One dwelling and garage at 211 Langer Lane, Birdholme, Chesterfield

What was proposed

The application proposed one three-bedroom dwelling, a detached double garage, boundary changes, landscaping and driveway alterations.

“The proposal seeks permission to erect 1 dwelling and a detached double garage which will be positioned to the west of the existing house at no.211. The dwelling’s proposed width would be 13.2m and length would be 12m. It would also have a height of 5.4m. It is proposed to be constructed out of red brick and “grey roof tiles”, with no further details of the construction materials, although it has cils, headers and quoins on the building drawings.”

“The proposal would have parking for at least 2 vehicles. The existing house would also have 2 parking spaces to the front. The proposal also includes changes to the driveway area to allow for a passing space to facilitate vehicles to being able to pass one another whilst off road. This would include the removing of a section of land and wall and to replace this with a new section of walling.”

Officer report

The site

The site is part of a garden beside an existing bungalow, within a residential area and surrounded by housing, hedges and fences.

“This application relates to land which is positioned to the west of no.211 Langer Lane and it is currently used as part of their garden. It is a grassed area with several trees on it and surrounded by hedges and fences to the north, south and west. There is no existing boundary treatment between the existing house and the proposed site. The site is within a residential area and is surrounded by housing on all sides.”

“The existing house is a stone built detached bungalow. The dwelling types in the area include many design variations but there are several detached bungalows within the local vicinity of this site.”

Officer report

Mining and ground conditions

Further investigations were required because coal and ironstone workings could affect ground stability, safety, landscaping and neighbouring properties.

“In respect of potential Coal Mining Risk, the site lies within the High Risk Area and The Mining Remediation Authority has provided these comments: The application site falls within the defined Development High Risk Area. Therefore, within the site and surrounding area there are coal mining features present at surface or shallow depths. The risk these features may pose should be considered as part of the planning process.”

“On the coal mining risk assessment the mine shaft plan shows multiple mines in the area, some of which are in gardens or under or very near housing, which shows that some form of development is possible nearby to mining works. These works will be required to be advised by and completed by competent persons. It is the responsibility of the site developer to ensure that construction works do not impact the safety and stability of neighbouring properties.”

Officer report

Consultees’ views

Consultees raised no objections subject to conditions covering drainage, mining, noise, contamination, trees and other matters.

“Design Services Drainage No objections, subject to separate systems of foul and surface water drainage. Further information required in regards SUDs on site.”

“No objection, subject to conditions regarding noise and land contamination.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The development manager presented the report, and the agent addressed the committee.

What members discussed

Members considered privacy, the passing area, drainage, coal activity and the need for additional conditions covering ironstone workings.

“The Development Management and Conservation Manager presented the report and explained the proposal seeks permission to erect 1 dwelling and a detached double garage which would be positioned to the west of the existing house at number 211. It was noted that permission had been previously granted on numerous occasions.”

“Concerns for ground conditions and coal activity remained with further investigations to take place. It was noted that that 2 additional conditions would need to be included for iron stone replicating Conditions 4 and 5 and that the consideration of these would require external expertise from Derbyshire Building Control Partnership would be needed. The renumbering of the conditions would then need to be undertaken.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Ridgway moved, and Councillor Miles seconded, that the officer recommendation should be upheld.

“The Committee considered the report as well as the concerns raised around iron stone workings and the need to include this in conditions as well as coal mining.”

“It was moved by Councillor Ridgway and seconded by Councillor Miles that the officer recommendation be upheld.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee upheld the officer recommendation and granted permission subject to the report’s conditions and additional ironstone-mining conditions.

“That the officer recommendation be upheld, and the application be GRANTED subject to the conditions outlined in the officer’s report with the additional conditions in relation to ironstone mining.”

Minutes