Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor D Newton for the morning session.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests and for Members to declare if they have a pre-determination in respect of any item on the agenda.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 14/2291W, Councillor J Hammond declared that whilst he had no involvement in discussions relating to the application, his position as a Director of the Board of Ansa Environmental Services Ltd who deliver Waste Management Services on behalf of the Authority could give the public perception that the Company of which he was a Director of has a pecuniary interest.  In the interests of total openness and transparency he declared that he would leave the room whilst the application was being determined.

In the interest of openness in the same application, Councillor D Hough declared that he was a Board Member of TSS.

It was noted that Members had received correspondence in respect of application 14/2247N.

To approve the minutes as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the inclusion of a wheel washing condition in respect of application 14/3371M.

In addition the following wording was included at the end of Minute No.61:-

‘[Note: Details of which will be held on the confidential part of the Enforcement file].’

(This item was considered at the end of the meeting).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor S Corcoran, the Ward Councillor, Town Councillor Bill Scragg, representing Sandbach Town Council, Anthea Buxton, an objector and

Cliff Anderson and Simon Artiss representing the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That for the reasons set out in the report and in the verbal update to Board the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement securing the following:-

• Financial contribution towards primary education of £292,850
• Financial contribution towards secondary education of £539,309
• Contribution of £10,000 (air quality mitigation) towards the implementation of Air
  Quality Action Plan in Sandbach
• The provision of a NEAP facility (comprising a minimum of 8 items of equipment) and
  a minimum of 4000sqm of open space to be provided on site. One area shall be a
  minimum of 2000 sqm.
• Management details for the maintenance of all amenity greenspace / public open
  space, public footpaths and greenways within the site, play areas, and other areas of
  incidental open space not forming private gardens or part of the adopted highway in
  perpetuity.
• Provision of 15% affordable housing with 50% to be provided as social rent and 50%
  provided as intermediate tenure
• Phasing of affordable housing
• Area of land across wildlife corridor transferred to Highway Authority
• Financial contribution of £500,000 towards bridge to cross wildlife corridor
• Clawback mechanism (in the event additional monies become available)

And subject to the following conditions:-

1. A01OP - Submission of reserved matters

2. A02OP - Implementation of reserved matters

3. A03OP - Time limit for submission of reserved matters

4. A06OP - Commencement of development

5. A01AP - Development in accord with approved plans

6. A22GR - Protection from noise during construction (hours of construction)

7. A32HA - Submission of construction method statement

8. A08OP - Ground levels to be submitted with reserved matters application

9. A19MC - Refuse storage facilities to be approved

10. Environmental Management Plan to be submitted

11. Details of external lighting to be submitted

12. Updated contaminated land Phase II report to be submitted

13. Noise mitigation details to be submitted with reserved matters

14. Submission of residential and business travel plans

15. Energy from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources

16. Scheme to limit the surface water runoff to be submitted

17. Scheme to manage the risk of flooding from overland flow of surface water

18. Scheme to dispose of foul and surface water to be submitted

19. Wildlife corridor buffer zone to be provided

20. Site to be drained on a separate system

21. Provision of electric car charging points

22. Reserved matters application to incorporate public right of way routes

23. Provision for pedestrians and cyclists to be included with reserved matters

24. Submission of arboricultural details

25. Written scheme of archaeological investigation to be submitted

26. Hedgerow retention and enhancement

27. Details of phasing of whole development and associated roundabout to be submitted

28. Provision of pedestrian crossing to Old  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

To consider the above application.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

The proposed development would be contrary to the interests of highway safety since it would result in an intensification of the use of Turf Lane and the junction of Turf Lane and Moss Lane which are both sub-standard, contrary to the requirements of Policy DC3 (7) of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and Policy SE 12 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version.

(The meeting adjourned from 12.30pm until 1.30pm for lunch).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor Mrs J Weatherill, the Ward Councillor and Parish Councillor Mrs Bond, representing Wistaston Parish Council attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.     The proposed residential development is unsustainable because it is located within the Open Countryside, contrary to Policies NE.2 (Open Countryside) and RES.5 (Housing in Open Countryside) of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan, Policy PG 5 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version and the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework and create harm to interests of acknowledged importance. The Local Planning Authority can demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land supply in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. As such the application is also contrary to the emerging Development Strategy. Consequently, there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan.

