Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Muldoon, Ben Wye and John Bird. Councillors Stewart Gardiner and Marilyn Houston were present as substitutes.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests, other registerable interests, and non-registerable interests in any item on the agenda and for Members to declare if they have pre-determined any item on the agenda.

In the interests of openness and transparency, the following declarations were made:

Councillor Stewart Gardiner, declared that, in relation to items 6 and 7, he had discussed the procedural matters only with Councillor Hazel Faddes.

Councillor Andrew Kolker, declared that, in relation to item 7, his wife’s family were planning to submit a similar application in different area, and had no pecuniary interest.

Councillor Linda Buchanan, declared that, in relation to item 7, she was a resident of Wybunbury but was not involved in the Parish Council or their planning meetings, and was not predetermined.

Councillor Marilyn Houston, declared that, in relation to item 8, she had, as a member of the Crewe Town Council planning committee, voted to object to the application, prior to being made aware that she would be attending the Southern Planning Committee meeting where it would be being discussed as a substitute member, so would leave the meeting for this item.

Councillor Roger Morris declared that, in relation to item 9, he had initially provided comments on the planning portal in relation to this application, however, he said that he had not got a predetermined judgement.

Councillor Stewart Gardiner, declared that, in relation to item 9, he was known to one of the public speakers socially, but had not discussed the application with them.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2025.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2025 be approved as a correct record.

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

The public speaking time procedure was noted.

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the planning application.

The following attended the meeting and spoke in relation to the application:

Councillor Hazel Faddes (Ward Councillor), Mr Stuart Ames (objector) and Mr Iain Smith (applicant).

RESOLVED: (Unanimously)

That the application be DEFERRED for the following reasons:

1.    To obtain a written legal opinion as to whether a breach of planning condition has occurred and whether planning permission has been nullified.

2.    Whether it is possible to vary an already varied planning application.

3.    Clarification as to why all other conditions have not been included within the recommendation.

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

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the planning application.

The following attended the meeting and spoke in relation to the application:

Councillor Hazel Faddes (Ward Councillor), Mr Stuart Ames (objector) and Mr Iain Smith (applicant).

RESOLVED: (Unanimously)

That for the reasons set out in the report and the update report, the application be APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED subject to the following conditions and with the following changes to the S106 Heads of Terms:

Conditions:

1.    Three year commencement

2.    Approved plans

3.    Materials to be approved

4.    Landscaping as submitted

5.    Landscaping implementation and maintenance

6.    Implementation of noise mitigation measures

7.    Electric Vehicle Charging

8.    Phase 1 Contaminated Land

9.    Verification report

10.Importation of soils

11.Unexpected contamination

12.Strict adherence with the AMS and Tree protection Scheme contained within the AIA.

13.United Utilities – Detailed Drainage Design to address in particular the pumping station capacity

14.Incorporation off localised SuDS in the layout design

15.Ecological enhancements

16.Details of land levels to be submitted and approved

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

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the planning application.

The following attended the meeting and spoke in relation to the application:

Councillor Janet Clowes (Ward Councillor), Stuart Howcroft (Wybunbury Parish Council) and Jo Mannion (objector)

RESOLVED: (By Majority)

That the application be DEFERRED for the following reasons:

1.    A site visit was required to take place.

Councillor Marilyn Houston left the meeting at this point for the reasons detailed in her declaration.

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

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the planning application.

The following attended the meeting and spoke in relation to the application:

Councillor Dawn Clark (Ward Councillor) and Rhian Powell (applicant)

RESOLVED: (By Majority)

That for the reasons set out in the report, the application be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:

1. Commencement of development

2. Materials in accordance with the application

3. Approved drawings

4. Remediation Strategy

5. Verification Report

6. Unexpected contamination

7. Containers shall not be stacked and shall be single-storey only.

8. Lighting to be carried out in accordance with submitted details.

9. Hours of operation limited to 06:00-23:00 Monday-Sunday

10. Submission of a management plan for the maintenance and appearance of the containers and the control of litter at the site.

Councillor Stewart Gardiner requested it be recorded that he voted against the application.

Councillor Marilyn Houston returned to the meeting at this point.

Councillor Allen Gage left the meeting at this point and did not return.

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 has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Southern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the planning application.

The following attended the meeting and spoke in relation to the application:

Councillor James Pratt (Ward Councillor) who provided a statement which was read by the Democratic Service Officer, and David Simcox (objector).

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED against the recommendations for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development in terms of the second-floor bedroom would not provide an adequate level of amenity for the future occupiers due to insufficient information in terms of ceiling heights, the irregular shape/layout of the room and the lack of a window to serve the bedroom. The proposal would be contrary to policies HOU12 and HOU4 of the SADPD.

2.    The proposed development would not provide a sufficient level of private amenity space due to the requirements for off-street parking, bin storage, cycle storage and clothes drying. The proposal would not provide an adequate level of amenity for the future occupiers and would be contrary to policies HOU12 and HOU4 of the SADPD.

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