an e-mail from Mr and Mrs Clowes of Burnside – the residents closest to the site. They were concerned about the noise from the rifle range, and had requested that there be conditions limiting the

109 8.9.2005 Planning

hours of use, that the use be restricted, and that traffic to the centre be directed from the A6. Mr Clowes felt that it was not right to encourage young people to become involved in a gun culture.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) said that he was not in favour of a deferral. Safety aspects were covered by MoD licensing. The planning issues were – is the site appropriate for the proposed use in the context of Local Plan Policy L3; and traffic – Moss Lane is a narrow lane with poor visibility and few passing places.

He confirmed that there would be no floodlights – the site would operate in the day-time only. Tournaments would be held four times annually and the site would operate from 10.00 am. to 7.30 p.m. on weekdays and 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. at weekends. The maximum number of competitors would be approximately 50 on any one day. Butts would be constructed around the site to protect the public footpath.

Members felt generally that this would be an ideal location for both sports, and were content that Cumbria Wildlife Trust had not raised any significant objections in respect of loss of trees.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) be authorised to grant the application, following the expiry of the consultation period.

P/067 COMPLEX PLANNING APPLICATIONS

RESOLVED – That the following applications be determined in the manner set out:-

SL/2005/0754 GRANGE-OVER-SANDS: Land adjacent to Langwell, Allithwaite Road, Grange-over-Sands. Single dwelling house with new vehicular access. Mr & Mrs B Keelan.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reported that four letters of objection had been received which raised concerns about the adequacy of the access and the likely impact on highway safety, the over-development of the site, loss of trees, and an unneighbourly form of development which would result in adverse impacts on the amenities of the surrounding residential properties – especially due to overlooking and loss of privacy.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reported that an amended plan had been submitted for this proposal which improved the access arrangements and also showed the replacement of the proposed balcony with a balustrade. He advised Members that this scheme had addressed most of the concerns raised by the occupiers of adjoining properties.

110 8.9.2005 Planning

The Highways Control Officer had indicated that the amended plan addressed his previous concerns although repositioning of a light on the footpath would be required to achieve visibility limits.

Members indicated that they considered the proposed house to be of an acceptable design, and the separation distances were adequate to protect the residential amenity in the locality.

GRANT, subject to the following conditions:-

Condition (1) The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of THREE YEARS from the date of the decision notice.

Reason (1) 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) This permission related to the amended plan drawing number 844 10C deposited with the Local Planning Authority on 22 August 2005.

Reason (2) To ensure that the proposed development will be carried out as approved so as to avoid doubt, and to ensure that the development does not impact upon highway safety in the local area.

Condition (3) The roof shall be covered with flat, slate-type tiles of a colour and texture a sample of which is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason (3) To ensure that the character of the area is not adversely affected by reason of the appearance of the type and colour of the materials to be used in the proposed development, in accordance with Policy S2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (4) The external walls shall be completed in the following manner -

(a) With stone, a sample of which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work on the site; or

(b) With a finish of roughcast, being a finish in which the final coat contains a preparation of fairly coarse aggregate thrown on as a wet mix and left rough.

111 8.9.2005 Planning

The precise details of the finish of the external walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the necessary work is commenced; the work shall be completed in a manner which will comply in all respects with the details approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.


Condition (5) Before construction of the dwelling is commenced the improvements to the highway shall be completed in accordance with the approved, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason (5) To avoid traffic danger and inconvenience on the adjoining highways in accordance with Policy H5 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (6) Before the dwelling is occupied the access, car parking and turning area shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plan and shall be maintained at all times thereafter.

Reason (6) To avoid traffic danger and inconvenience on the adjoining highways in accordance with Policy H5 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (7) The first five metres of the access road must remain ungated and be surfaced with a bound material at all times.

Reason (7) To ensure that a reasonable standard of access is provided for the safety and convenience of users in accordance with Policy H5 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Reason for granting planning permission:-

The proposed dwelling is appropriately designed and accords with Policy H5 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

P/068 THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF INFORMATION WITHIN DEVELOPMENT CONTROL WITH REFERENCE TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

Members were provided with an outline of the approach to be adopted by the Development Control Group concerning the use of historic planning data.

