Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors D Brickhill, D Brown, J Hammond, Mrs J Jackson and Mrs L Smetham.

Councillor Mrs R Bailey gave her apologies for the morning session of the meeting.

In the interest of openness in respect of the White Moss Quarry item, Councillor D Hough declared that whilst he had spoken on the White Moss Quarry application he had not spoken in respect of this item.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 14/0114M, Councillor G Walton declared that he was a member of the Manchester Airport Consultative Group and on a Sub Group of the Technical Advisory Group, however had not had discussions with Manchester Airport regarding the application.

It was noted that the majority of Members had received correspondence in respect of some of the applications on the agenda.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 October 2014 be approved as correct record.

A total period of 5 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the Ward Councillors who are not members of the Strategic Planning Board.

A period of 3 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following individuals/groups:

·         Members who are not members of the Strategic Planning Board and are not the Ward Member

·         The relevant Town/Parish Council

·         Local representative Groups/Civic Society

·         Objectors

·         Supporters

·         Applicants

RESOLVED

That the public speaking procedure be noted.

Prior to consideration of the following item, Mr A Fisher, the Head of Strategic and Economic Planning read out a written statement in respect of the Planning Inspector’s Interim views on the Local Plan.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor J Macrae, Ward Councillor, Parish Councillor Maurice Bowden, representing Mobberley Parish Council, Gareth Wilson representing RAMS, (Residents Against Mobberley Sprawl), Ian Norbury, an objector, Jim Shepherd, an objector, Mr Elton, a Supporter and Mr Hinds, 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)  Impact of noise from aircraft on the amenity of the residents

(2)  Character and scale of the development

(3)  Lack of affordable housing

Should an appeal be submitted, authority be delegated to the Principal Planning Manager in consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence Vice Chairman) and the Ward Councillor to agree the appropriate terms of a Planning Obligation pursuant to S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

(This decision was contrary to the Officer’s recommendation of approval.  The meeting adjourned for lunch from 1.30pm until 2.15pm.  Prior to consideration of the following item, Councillors P Edwards and B Murphy left the meeting and did not return).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor S Davies, the Ward Councillor and Parish Councillor Jack McEvoy, representing Wrenbury Parish Council attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.         Unsustainable form of development

2.         Proposals would have an adverse impact upon landscape character and insufficient information

3.         Insufficient information in respect of protected species and BAP habitat

(Prior to consideration of the following item, Councillor Mrs R Bailey arrived to the meeting).

To consider the above application.

This application was withdrawn by Officers prior to the meeting.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above.

(Sara Compton representing Kernon Countryside Consultants and Alex Anderson, agent for the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That authority be delegated to the Principal Planning Manager to approve the application subject to:-

(A)

(i)    The Principal Planning Manager being satisfied that restoration of the land to agricultural condition when the use hereby permitted ceases, is secured by financial bond or equivalent mechanism.

(ii)  Subject to the following conditions:-

1.Standard 3 years

2.Approved Plans

3.Implementation of the submitted Ecological Management Plan

4.Submission of detailed proposals for off site habitat creation/management to compensate the loss of breeding and wintering birds habitat

5.Submission of a scheme for roosting/breeding Barn Owls

6.Submission of Construction Environment Management Plan

7.Further Badger survey prior to commencement of development

8.200m gap to be provided beneath the security fencing

9.Works to be completed between 1 November and 28 February to avoid Great Crested Newts

10.Development carried out in accordance with the Tree Retention/Removal Plan

11.Construction specification/Method Statement (Trees)

12.Landscape Scheme to be submitted

13.Implementation of landscaping

14.Landscape Management Plan for operational period of the development

15.Prior to commencement a decommissioning report for the removal of panels and infrastructure after 25 years  to be agreed and return to agricultural use

16.Colour, finish of Solar arrays, fencing, CCTV, poles, stands to be agreed

17.Materials for substations, inverters Transformer housing to be submitted for approval

18.Scheme for provision and management of an undeveloped buffer zone along New hall Cut

(B) Authority is delegated to the Principal Planning Manager to enter into an Agreement under the Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to require a restoration bond or other financial security if necessary and appropriate.

(This decision was contrary to the Officer’s recommendation of refusal).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

RESOLVED

That for the reasons set out in the report and in the update to Board the application be approved subject to the following conditions:-

1.         Approved Plans

2.         Materials in accordance with the submitted for approval

3.         Landscaping details to be submitted to the LPA for approval in writing (including land levels for the proposed POS)

4.         Implementation of the approved landscape scheme

5.         Boundary treatment details to be in accordance with the approved details

6.         Development to proceed in accordance with the AIA and Tree Protection Plans

7.         Details of the LEAP to be submitted to the LPA for approval in writing

8.         Details of proposed land levels in accordance with the submitted plans

9.         Full detailed design and construction details of the storage lagoon to be submitted to the LPA for approval in writing.

10.       Details of the LEAP shall be submitted to the LPA for approval in writing

11.       Badger mitigation method statement to be submitted

12.       Bin storage details to be submitted and approved

13.       Cycle storage details to be submitted and approved

14.       Submission of revised proposals for habitat creation/retention to be provided to the South of the site

Informative about the Brine Board.

(Prior to consideration of the following item, Councillor K Edwards left the

meeting and did not return).

To consider the above report.

(During consideration of the item, Councillor B Burkhill left the meeting and did not return).

Consideration was given to the above report.

(Cath Mainwaring, a Supporter attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the decision to issue a negative Certificate of Existing Lawful Use for the parking and storage of vehicles, machinery and equipment for White Moss Quarry, Bathomley be confirmed.

The reasons for this decision was that the Applicant has failed to demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities that the use of land known as Triangle Field, Butterton Lane, Barthomley, Crewe, as outlined in red on the attached plan, for the parking and storage / parking of vehicles, machinery and equipment is immune from enforcement action on the basis of it having been used for in excess of ten years prior to the date of the application. In reaching this conclusion the local planning authority has taken into consideration evidence submitted by the Applicant, evidence from local residents and other interested parties and evidence which is contained within the authority’s own records.