Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor W J A Arnold.

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.

Councillor H Davenport declared that he had considered application 09/0842M-Replacement Dwelling with new Entrance Gates, Brick Piers and Boundary Wall, Broad Heath House, Slade Lane, Over Alderley for Mr and Mrs Wren and application 11/0037M-Brick Garage to Replace Carport, Broad Heath House, Slade Lane, Over Alderley for Mr Chris Wren as a Member of the Northern Planning Committee, however he was looking at the application afresh and therefore had no personal or prejudicial interest in the item.

It was noted that all Councillors had received correspondence in respect of a number of applications on the agenda.

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 total 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 be noted.

To consider the above application.

(During consideration of the application, Councillors Mrs R Bailey and S Wilkinson arrived to the meeting).

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor R Menlove, the Ward Councillor, Mr P Yates, a Supporter and Alison Malone, the agent for the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be approved subject to a number of conditions to be agreed by the Head of Planning and Housing.

(This decision was against the Officers recommendation of refusal).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Mr Sparrow, representing CPRE, Mr Vendy, representing an objector, Mr P Yates, a Supporter and Mr Wren, the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.     The proposal is an inappropriate form of development within the Green Belt, as defined by the Development Plan.  The development is therefore contrary to policy GC1 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and would cause harm to the objectives of those policies by virtue of the fact that having regard to the overall scale, design and appearance, the proposed replacement dwelling is materially larger than the existing dwelling.  The development is similarly contrary to national policy guidance relating to development within the Green Belt. It is not considered that very special circumstances exist to justify the approval of inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

2.     The proposed development, by reason of its size, siting and design, would form a visually obtrusive feature which would detract from the rural character and appearance of the area within which it is located.  The approval of the development would therefore be contrary to national planning policy guidance, North West of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 policies DP7 & EM1 and Macclesfield Borough Local Plan policies BE1 and DC1, thereby causing harm to the objectives of those policies.

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Mr Vendy, representing an objector, Mr P Yates, a Supporter and Mr Wren, the applicant attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.     The development is therefore contrary to policy RDF4 of the Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West and policies GC1 and GC12 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and would cause harm to the objectives of those policies.  The development is similarly contrary to national policy guidance relating to development within the Green Belt. It is not considered that very special circumstances exist to justify the approval of inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

2.     Policy GC12 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan only allows for alterations or extensions to dwellings which would neither result in a significant change in the scale and appearance of the original dwelling nor require additional works which would unduly detract from the quality of the environment.  The proposed extension is considered by the Local Planning Authority to be a significant and disproportionate addition to this dwelling.  The Local Planning Authority considers that the erection of the proposed extension would be contrary to the objectives of these policies which are to retain the prevailing character of housing in the rural areas and the stock of smaller dwellings, and that such proposals, if permitted, would have a cumulative and incremental effect on the openness of the Green Belt.

(The meeting adjourned at 3.25pm and reconvened at 3.35pm.  Councillors C Thorley and G M Walton left the meeting and did not return).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reason:-

1. The proposal is an inappropriate form of development within the Green Belt, as defined by the Development Plan.  Very special circumstances have not been demonstrated that would clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt arising from the proposed inappropriate development.  The development is therefore contrary to policy GC1 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and would cause harm to the objectives of those policies.  The development is similarly contrary to national policy guidance relating to development within the Green Belt.

To consider the above application.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda prior to the start of the meeting.

To consider the above application.