The Local Planning Authority had to maintain a statutory register in two parts of all planning applications and decisions. At present, that register was composed of microfiched files indexed by 600 paper maps and dated back, in a few cases, to the mid 1920s.

112 8.9.2005 Planning

In November 2002, the Planning Committee had endorsed a Strategy for Data and Record Keeping, details of which were provided. That strategy had been implemented, with no challenges, since the beginning of 2003. Many of the records retained were paper based and some were microfiched. Storage space was significant in both cases.

Members were asked to endorse an approach to assist in the relocation of groups within South Lakeland House by streamlining the data sources and eliminating the duplication of records held concurrently by Land Charges and Planning. This would also ensure that the Group’s records were based on current history, that responses to Land Charge requests for planning history related to relevant records and that all other requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act were properly handled. Advice had been sought from both Government Office North West and the Council’s Solicitor. It was felt that maintaining an archive of data back to 1988 would more than satisfy the terms of the Local Government Act 1972, which sought only a six-year retention.

RESOLVED – That

(1) the report be noted; and

(2) the action points outlined in the appendix to the report be endorsed to close the archive.


Note: Councillor Howard Martin declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that his property was close to the application site, and left the Council Chamber during the discussion and voting on the item.

SL/2005/0771 LOWER ALLITHWAITE: The Pastures Caravan Park, Templands Lane, Allithwaite, Grange-over-Sands. Extension to caravan parks open season (1 March – 14 January). Woodset Ltd, The Pastures Caravan Park

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) explained that this application was only concerned with an extension to the open season, and the main planning issue was the impact of this extension on the landscape. He said that, since approval of the original application in 2003, conditions in respect of landscaping had been complied with; there had been substantial tree planting (Forestry Commission approved); the applicant had plans for more planting within the site to provide additional screening; and low level external lighting had been installed to lessen the impact of light pollution.

Letters of support had been received from local business people, who felt the extension would benefit the local economy.

Members felt that the site visit had demonstrated a low level of light pollution although, since their site visit had been carried out in daylight, it was not possible to judge the effect during the hours of darkness.

113 8.9.2005 Planning

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reiterated that the application only concerned the extended period, and he felt that a refusal was not appropriate in the context of Policy T7 of the South Lakeland Local Plan..


Condition This permission does not authorise occupation of the caravans except during the period 1st March to 14 January each year.

Reason To protect the character of this Landscape of County Importance in accordance with Policy 12 of the adopted Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan, Policy E36 of the Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan proposed modifications, and Policy T7 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.


The proposal would not adversely affect that character and appearance of the site and surroundings in accordance with Policy 12 of the adopted Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan, Policy E36 of the Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan proposed modifications, and Policy T7 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

P/070 ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

The meeting was adjourned at 1.02 p.m. and reconvened at 2.00 p.m. when the same Members were present, with the exception of Councillor Mrs Brenda Gray who had tendered an apology.


RESOLVED – That the following applications be determined in the manner set out: -

Note: Councillor Howard Martin declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following application because he was a National Trust tenant, and the Trust had applied to convert a barn on land leased to him. Councillor Martin left the Council Chamber during the discussion on and determination of the application.

SL/2005/0343 DUDDON: Coalgate Farm, Broughton-in-Furness. Conversion of redundant barn into farm workers dwelling. Mr R Winder

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) outlined the application to Members, and informed them of the advice given by Lancashire County Council’s Land Agency Manager regarding the appraisal of the proposal. Members were of the view that there was a need for a dwelling at Coalgate Farm to ensure good animal husbandry and supervision, and were in favour of granting the application with appropriate conditions being attached.

114 8.9.2005 Planning

GRANT subject to the following conditions:



Condition (2) The occupation of the dwelling shall be limited to a person solely or mainly employed or, if no longer in employment, solely or mainly last employed (in either case for a continuous period of not less than one year) locally in agriculture, as defined in Section 336(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or in forestry, or the dependants of such persons residing with him or her (but including the widow or widower of such a person).

