Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors R Moreton, B Roberts and J Weatherill.

In the interests of openness in respect of item 8-Brooks Lane Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document, Councillor S Gardiner declared that was a former employee of Barton Wilmore and was part of their pension scheme.

In the interests of openness in respect of item 8-Brooks Lane Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document, Councillor M Hunter declared that he was the Ward Councillor for Middlewich.

In the interest of openness in respect of applications 19/2202M, 19/3784C and 19/3126C, Councillor S Hogben declared that he was a Director of ANSA who were a consultee on the applications, however he had not made any comments nor discussed the applications.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 19/3162C, Councillor P Redstone declared that he once had an option for some land with Gladman, however he did not currently have an option.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 20 November 2019 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That minutes of the meeting held on  be approved as correct record and signed by the Chairman.

A total period of 5 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following:

·         Ward Councillors who are not members of the Strategic Planning Board

·         The relevant Town/Parish Council

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

·         Objectors

·         Supporters

·         Applicants

RESOLVED

That the public speaking procedure be noted.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Parish Councillor Ron Dixon, representing Styal Parish Council, Parish Councillor Moore, representing Handforth Parish Council, and Anna Relph, representing the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

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

1.         To comply with outline permission

2.         Development in accord with approved plans

3.         Materials as application

4.         Tree and hedgerow retention for 10 years

5.         The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details in the submitted Landscape and Habitat Management Plan

6.         Detailed design of ponds to be submitted

7.         Nesting bird survey to be submitted

8.         Development to be carried out in accordance with submitted tree

protection scheme and arboricultural method statement

9.         All external lighting is to be capped below the horizon

10.       No photovoltaic solar panels to be constructed

11.       Measures to control dust and smoke during construction to be submitted  

12.       Details of apartment cycle stores to be submitted

13.       Bin stores and cycle stores to be provided prior to occupation of each unit

14.       Surfacing details for link track between Clay Lane and Sagars Road to be submitted

15.       Landscape details to be submitted

16.       Implementation of landscape scheme.

17.       Footbridge details to be submitted

18.       Hard surfacing details to be agreed

(b)That discussions take place with officers and the relevant Ward Councillors and Parish Councils in respect of the S106 monies and how this could potentially be spent.

In addition it was agreed that there would be an informative in respect of insulation.

(The meeting was adjourned for a short break).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Matthew Wedderburn, representing the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application.  In addition a statement was read out on behalf of the Ward Councillor S Corcoran and the neighbouring Ward Councillor M Benson).

RESOLVED

That for the reasons set out in the report the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.         This is an important gateway location and prominent site in Sandbach. The phasing of the development would result in a development which is dominated by engineered access with a poor relationship to the frontage of the site (north). The development will not suitably integrate or add to the overall quality to the area in character or landscape terms. Furthermore the topography of the site is not conductive to a large floorplate of the care home and would result substantial engineered retaining structures. The proposed development fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of the area and is contrary to Policies SE1 and SE4 of the CELPS, Policy H2 of the SNP and guidance contained within the NPPF.

2.         The application site is of a very challenging topography including an escarpment that runs along the central part of the site. The submitted information demonstrates that the care home part of the development will require engineered retaining wall with minimal landscape mitigation along the western boundary and it is unclear how land levels would be treated to avoid any changes within the RPA of a mature Sycamore Tree (T12). Furthermore the application does not include sections or levels information in relation to the proposed access north of the proposed care home. On this basis the development would not achieve a sense of place and would be harmful to the character of the area. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policies SD2, SE1, SE4 and SE5 of the CELPS, PC2 of the Sandbach Neighbourhood Plan and guidance contained within the NPPF.

3.         The proposed development includes the provision of a 74 bed care home/extra care facility with the provision of 33 car parking spaces. The level of car parking proposed falls below the standards set out within Appendix C of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy. This shortfall in parking would result in on-road parking within the development which would harm the character and appearance of the development and vehicle movements within the site. The proposed development is contrary to Policy CO 2 and Appendix C of the CELPS and the NPPF.

4.         The proposed development is located partly within the Sandbach Wildlife Corridor. The proposed development would result in a loss of a substantial area of habitat within the wildlife corridor. The proposed development would result in an overall loss of biodiversity from the designated wildlife corridor. As a result the proposed development would be contrary to Congleton Local Plan Policy NR4, CELPS Policy SE3, SNP Policies PC4 and JLE1 and the NPPF.

In order to give proper effect to the Committee`s intent  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor S Holland, the Ward Councillor, Town Councillor Amanda Martin, representing Congleton Town Council and Neil MacKrell, an objector 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 PG6 (Open Countryside) & SD1 (Sustainable Development in Cheshire East) of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy, Saved Policy PS8 (Open Countryside) of the Congleton Borough Local Plan 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.

2)         The proposal would not provide safe and suitable access for all users and the lack of suitable footways and cycle tracks would create conflict with vehicles due to the reduced carriageway widths on Waggs Road. It is therefore concluded that there is inadequate infrastructure in place to support further major residential development as safe and suitable access has not been demonstrated. The development is therefore contrary to Policies SD1 (Sustainable Development in Cheshire East), SD2 (Sustainable Development Principles), SC3 (Health and Well-being), C01 (Sustainable Travel and Transport), C04 (Travel Plans and Transport Assessments) of the Cheshire East Local Plan, Saved Policies GR9, GR10 and GR18 (Traffic Generation) of the Congleton Borough Local Plan and the requirements of the NPPF

In order to give proper effect to the Board`s/Committee’s intentions and without changing the substance of the decision, authority is delegated to the Acting Head of Planning in consultation with the Chair (or in his absence the Vice Chair) of Strategic Planning Board, to correct any technical slip or omission in the wording of the resolution, between approval of the minutes and issue of the decision notice.

Should the application be subject to an appeal, the following Heads of Terms should be secured as part of any S106 Agreement:

To consider the Brooks Lane Development Framework Supplementary Planning document.

Consideration was given to the above report.

RESOLVED

That the Portfolio Holder for Planning be recommended to approve and publish the Final Draft of the Brooks Lane Development Framework SPD (Appendix 2) alongside the report of consultation for public representations for a period of six weeks.

(During consideration of the item, Councillor D Edwardes left the meeting and then returned).

To consider the report.  

To consider the above report.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.