Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs R Bailey, P Edwards and B Livesley.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests and for Members to declare if they have made a pre-determination in respect of any item on the agenda.

Councillors D Brown and W J Macrae declared that in respect of agenda item 55 ‘Interim Planning Statement on Affordable Housing’ they had pre-determined the item and therefore they left the room prior to consideration of the item.

Councillors D Brown and W J Macrae declared that in respect of agenda item 56 ‘Local Development Framework Core Strategy Issues and Options’ they would not be participating in the debate as they did not want to Fetter their Discretion at a future Cabinet meeting where the item would be considered and which they were Members of and therefore they left the room prior to consideration of the item.

(During consideration of the following item Councillor S Wilkinson arrived to the meeting).

To approve the minutes as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

A total period of 5 minutes is allocated for the planning application for Ward Councillors who are not members of the Strategic Planning Board.

A period of 3 minutes is allocated for the planning application for the following individuals/groups:

• Members who are not members of the Strategic Planning Board and are not the Ward Member
• The relevant Town/Parish Council
• Local Representative Group/Civic Society
• Objectors
• Supporters
• Applicants

RESOLVED

That the public speaking procedure be noted.

To consider the above application.

The Committee considered a report (together with an oral update) regarding the above planning application.

(Councillor D Brickhill, Ward Councillor, Parish Councillor Mrs Wilson, Doddington and District Parish Council, Mr Frodsham, an objector and Mr Thornley, agent on behalf of the applicant).

RESOLVED

1. That the recommendation to amend condition 5 be refused as the submitted amended wording to condition 5 is considered ambiguous and does not assist to clearly define the nature of waste materials that would be acceptable for import. The existing condition, read in relation to the permitted development, is considered to provide sufficient indication of the nature of wastes that are acceptable to be imported to, processed or stored at the site.

2. That the recommendation to leave existing condition 6 unaltered be approved as Condition 5 makes it clear that only green garden waste shall be imported and accepted on the site. The operator should ensure that only such waste is imported. Allowing a 5% quantity of mixed waste to be imported does not accord with the requirements of condition 5 and would lead to unacceptable impacts on amenity. It is considered the current wording of condition 6 adequately allows for those incidents were contaminated material which is not green garden waste is inadvertently imported within the main body of the green garden waste.

(The decision to refuse an amendment to condition 5 was against the Officers recommendation to amend).

To consider the above application.

The Committee considered a report (together with an oral update) regarding the above planning application.

RESOLVED

1. That the recommendation to amend condition 5 be refused as the submitted amended wording to condition 5 is considered ambiguous and does not assist to clearly define the nature of waste materials that would be acceptable for import. The existing condition, read in relation to the permitted development, is considered to provide sufficient indication of the nature of wastes that are acceptable to be imported to, processed or stored at the site.

2. That the recommendation to leave existing condition 6 unaltered be approved as Condition 5 makes it clear that only green garden waste shall be imported and accepted on the site. The operator should ensure that only such waste is imported. Allowing a 5% quantity of mixed waste to be imported does not accord with the requirements of condition 5 and would lead to unacceptable impacts on amenity. It is considered the current wording of condition 6 adequately allows for those incidents were contaminated material which is not green garden waste is inadvertently imported within the main body of the green garden waste.

(The decision to refuse an amendment to condition 5 was against the Officers recommendation to amend).

To consider the above application.

The Committee considered a report (together with an oral update) regarding the above planning application.

Members were asked to consider an amendment to the recommendation which remained one of approval subject to the decision being delegated to the Head of Planning and Housing in order to draft a set of revised conditions and a new S106 agreement.

(Sam Ryan, agent for the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be approved subject to the decision being delegated to the Head of Planning and Housing in order to draft a set of revised conditions and a new S106 agreement.

To consider the above report.

The Committee considered a report (together with an oral update) regarding the above planning application.

RESOLVED

That the amendments to the application be approved as follows:-

1. The alteration to the plans to remove an area of land on the north side of the Stapeley Water Gardens development site for use with the outline planning application and for the related S106 agreement.

2. Alterations to the wording of condition 18 on the outline planning permission to require the submission of the tree survey in relation to land to the south west of the outline planning application area (i.e. part of the ecological mitigation area) prior to the commencement of development of the outline permission.

3. The removal of condition 19 from the outline planning permission to be issued which requires the retention of planting between the Stapeley Water Gardens development area and Peter Destapleigh Way.

(Prior to consideration of the following item Councillors D Brown and W J Macrae left the meeting and did not return).

(The meeting adjourned at 3.35pm and reconvened at 3.45pm).

To consider a on the introduction of an Interim Planning Statement to be used in considering planning applications for housing development pending the adoption of a policy for Cheshire East in the LDF Core Strategy

Consideration was given to a report on the Council’s Interim Planning Statement on Affordable Housing.

Members welcomed the report although concerns were raised in relation to the percentage of affordable housing that developers were required to build.

It was suggested by the chairman that once the economic situation improved then the percentage could be amended.

RESOLVED

1. That endorsement be given to the Cabinet’s approval of the draft Interim Planning Statement on Affordable Housing (as appended to this report) for consultation purposes.

2. That the Board gives its agreement that it be treated as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications pending the adoption of the finalised document in such a format as may be appropriate following the consultation process.

To consider the above report.

Consideration was given to a report on the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Issues and Options.

Whilst the Board was happy that the consultation stage be progressed, the following comments were made:-

(i)                 Information in the earlier part of the report could be improved.

(ii)               More information on transport connections was required.

(iii)             Statistical information on pages 16 and 41 of the report was inaccurate and needed correcting.

(iv)              Lack of reference to agriculture in the report.

(v)                Mineral sites were referred to in the report, but waste sites had been omitted.

RESOLVED

That report be noted and that Cabinet be recommended to approve the Issues and Options report for the Local Development Framework Core Strategy for consultation purposes.