Reason (2) The dwelling is in an area where the Local Planning Authority considers that new residential development should be restricted to that which is essential in the interests of agriculture or forestry.

Condition (3) The roof shall be covered with slate, being blue/grey in colour and of similar texture to those mined within the County of Cumbria, a sample of which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before any development work commences on site.


Condition (4) The external walls shall be completed in the following manner:-

“with stone, a sample of which shall be submitted to an agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work on the site.”

The precise details of the finish of the external walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the necessary work is commenced; the work shall be completed in a manner which will comply in all respects with the details approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.


115 8.9.2005 Planning

Condition (5) The doors and windows shall be of a timber construction and shall be set back in a reveal a minimum distance of 100 mm from the face of the building.


Condition (6) This permission authorised no greater extent of reconstruction than that described in the submitted report compiled by Bleasdale Wand Limited, reference 1299.01.BFB, dated 10 June 2005.

Reason (6) To ensure that the building is structurally sound and capable of conversion without major alteration or extension, in accordance with Policy H12 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (7) No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the conveyance of foul drainage to a septic tank has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be brought into use until such septic tank has been constructed and completed in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason (7) To present the pollution of the water environment.

Condition (8) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General permitted Development Order 1995 as amended, express planning permission shall be obtained for any development falling within Classes A, B, C, D and E of Part 1, Schedule 2, of that Order.

Reason (8) To ensure that any further alterations to the property permitted by the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995 as amended will not detract from the appearance of the site.


The conversion of the barn to house an agricultural worker on this farm accords with the objectives of Policies H9, H12 and S2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

116 8.9.2005 Planning

Note: Councillor Howard Martin declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the

following application because he was a National Trust tenant, and the Trust had applied to convert a barn on land leased to him. Councillor Martin left the Council Chamber during the discussion on and determination of the application.

SL/2005/0578 KIRKBY LONSDALE: Barn adjacent to the Coach House, Beck Head, Kirkby Lonsdale. Conversion of barn to dwelling. Mrs E Nelson.

Objections to this proposal had been received from the owners of Fountain House, relating to loss of privacy, overlooking and traffic generation which would result from the development, and the objector felt that this would bring about a loss in privacy and a risk to security. Due to there being insufficient turning space within the site, vehicles would have had difficulty in manoeuvring, and be forced to reverse out on to Beck Head.

Revised drawings had been prepared to address the issue of overlooking. However, upon consideration of the revised plans, the objector expressed the opinion that she preferred the original plans.

In order to deal with the problem of vehicles manoeuvring on the site, it would be possible for an area of land adjacent to the building to be used for vehicles turning, and therefore avoid the need for vehicles to reverse out of or into the site.




Condition (2) The building shall be converted in accordance with the details illustrated on the drawings numbered NELSON 05/REV.A and NELSON 06/REV.A, deposited with the Local Planning Authority on 2 August 2005.

Reason (2) To ensure that the conversion is compatible with the aims and objectives of Policies H11 and C16 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (3) The vehicle turning area illustrated on drawing no. NELSON 03/REV.B shall be kept available for this purpose at all times and shall not be used for any other purpose.

Reason (3) To ensure that a vehicle turning space is available for use by both the proposed dwelling and The Coach House.

Condition (4) The window frames to be installed shall be of timber construction and shall match the specifications and styles illustrated on drawing number NELSON 06A.

117 8.9.2005 Planning


Condition (5) The door opening in the south elevation facing Mitchelgate shall be infilled with natural limestone to match the rest of the building in terms of the type of stone used and its method of laying, coursing, jointing and mortaring. A sample panel of the proposed stonework shall be erected on the site for the further written approval of the Local Planning Authority.


Condition (6) The roof shall remain slated; any replacement slates which are to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works are undertaken to the roof.


Condition (7) No part of the building or the outbuilding shall be taken down and rebuilt without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.


Condition (8) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, as amended, express planning permission shall be obtained for any development falling within Classes A and B of Part 1 of the Second Schedule of that Order.

