Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor P Groves.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 18/2996M, Councillor S Hogben declared that he was a non-Executive Director of ANSA who had been consulted on the application, however he had not discussed the application or made any comments on it.

In the interest of openness in respect of applications 18/2996M, 20/0113M and 20/2682M, Councillor S Edgar declared that he was the Chairman of the Public Rights of Way Committee who had been a consultee on all three of the applications, however had he had not discussed the applications or made any comments on them.

In the interest of openness in respect of applications 18/2996M and 20/4682M, Councillor T Dean declared that he was known to the Tatton estate and the Chief Executive but he had not discussed the applications with him.

In respect of application 20/0113M, Councillor T Dean declared that he was a member of the Northern Planning Committee who had discussed the application and made a recommendation on which he took part in and voted on.  In accordance with the Code of Conduct he left the virtual meeting prior to consideration of the application.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 20/0113M, Councillor S Gardiner declared that he was a former employee of Emery Planning and that he knew the agent for the applicant speaking on the application well but he had not been in communication with her for several months and he had not discussed the application or commented on it.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 20/4682M, Councillor S Gardiner declared that he knew the CEO of Tatton Estates and that he had not discussed the application with him.  Before Christmas he had received a telephone call to discuss the application from Mr Henry Brooks.  He informed him that he was unable to discuss the application but Mr Brooks was concerned that communication with officers and his agent had stopped and he requested be resumed and as a result Councillor S Gardiner did send an email to the Head of Planning to make him aware of Mr Brooks concerns.  However he had not discussed the application with Mr Brooks and had gone out of his way to ensure he was unfettered.  At the time the application was submitted in its revised form he was the Chairman of the Knutsford Town Council Planning Committee, however he deemed it was inappropriate for him to attend and take part in the debate on the application and so a meeting was arranged whereby only that application was considered and which the Vice Chairman of Knutsford Town Council Planning Committee chaired.  Until he received the agenda he was unaware of the details of the application.  He was aware of the historic application but the current application was so different that he did not believe his position was fettered.

In the interest of openness in respect of application, 18/2996M Councillor M Hunter declared that he was a non-Executive Director of ANSA who had been consulted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To approve the minutes of the previous virtual meeting held on 9 December 2020 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the previous virtual meeting held on 9 December 2020 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to a correction to the spelling of Councillor A Farrall’s surname under the item relating to Declarations of Interest which was incorrectly recorded as Councillor A Farrell.

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.

(Councillor Q Abel, the Ward Councillor and Sebastian Tibenham attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That for the reasons set out in the report and in the verbal update to the Board, the application be delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chairman of the Strategic Planning Board to approve subject to the following conditions:-

1.    To comply with outline permission

2.    Development in accord with approved plans

3.    Materials as application

4.    Landscaping - submission of details to include additional planing to the Northern buffer

5.    Landscaping (implementation)

6.    Details of SUDs features to be submitted

7.    Measures to prevet attraction of birds to site durig construction to be submitted

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

9.    Prior to the installation of any rooflights / solar panels a glint and glare assessment to be submitted

10.All exterior lighting to be capped at the horizon with no upward light spill

11.Submission of a specific Tree Protection and Management Plan for the veteran tree (T1)

12.Development to be carried out in accordance with the arboricultural impact assessment method statement and Tree protection plan

13.No additional fences to be erected

14.Open space, play area and gym trail layout details to be submitted

15.Sports pitch details to be submitted

16.Finished floor levels to be agreed and aligned with the drainage details

17.Plans and elevations of the one bedroom properties to be submitted

(During consideration of the application, the meeting was adjourned from 11.30am until 12.15pm due to technical issues.  Prior to consideration of the following application, Councillor A Critchley left the virtual meeting and did not return).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor A Gregory, the Ward Councillor, Hilda Gaddum, a supporter, Alison Freeman, the agent for the applicant and Stephen Bell, the applicant attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.The application site is located with the Open Countryside, which is defined as the area outside of any settlement with a defined settlement boundary. The proposed development is not for one of the permitted types of development within the Open Countryside listed under policy PG6 of the CELPS, and is not for one of the specified exceptions to these development types. Policy EG2 sets out the circumstances where rural economic development proposals (outside the Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres) will be supported. From the information provided with the application, the proposed development does not meet any of the identified circumstances for the

development to be supported. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies PG6 and EG2 of the CELPS.

2.By reason of the nature and location of the development, the application is not a sustainable form of development, and conflicts with policies SD1, SD2 and CO1 of the CELPS, and the objectives of the NPPF.

3.The proposed development of the upper quarry site will result in significant harm to the Gawsworth Common, Whitemoor Hill and Ratcliffe Wood Local Wildlife Site, and does not provide adequate detail relating to the impact of the development upon proximate trees or appropriate mitigation. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies SE3 and SE3 of the CELPS and the provisions of the NPPF.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Board’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 Strategic Planning Board, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Board’s decision.

(The virtual meeting was adjourned for a short break.  Prior to consideration of the following application, Councillors S Gardiner and J Weatherill left the virtual meeting and did not return).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor K Parkinson, the Ward Councillor, Mike Reed, clerk to Little Bollington Parish Council and Jonathan Burns representing the applicant attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

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

1.    Temporary consent until end of December 2022

2.    Land to be reinstated to agricultural land at the end of the approved period with all hard-surfaces being removed

3.    The development hereby approved shall be carried out substantially in accordance with the Proposed Site Compound Plan 001 Rev 9, with no structures or material storage exceeding a maximum of 4m in height

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Board’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 Strategic Planning Board, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Board’s decision.

(During consideration of the application, Councillor R Moreton left the virtual meeting and did not return).