2.     In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed development would cause a significant erosion of the Green Gap between the built up areas of Nantwich and Crewe, in an area that is also designated as being within the designated Green Belt within the Local Plan Strategy Submission Version and would adversely affect the visual character of the landscape which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme notwithstanding a shortfall in housing land supply. The development is therefore contrary to Policy NE4 (Green Gaps) of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011, Policy PG3 (Green Belt) of the Local Plan Strategy Submission Version  and guidance contained within the NPPF.

3.     In the absence detailed site survey information the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal will not result in loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and given that the Authority can demonstrate a housing land supply in excess of 5 years, the applicant has also failed to demonstrate that there is a need for the development, which could not be accommodated elsewhere. The use of the best and most versatile agricultural land is unsustainable and contrary to Policy NE.12 of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011 and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.     Insufficient information has been submitted with the application to determine the impact of the proposal on barn owls. As the Local Planning Authority can demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land there are overriding reasons for allowing the development. Therefore the scheme is contrary to Policy NE.5 of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011 and guidance contained within the NPPF.

5.     The proposed development will have an adverse impact on highway safety by virtue of the increase in traffic from the development contrary to Policy BE3 of the Crewe & Nantwich Local Plan.'

In order to give proper effect to the Board`s intentions and without changing the substance of the decision,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Richard Lomas, the agent for the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.  The proposed residential development is unsustainable because it is located within the Open Countryside, contrary to Policy PS8 and H6 of the Congleton Borough Local Plan  First Review 2005, Policy PG5 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version and the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework, which seek to ensure development is directed to the right location and open countryside is protected from inappropriate development and maintained for future generations enjoyment and use. As such it and creates harm to interests of acknowledged importance. The Local Planning Authority can demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and consequently, there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan, to the emerging Development Strategy and the principles of the National Planning Policy since there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan.

2.  The proposal would result in loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and given that the Authority can demonstrate a housing land supply in excess of 5 years, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there is a need for the development, which could not be accommodated elsewhere. The use of the best and most versatile agricultural land is inefficient and contrary to Policy SE2 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.     The proposed residential development, by virtue of the adverse impact that the proposals would have on the local landscape character thereby failing to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of this site and the contribution to the wider landscape setting  is  contrary to Policies GR5, GR3  of the Congleton Borough Adopted Local Plan First Review 2005 and policies SE4,SE5 and SE6 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version  and the provisions of Paragraph 17 of  the National Planning Policy Framework

4.     Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal will have an acceptable impact upon the operation of the highway network in the vicinity in terms of  safety and congestion impacts and  lack of data  in the Transport Assessment contrary to Policies GR9 and  GR10  of the Congleton Borough Adopted Local Plan First Review 2005

5    Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the scheme would provide for the retention and protection of existing trees of amenity value and no assessment of historic hedgerows has been provided therefore the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal complies with Policies GR1 and NR1 of the adopted Congleton Borough Local Plan First Review 2005 and policy SE3 and SE5 of the emerging Cheshire East local Plan and the provisions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Abbie Little, representing Save Somerford Corner and Jonathan Vose, agent for the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application.  In addition a statement was read out on behalf of Councillor L Gilbert, the Ward Councillor).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.       The proposed residential development is unsustainable because it is located within the Open Countryside, contrary to Policy PS8 and H6 of the Congleton Borough Local Plan  First Review 2005, Policy PG5 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version and the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework, which seek to ensure development is directed to the right location and open countryside is protected from inappropriate development and maintained for future generations enjoyment and use. As such it and creates harm to interests of acknowledged importance. The Local Planning Authority can demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and consequently, there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan, to the emerging Development Strategy and the principles of the National Planning Policy since there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan.

2.       The proposal would result in loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and given that the Authority can demonstrate a housing land supply in excess of 5 years, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there is a need for the development, which could not be accommodated elsewhere. The use of the best and most versatile agricultural land is inefficient and contrary to Policy SE2 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version  and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Board’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Planning and Place Shaping Manager has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Strategic Planning Board, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Board’s decision.

Should this application be the subject of an appeal, authority be delegated to the Planning and Place Shaping Manager in consultation with the Chairman of the Strategic Planning Board to enter into a planning agreement in accordance with the S106 Town and Country Planning Act to secure the Heads of Termsfor a S106 Agreement.

·                 Affordable housing:

o                30% of all dwellings to be affordable (65% social or affordable rented and 35% intermediate tenure)

o                A mix of 2 , 3 bedroom and other sized  properties to be determined at reserved matters

o                units to be tenure blind and pepper potted within the development, the external design, comprising elevation, detail and materials should be compatible with the open market homes on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.