Reason (8) To ensure that subsequent extensions or alterations will not detract from the appearance of the building.

Condition (9) The garage shall be made available for the garaging of two vehicles before the dwelling hereby approved is occupied, and shall thereafter be permanently retained as a garage for the dwelling hereby permitted.

Reason (9) To ensure the provision of off-street parking spaces.

Reason for granting planning permission:

The conversion of this building into one dwelling is compatible with the aims and objectives of Policies H11 and C16 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

118 8.9.2005 Planning

Note: Councillor Paul Braithwaite declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that he was Chairman of the Kendal Town Council Planning Committee.

SL/2005/0618 KENDAL: Lound Place, Lound Street, Kendal. Residential development of 24 units in two 2-storey apartment blocks with associated car parking and 11 coach parking spaces. Kendal Riverside Limited

It was announced that this application was to be deferred for a site visit.

DEFERRED FOR SITE VISIT


SL/2005/0619 KENDAL: K Village Site, Lound Road, Kendal. Mixed residential, leisure and factory outlet centre development including 120 x 2-4storey apartments, 4182 sq metre gross factory outlet centre, 1733 sq metre of restaurant floorspace and a 511 sq metre Heritage Centre, including associated car parking, landscaping and infrastructure. Kendal Riverside Limited.

It was announced that this application was to be deferred for a site visit.

DEFERRED FOR SITE VISIT

Note: Councillor Howard Martin declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that he was the Ward Councillor and also a member of the Parish Council.

SL/2005/0716 LOWER HOLKER: Land adjacent to Moor Lane, Flookburgh, Grange-over-Sands. Erection of drying building in new timber yard. T Knipe

The Strategic Director (Customers Services) reminded Members that they had carried out a site visit to the location of the proposed development.

The proposed building would be 30 m x 20 m x 8.2 m high, with an open side canopy building for storing timber. The height of the building would be 3 m higher than the surrounding buildings. The applicant had agreed to site the building closer to the existing units, in order to reduce the impact of the building bulk within the landscape.

The existing premises used by the applicant did not allow for further expansion due to its position within a group of residential property. The proposed development would enable to business to expand and at the same time safeguard existing employment with the possibility of creating additional jobs.

119 8.9.2005 Planning

There had been no objections from the Parish Council.

Amended plans for access had been submitted, which would require to be approved by Cumbria Highways.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) be authorised to GRANT the application.

SL/2005/0758 PRESTON PATRICK: High Bracken Hall, Gatebeck. Provision of 13 mobile holiday chalets together with ancillary amenity building and car parking and installation of biological treatment plant and reed bed. Mr S Robinson.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) reminded Members that they had visited the site, and described the application. The impact on the landscape would be limited to the close proximity of the site, and would not be significantly obtrusive in the wider landscape. The access lane was considered appropriate for the amount of traffic the development would generate and passing spaces had recently been constructed. The Environment Agency had requested conditions relating to drainage.

Some Members of the Committee expressed concern that the development could have a visual impact on the landscape, which was designated at being of County Importance, and in addition that the woodland was not in the ownership of the applicant.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) be authorised to GRANT planning permission, subject to appropriate conditions.

SL/2005/0759 KIRKBY IRELETH: Land adjacent to Sanderlings, Sandside, Kirkby-in-Furness. Dwelling and attached garage. Mr Allen & Mr Nunwick.

WITHDRAWN by the applicant.


SL/2005/0796 KENDAL: Brantholme, 7 Sedbergh Road, Kendal. Dwelling. Mr T A Gray & Mr T Tomlinson

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) advised that this application related to a property which was situated in the Conservation Area, but was not a listed building. The proposal was to build an extension to the rear of the building, which would become a separate dwelling unit.

120 8.9.2005 Planning




Condition (2) The external walls shall be completed in the following manner -

(a) With stone, a sample of which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work on the site; or

(b) With a finish of roughcast, being a finish in which the final coat contains a preparation of fairly coarse aggregate thrown on as a wet mix and left rough.

