Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

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 a pre-determination in respect of any item on the agenda.

In the interest of openness in respect of application 20/2640M, Councillor N Mannion declared that he was the Portfolio Holder for Environment & Regeneration and part of his portfolio covered Council owned assets and whist the applicant was the Council he had not been involved in the application and was not aware of any details until the agenda was published.

In the interest of openness in respect of applications 19/0684M and 20/0554M, Councillor C Browne declared that he had called both applications in.  Whilst Alderley Edge Parish Council had formed a view he had not taken part in any public debate or expressed a view.  In respect of application 19/0684M, he knew the objector speaking as she was a member of Alderley Edge Parish Council.

To approve the minutes of the virtual meeting held on 7 October 2020 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the virtual meeting held on 7 October 2020 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

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 period of 3 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following individuals/groups:

• 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.

(Councillor Don Stockton, the Ward Councillor, Councillor Mark Goldsmith the adjacent Ward Councillor, Town Councillor Jon Newell, representing Wilmslow Town Council, Christopher Lee, an objector, Matthew Johnson, the agent for the Applicant and Claire Ellam, a Care UK representative attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.         The proposed development, would result in a cramped form of development and overdevelopment of the site which would undermine the visual amenity of the area and its low density character contrary to Policies SE1 and SD2 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy, saved Policies DC41 and H12 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and Policy NE6 of the Wilmslow Neighbourhood Plan as well as the Councils Design Guide and advice within National Planning Policy Framework.

2.         It had not been demonstrated that there was a proven need for such elderly accommodation contrary to Policy SC4 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy.

In order to give proper effect to the Northern Committee`s intent and without changing the substance of its decision, authority is delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chairman (or in their absence the Vice Chairman) to correct any technical slip or omission in the resolution, before issue of the decision notice.

(This decision was contrary to the officers recommendation of approval.  During consideration of the application, Councillor B Murphy lost connection and therefore did not take part in the debate or vote on the application.  The virtual meeting was adjourned for a lunch break from 12.00pm until 12.40pm).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Town Councillor Jon Newell, representing Wilmslow Town Council and Paul Howitt, the agent for the applicant attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chairman of Northern Planning Committee (or in their absence the Vice Chairman), to approve the application for the reasons set out in the report, subject to:-

The receipt of a contribution of £8,000, prior to the issuing of the decision notice, to provide parking (waiting) restrictions on Broadway

And subject to the following conditions:-

1.    Time limit (3 years)

2.    In accordance with approved plans

3.    Submission/approval of a Community Use Agreement

4.    Materials as per application

5.    Implementation of noise mitigation measures

6.    Submission/approval of a dust mitigation scheme

7.    Provision of electric vehicle charging infrastructure

8.    Provision of low emission gas boilers

9.    Works to stop if land contamination is identified

10.Submission/approval of a soil verification report should any soil or soil forming materials be brought onto site

11.Submission/approval of external lighting details

12.Submission/approval of a post compliance lighting assessment

13.Landscaping – Implementation

14.Retention of trees/shrubs and hedgerows as shown

15.Tree protection measures – Implementation

16.Submission/approval of an Engineer designed no dig hard surface construction specification for any area of hard surfacing within the root protection area of retained trees

17.Submission/approval of a overall detailed; service & surface water drainage strategy and associated management and maintenance plan

18.Implementation of the details contained within the Flood Risk Assessment

19.Foul and surface water be drained on separate systems

20.Nesting birds

21.Submission/approval of an ecological enhancement plan including; features for nesting birds (including swifts), roosting bats, deadwood piles, a wildlife pond and native species planting

In order to give proper effect to the Northern Committee`s intent and without changing the substance of its decision, authority is delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chairman (or in their absence the Vice Chairman) to correct any technical slip or omission in the resolution, before issue of the decision notice.

(During consideration of the application, Councillor B Murphy lost connection and therefore did not take part in the debate or vote on the application.  The meeting was adjourned for a short break).

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Parish Councillor Myles Garbett, representing Alderley Edge Parish Council and Sarah Greenwood, an objector attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1.         Insufficient pedestrian access would exist and would therefore be contrary to saved Policy DC6 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and Policies SE1 and CO1 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy.

2.         The proposed development, would result in an overdevelopment of the site which would undermine the visual amenity of the area contrary to Policies SE1 and SD2 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy, saved Policy DC41 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan.

In order to give proper effect to the Northern Committee`s intent and without

changing the substance of its decision, authority is delegated to the Head of

Planning in consultation with the Chairman (or in their absence the Vice

Chairman) to correct any technical slip or omission in the resolution, before

issue of the decision notice.

Councillor B Murphy requested that a named vote be taken.  The result was as

follows:-

Councillor L Braithwaite-For refusal

Councillor C Browne-For refusal

Councillor T Dean-Not Voting

Councillor P Findlow-For refusal

Councillor A Harewood-Against refusal

Councillor S Holland-Not Voting

Councillor J Nicholas-Not Voting

Councillor I Macfarlane-Not Voting

Councillor N Mannion-Against refusal

Councillor B Murphy-Against refusal

Councillor B Puddicombe-For refusal

Councillor L Smetham-Against refusal

The Chairman had the casting vote and voted for refusal again.

(This decision was contrary to the officers recommendation of approval.  The virtual meeting was adjourned for a short break.  Councillors T Dean and N Mannion left the virtual meeting and did not return).

To consider the above report.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Parish Councillor Myles Garbett, representing Alderley Edge Parish Council,

Alan Corinaldi-Knott, representing an objector and Kath Ludlam, the agent for the applicant attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That for the reasons set out in the report the application was approved subject to the following conditions:-

1.    Standard time limit

2.    Accordance with approved Plans

3.    Breeding birds – timing of works

4.    Arboricultural works to be carried out in accordance with the submitted Method Statement

5.    Tree protection measures to be implemented in accordance with submitted details

6.    Submission and approval of a drainage strategy

7.    Land levels to be submitted, approved and implemented

8.    Dust Management Plan to be submitted, approved and implemented

9.    Electric Vehicle Charging point to be provided

10.Contaminated land survey to be submitted, approved and implemented

11.Details of any soils imported onto the site

12.Works to stop if any unexpected contamination is discovered

13.Details of boundary treatments to be submitted and approved

14.Landscaping scheme to be submitted and approved

15.Landscaping implementation

16.Materials to be submitted

17.Access and visibility splays to be provided prior to first occupation

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

To consider the above application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor Stewart Gardiner, the Ward Councillor, Clive Pugh, an objector and

Georgina Daintith, the agent for the applicant attended the virtual meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED

That the application be refused for the following reason:-

The proposed dwellings would result in an overdevelopment of the site by virtue of their scale and form and would be overbearing to, and out of character with, the adjoining single storey properties on St Johns Road. The development would therefore be contrary to policies SD2 and SE1 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy and policies D1, D2 and H2 of the Knutsford Neighbourhood Plan.

In order to give proper effect to the Northern Committee`s intent and without changing the substance of its decision, authority is delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chairman (or in their absence the Vice Chairman) to correct any technical slip or omission in the resolution, before issue of the decision notice.

(This decision was contrary to the officers recommendation of approval).