Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor E Brooks.

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.

It was noted that in respect of application 16/3931M, Members of the Committee had received emails from both the applicant and objectors including a petition objecting to the proposal.  In addition Councillor H Gaddum also stated that the Ward Councillor had sent an email. 

In the interest of openness in respect of application 16/3931M, Councillor H Gaddum declared that her husband’s parents came from Mobberley and therefore had visited the area on numerous occasions going back 30 years ago.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 16/5788C, Councillor H Gaddum declared that a resident had contacted her in the Autumn advised her to speak to Councillor Heyes.  Subsequently a different resident had sent her a number of press cuttings, however she had not commented on the proposals.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 16/4826M, Councillor S Edgar declared that he had briefly watched a programme on BBC television the previous night which referred to the application site, however he turned it off so that it did not prejudice him when considering the application at the meeting.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 16/3285M, Councillor S Gardiner declared that known to one of the speakers, Town Councillor C Dodson and considered him to be more than a passing acquaintance.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 January 2017 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 January 2017 be approved as a 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 Planning Committee

·         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 planning committee 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 Heidi Gilks, representing Mobberley Parish Council, Richard Irving, an objector and Sarah Foster, representing the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application.  In addition a statement was read out on behalf of Councillor J Macrae, the Ward Councillor).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

(1) Inappropriate development in Green Belt

(2) Unsustainable location

(3) Visual impact of the access.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’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 Head of Planning (Regulation) delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

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

To consider the above application.

This application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

To consider the above application.

This application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Parish Councillor Myles Garbett, representing Alderley Edge Parish Council, Stuart Galloway, an objector and Alan Davies, representing the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be delegated to the Head of Planning (Regulation) in consultation with Chairman to approve subject to further discussions with the applicant regarding the reduction in proposed ridge height.

And subject to the following conditions:-

1.         Commencement of development (3 years)

2.         Development in accord with approved plans

3.         Materials as application

4.         Obscure glazing requirement: Rear and side

5.         Should piling be required (details to be submitted)

6.         Site Specific Dust Management Plan (DMP)

7.         Removal of PD rights

8.         Provision of car parking for existing and proposed dwelling

9.         Demolition of rear outrigger prior to occupation of new dwelling

10.       Construction Management Plan

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’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 Head of Planning (Regulation) delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(The meeting was adjourned for a short break).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor T Fox, the Ward Councillor and Jonathan Oldfield, an objector attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

(1) Over development of the site, inadequate private amenity space, detrimental to living conditions of future occupiers.

(2) Impact of living conditions of neighbouring property – contrary to policy DC38.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’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 Head of Planning (Regulation) delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(This decision was contrary to the Officer’s recommendation of approval.  The meeting was adjourned from 1.10pm until 1.30pm for lunch).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Town Councillor Christopher Dodson, representing Wilmslow Town Council, Will Rogers, the applicant and Mike Paddock, the Architect attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reason:-

1.The proposed apartment development by virtue of its size and design, in particular its height and proximity to the road, would have an unacceptable impact on the street scene.  The proposed building would over-dominate the surrounding site and built form and would not make a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the area. The development would therefore not accord with Macclesfield Borough Local Plan policies BE1, DC1 and DC8, Policy SE1 of the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’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 Principal Planning Manager (Regulation) has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

Should this application be the subject of an appeal, authority is approved to enter into a S106 Agreement to secure the following Heads of Terms;

•           30% of the dwellings to be affordable in a 65:35 split

•           Education contribution – £49,028 for secondary places

•           Contribution towards off site improvements for public open space

and recreation and outdoor sport in line with Council policy.

(During consideration of the application, the meeting was adjourned for a

short period in order for the Principal Planning Officer to discuss the possibility

of a deferment with the applicant).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor G Baxendale attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

(1) Increased bulk and massing on prominent corner harmful to character of area.

(2) Impact upon living conditions of neighbouring property.

(3) Residential accommodation sub-standard for future occupiers.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’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 Head of Planning (Regulation) delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

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