The precise details of the finish of the external walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the necessary work is commenced; the work shall be completed in a manner which will comply in all respects with the details approved in writing by the Local Planning authority.

Reason (2) To preserve the character of the Conservation Area and thereby accord with Policy C16 of the South Lakeland Local Plan and Policy 26 of the Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan.

Condition (3) The roof shall be covered with slate being blue/grey in colour and of similar texture to those mined within the County of Cumbria, a sample of which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before any development work commences on site.


Condition (4) The development shall be screened by the retention of the existing beech hedge on the north-western boundary of the site in the position shown in green on the attached plan, and that hedge shall be retain hereafter at a minimum height of 2.4 metres measured from within the application site. Any hedging plants which are removed, die, become severely damaged or diseased within five years of their planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with hedging plants of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

121 8.9.2005 Planning

Reason (4) To avoid unneighbourly overlooking of the property.

Condition (5) No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection during the course of the development.


Condition (6) No trenches for services or drains shall be sited within the crown spread of any trees that are to be retained on site.

Reason (6) To preserve the character of the Conservation Area in accord with Policy C16 of the South Lakeland Local Plan and Policy 26 of the Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan.

Condition (7) No demolition, site clearance or building operations shall commence until chestnut pale fencing (or other type fencing approved in writing by the Local Planning authority) of a height not less than one metre shall have been erected around each tree or tree group to be retained on site, at a radius from the trunk of not less than five metres or the boundary of the crown spread, whichever is the greater of the two. Such fencing shall be maintained during the course of the development operations.


Condition (8) The destruction by burning of materials obtained by site clearance or demolition shall not take place within six metres of the furthest extent of the crown spread of any tree or tree group to be retained on the site or on land adjoining. No tree felling, lopping or removal of branches of trees to be retained on site shall be carried out without the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. No topsoil or other spoil from excavations shall be disposed of by spreading on the site or shall be stored on site if such spoil shall lie within the branch spread of trees to be retained on site.


122 8.9.2005 Planning

Reasons for granting planning permission:-

(1) The development would preserve the character of this part of the Kendal Conservation Area and accord with Policy C16 of the South Lakeland Local Plan and Policy 26 of the Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan.

(2) The development would accord with Policy H4 of the South Lakeland Local Plan and Regional Policy Guidelines with regard to housing.

Note: Councillors Graham Donning and Brian Wilkinson each declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that they were Members of Ulverston Town Council.

SL/2005/0853 ULVERSTON: Conishead House, Ulverston. Refurbishment to Conishead House and conversion of two redundant stable blocks to form four apartments over sixteen parking spaces. Greathead House Estate.

The proposed development related to a substantial building, which was part of the Greathead Estate. The proposal was to refurbish, alter and extend the building to provide 19 flats, in addition to four flats to be located in the stable block.

It was proposed that there would be significant alterations to the building. Negotiations had taken place to reduce the scale of the side extensions to improve the separation distance. The building would not be visible from any public vantage point, and the building was set well back from the road.

It was intended that there be parking provision under the stable block, and four two bedroom flats would be accommodated within the stable block. The applicant was reluctant to restrict this accommodation to staff occupancy.

Members had a number of concerns relating to the application, in particular some Members felt that the contemporary style of the proposed design was radical and felt that the design was poor and inappropriate. In addition, it was felt that it would be appropriate to request some affordable housing to be included in the application.

Members were minded to refuse the application on design grounds and in respect of Policy S2. However, the Council’s Legal Adviser recommended that there be a cooling off period, in view of the fact that Members were in direct opposition of the recommendation made by Officers. The Planning Officer would seek to negotiate with the applicant to address the Members concerns relating to the design of the building, and ask for the design to be toned down, at the same time requesting that some of the accommodation be allocated as affordable housing.

DEFER

123 8.9.2005 Planning

P/072 DEVELOPMENT BY SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL AND/OR CUMBRIA COUNTY COUNCIL


Note:-

Councillor Paul Braithwaite declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that he was the SLDC Portfolio Holder for Housing and Rural Services, and left the Council Chamber during the discussion and voting thereon.

