Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies of absence were received from Councillor Jill Rhodes (Councillor Hazel Faddes substituted).

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 pre-determined any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 22 September 2021.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting 22 October 2021 be accepted as a correct and accurate record and be signed by the Chair.

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 total period of 3 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following:

·                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 David Nutting, Wrenbury cum Frith Parish Council, Sarah Goodwin, Local Resident Objector and Geraint Lyndon Jones, Local Resident Objector attended the meeting and spoke against the application.  Shaun Taylor, Agent for the Applicant attended the meeting to speak in favour and answer any questions the Committee had.) 

RESOLVED:

That, for the reasons set out in the report, the application be APPROVED as recommended subject to S106 Agreement and conditions:

Head of Terms

And the following Conditions:

1)    Standard Time – 3 years

2)    Compliance with the Approved plans

3)    Materials to be submitted and approved

4)    Surfacing materials to be submitted and approved

5)    Landscape Scheme to be submitted and approved

6)    Landscape Implementation

7)    Details of boundary treatment across the whole site to be submitted and approved

8)    Tree Protection scheme to be submitted and approved

9)    AMS to be submitted and approved

10)10.Details of retaining structures to be submitted and approved

11)11.Lighting strategy to be submitted and approved

12)12.Habitat Creation method statement and 30 yr management plan to be submitted and approved

13)Updated Badger Survey to be submitted and approved

14)Submission of CEMP to safeguard the River Weaver to be submitted and approved

15)Ecological Enhancement Strategy to be submitted and approved

16)Development to adhere to FRA and mitigation within it

17)Detailed strategy/design limiting the surface water runoff generated by the proposal, and associated management /maintenance plan - required prior to commencement

18)Levels information required, GFL and FFLs to be submitted and approved

19)Foul and surface water to be drained separately

20)Travel Information Pack to be submitted and approved

21)Electric Vehicle Charging Provision to be submitted and approved

22)Soil Importation to be submitted and approved

23)Unexpected contaminated land

24)Full details of Children’s Play equipment, and surfacing details to be submitted and approved

25)PD rights removed including surfacing of front gardens

26)Visibility Splays as plan and kept obstruction free

27)Prior to the first use of any facing or roofing materials a plan to show a looped footpath link within the open space together with a timetable for implementation shall be submitted to the LPA and approved in writing. The footpath shall be provided in accordance with the approved timetable.

28)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Ward Councillor and the Councillor who called in the application Councillor Steven Edgar, Clare Bland, Leith Planning Ltd, on behalf of Barthomeley Parish Council and Viv Belcher a Local Resident Objector attended the meeting and spoke against the application.

Ian Macbeth a Local Supporter attended the meeting to speak in favour and answer any questions the Committee had.) 

RESOLVED:

That, for the reasons set out in the report, the application be REFUSED as recommended for the following reasons:

1)    The proposed development is located within the Green Belt and in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed development does not preserve the openness of the Green Belt. No very special circumstances have been identified and planning permission should not be granted. The proposed development is therefore unacceptable in principle and conflicts with Cheshire East Local Plan Policy PG3, saved Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan Policy NE.1 and the NPPF.

2)    No Noise Assessment, proposed flight paths or details of the direction of take[1]ff/landing has been submitted as part of this application. The Local Planning Authority consider that insufficient information has been provided in order to adequately assess the noise impact of the proposed development upon residential amenity and a nearby riding school. In the absence of this information, it has not been possible to demonstrate that the proposal would comply with policies BE1, RT16 and NE17 of the Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan and Policies EG2, SC1 and SE12 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy and the NPPF.

3)    The site is in close proximity to the Midland Meres & Mosses – Phase 2 Ramsar, Oakhanger Moss Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Black Firs & Cranberry Bog SSSI and Sandbach Flashes SSSI. The application could have potential significant effects on these designated sites, and no Habitat Regulations Assessment has been provided. It is not possible to determine the significance of these impacts and the scope for mitigation. Therefore, the proposed development is contrary to Policy SE3 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy, Policies NE.6 and NE.7 of the Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan and the NPPF.

4)    The proposed building would be sited on the route of Public Right of Way Barthomley FP9. No details have been provided to demonstrate how the PROW could be diverted. The development would prejudice public access onto the PROW and the proposed development is contrary to Policy RT.9 of the Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan.

5)    A major hazard pipeline crosses the site, there is a risk of harm to people at the proposed development site and there are sufficient reasons on safety grounds, for advising against the granting of planning permission in this case. No information has been provided to show how the field will be converted to a landing strip together with mitigation to protect the gas pipeline. The proposed development is contrary to Policy BE.21 of the Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan.

In order to give proper effect  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.