Councillor Frank Hodson declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that he was the Ward Member, and left the Council Chamber during the discussion and voting thereon.

Councillor Ms Gwen Murfin declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that she was a Director of South Lakes Housing.

Councillor Mrs Brenda Gray declared a personal interest in the following application by virtue of the fact that she had been involved with the Gowan Lea Sheltered Housing Scheme.

SL/2005/0845 STRICKLAND KETEL: Gowan Lea, Burneside, Kendal. Alterations to existing sheltered housing unit to provide twenty flats and erection of five bungalows. Impact Housing Association Ltd.

This proposal related to the reorganisation and refurbishment of 24 bedsit flats and wardens flat in the main building to provide accommodation for 20 flats with one and two bedrooms.


P/073 STRAIGHTFORWARD PLANNING APPLICATIONS


SL/2005/0745 ULVERSTON: Work studio adjacent to Candlewyck, Old Hall Road, Ulverston. Change of use of work studio into bed and breakfast. Angus Duncan.

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) informed Members that this application was to provide one room for bed and breakfast use. Criticism has been received from two local residents regarding parking and access. A condition would be added to the planning permission to restrict the use to Candlewyck.

124 8.9.2005 Planning




Condition (2) Before the building is first occupied for bed and breakfast purposes, space shall be provided within the site for the parking of one vehicle in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved parking space shall be maintained at all times thereafter.

Reason (2) To ensure that adequate provision can be made to park a vehicle associated with the permitted use off the highway in accordance with Policy T2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

Condition (3) The first floor of the building to which this application relates shall be used only for bed and breakfast letting purposes incidental to the residential use of the dwelling house known as “Candlewyck” and shall not be construed as being used as a separate residential unit.

Reason (3) The site is located in an area of open countryside where there is a general restriction on the development of new residential properties, in accordance with Policy H6 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.


The proposed use of the first floor of the building is modest in scale and accords with Policy T2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.


SL/2005/0841 KENDAL: Land east of No 9 Old Shambles, Kendal. Erection of two dwellings. S Pooley & P W Sharp


125 8.9.2005 Planning


SL/2005/0857 KENDAL: 4 Howe Court, Kendal. Single storey extension.Mr & Mrs G Lawson.

Grant, subject to the following conditions:-



Condition (2) Before building works commence on the development, the car parking space indicated on drawing number PO2 received on 26 July 2005 shall be created, and retained thereafter.

Reason (2) To ensure the provision of an off-street parking space.


The extension is consistent with the aims and objectives of Policy S2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.


SL/2005/0901 KENDAL: 39 Peat Lane, KENDAL. Installation of three rooflights. Mr & Mrs Clements.

GRANT, subject to the following condition:-




The proposed alterations are compatible with the aims and objectives of Policy S2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan.

126 8.9.2005 Planning

SL/2005/0921 PRESTON PATRICK: SiIlfield Farm, Gatebeck, Kendal. Agricultural workers caravan. Mr P Gott

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) advised that the Parish Council had no objection to the application.

The proposal was to site the caravan amongst farm buildings where it would not have a significant visual impact. Members took the view that it was important that there be a member of staff on site to ensure good animal husbandry and supervision. The Strategic Director (Customer Services) advised the Committee that a previous application for a farm worker’s caravan had been refused planning permission in June 2005.


Condition (1) This planning permission shall expire on 30 September 2008 when the caravan hereby permitted shall be permanently removed from the site.

Reason (1) To ensure that the caravan is used as a residence for a temporary period.

Condition (2) The caravan shall be occupied only be a person or persons employed wholly or mainly as agricultural workers at Sillfield Farm.

Reason (2) To ensure that the caravan is occupied only by a person or persons employed wholly or mainly as agricultural workers at Sillfield Farm.

Condition (3) Within six months of the date of this planning permission, the caravan shall be painted in one or more dark colours to a specification previously approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason (3) To reduce the visual impact of the caravan.


The District Council considers that the operational needs of the farm justify a caravan to function as a temporary residence.

P/074 ENFORCEMENT

Activity from 25 July to 19 August 2005

The Strategic Director (Customer Services) presented a report, which informed Members about enforcement activity between 25 July and 19 August 2005. During that period ten cases from the outstanding caseload had been resolved, six complaints had been recorded, of which two had been resolved.

127 8.9.2005 Planning

The Committee was given an update on enforcement cases as detailed in the report. The Strategic Director (Customer Services) also advised Members of the following case:-

05/178 & 05/179: 109 Aikrigg End House, Kendal

It was reported that retrospective planning permission and Listed Building Consent had been refused under delegated powers for a timber decking structure attached to the listed building, and a timber playhouse situated in the garden, for the reasons detailed in the report. Members were requested to authorise enforcement powers to secure the removal of the decking, and the repositioning of the playhouse if voluntary agreements could not be reached.

RESOLVED – That

(1) the report be received; and

(2) in the case of 109 Aikrigg End House (05/178 & 05/179), the Executive Director (Central Services) be authorised to take enforcement action to secure the removal of the decking and the repositioning of the playhouse.

Outstanding Caseload between 1 January 2004 and 19 August 2005

RESOLVED – That the report be received.

P/075 RESIDENTIAL MONITORING Consideration was given to residential monitoring data for the period 1 April to 31 July 2005.


Jennifer Richards, Committee Administrator declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following item of business, by virtue of the fact that the owners of Calderbeck were personal friends, and left the Chamber for the discussion and voting thereon

P/076 BOUNDARY SCREENING AT FELL HOUSE, HIGHFIELD ROAD, GRANGE-OVER-SANDS Planning permission had been granted for an extension to the children’s home in August 2001, subject to a condition that screening be installed along the site boundaries in accordance with a scheme to be submitted.

Appropriate fencing had been erected along the boundaries around the rear garden, but the applicants were reluctant to install fencing along the front boundary adjoining Calderbeck, stating that it would be unsightly and oppressive. The neighbour at Calderbeck, however, felt that additional fencing was required at this boundary, to ensure the privacy and amenity of his property.

The boundary between Fell House and Calderbeck was mostly screened by vegetation in the neighbouring garden, with only a small gap, which was a result of the development. The owner of the premises had offered to fill the small gap with additional planting. It was felt that the erection of a fence would be difficult to justify in this case and that the additional planting suggested appeared to be the most practical solution to resolve this matter.

RESOLVED – That the use of additional planting be approved as an appropriate boundary treatment for this part of the site.

128 8.9.2005 Planning

P/077 6 QUEENS TERRACE, HOLME, CONVERSION OF SINGLE DWELLING TO FORM TWO DWELLINGS

In July 2005, authority had been given to the then Assistant Director (Development) to issue a planning permission for the sub-division of the house into two dwellings, subject to the applicant entering into an Agreement to secure local occupancy on one of the dwellings. The applicant, however, had written to explain that she considered this requirement to be unreasonable for the following reasons: -

• the property was originally two houses;

• the terms of a local occupancy agreement would make future sales impossible and unattractive;

• defining local occupancy as Holme and its immediate surrounding parishes was too restrictive;

• other planning permissions had been granted without such restrictions; and

• the sub-division would result in two houses at the lower end of the market – the terms of an agreement would make it an uneconomic proposition.

Members were recommended that, at the July meeting, they had been recommended to grant planning permission for the application as submitted and that there was no firm policy base at present for requiring a local occupancy restriction in this particular case. It was recommended, therefore, that planning permission be granted for the application as submitted.

RESOLVED – That planning permission be granted for the application as submitted, without a local occupancy restriction.

P/078 APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED PREVIOUSLY BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AND DETERMINED BY THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR (CUSTOMER SERVICES) BETWEEN 29 JULY AND 26 AUGUST 2005


P/079 APPEALS FOR THE PERIOD 29 JULY TO 26 AUGUST 2005


The meeting ended at 4.05 pm.

south lakeland district councildemocracy.southlakeland.gov.uk/data/planning...

Documents