Agenda and minutes

            The Minutes of the meeting held on 27 July 2020, having been circulated, were taken as read and signed as a correct record.

The Committee was presented with the urgent decisions taken by the Chief Executive in respect of the Development Control Committee, due to the Covid-19 Pandemic and subsequent suspension of meetings.

These were provided at appendix 1 and noted by Members.

RESOLVED:  That the report and urgent decisions made be noted.

The Committee considered the following applications for planning permission and, in accordance with its powers and duties, made the decisions described below.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

The Committee was advised that since the publication of the agenda four representations had been received from Elected Members of the Heath and Mersey Wards, these were circulated to Members today via email.  Further representations had been received. One from a member of the public raising issues with regard to access. One from the supporters of Runcorn Town Football Club, in support of the application as they were now aware that the football club were going to enter into a binding agreement for lease subject to planning.  One from a member of the public stating that safety issues with the Energy from Waste facility should prevent the proposed development from being granted.  The representation alleged that the boiler panels were made of substandard material which are a risk to people in the area.  One from Viridor who operate the Energy from Waste facility who reiterated the content of Paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy for Waste and whilst disappointed by the recommendation, they requested that sufficient mitigation measures are secured by condition.

Also, further observations had now been received from the Council’s Ecological Adviser in relation to the Habitats Regulations Assessment and also bats and breeding birds.  Officers advised that the adoption of the Assessment following consultation with Natural England and the resolution of issues relating to bats and breeding birds would ensure the proposal was acceptable from an ecology perspective.

The Committee was addressed by Mr Matt Smith, from Gleeson Homes.  He stated that they provided entry level housing aimed at first time buyers, thus providing customers at the beginning / lower end of the housing ladder a chance to own their own homes.  He announced that the starting price of a new two bedroom family house would be approximately £115,000 and explained how this would be affordable through the new Help to Buy Scheme and Gleeson’s newly introduced Key Worker Priority Programme.  He also confirmed that Gleeson did not sell to landlords or sub-letters, ensuring that the homes would go to people who actually needed them.  He ended by commenting that this £11.8m investment would go some way to contributing to the local economy and was a predominantly first time buyer led low cost home ownership scheme and hoped it would be supported by the Committee.

In response to Members queries it was noted that the scheme would consist of freehold sales only.  In response to concerns regarding access to the development being via one road, Members were advised that as the access road met the requirements as per the relevant design standard and it was considered to be acceptable, there were no objections from the Highways Officer to the access strategy.  With regards to queries regarding car ownership, Members were advised that the trip generation methodology was used to establish the number of vehicle movements in the peak hours associated with the development and therefore impact on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

The Committee agreed that the application be approved subject to conditions and entering into legal agreements listed below.

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved subject to the following:

a)    a legal or other appropriate agreement relating to securing financial contributions to Open Space;

b)    conditions relating to the following:

1.    Time limit;

2.    Approved plans;

3.    External facing materials (BE1 and BE2);

4.    Soft landscaping scheme (BE1);

5.    Boundary treatments scheme (BE1);

6.    Electric vehicle charging points scheme (CS19);

7.    Provision and retention of parking (BE1);

8.    Provision and retention of cycle parking;

9.    Requirement for acoustic report and implementation of noise mitigation measures (PR2);

10. Affordable housing scheme (CS13);

11. Ground contamination (PR14);

12. Drainage strategy/scheme (PR16);

13. Waste audit (WM8);

14. Submission and agreement of site and finished floor levels;

15. Surface water drainage strategy; and

16. Conditions relating to tree protection through the course of the development; and

c)    that if the Section 106 Agreement or alternative arrangement was not executed within a reasonable period of time, authority be delegated to the Operational Director – Policy, Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Chair or Vice Chair of the Development Control Committee to refuse the application.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

The Case Officer advised the Committee of an error in the report pack, top of page 90, which refers to a lounge window on the side elevation – this should refer to side facing windows within a conservatory to the rear. 

It was noted that the receipt of amended plans had addressed officer concerns relating to the scale and appearance of the proposed dwelling within the street scene.  Further, the objections received by two neighbouring properties and Moore Parish Council and comments made by Ward Councillor John Bradshaw had been addressed in the report.

Officers advised the Committee that since the preparation of the report issues had arisen regarding the impact that the excavation for the house might have on surrounding trees and potential compliance with conditions attached to the original outline planning permission, which required further investigation by officers.  It was suggested that the recommendation be amended to delegated powers being given to the Operational Director to determine, once the issue had been resolved.

The Committee was addressed by Miss Harris-Grave who lived in the neighbouring property of the site and made the following objections in relation to the plans.    Incidentally, she stated that reference to a conservatory window (correction above) was incorrect.  She advised Members that when they purchased the property in 2018 they were aware of the outline planning permission of the neighbouring land as it formed part of the sales particulars.  However, she stated that this proposal did not comply with the Local Planning Authority (LPA) policies.  Additionally there was a huge tree that was not identified on the plans and to excavate around it would make it unstable; she said this was brought to the attention of the LPA but it was dismissed.  She stated that although they were not opposed to the construction of a dwelling on the site, they requested reassurance that all outline conditions and planning polices be adhered to and monitored throughout  construction.  She added that this had not been the case so far.

Mr Craig Foster, a Moore Parish Councillor, then addressed Members arguing that the issues around the neighbour’s windows and other issues raised by the neighbour had not been addressed.  He stated that the proposed development would be in breach of the neighbours ‘right to light’ and the Council’s adopted SPD.  He requested that a better design solution be found.

The Committee then heard Mr Keith Summers, the agent representing the applicants.  He stated that the principle of the dwelling had already been established in the outline planning approval which also included its access from Runcorn Road.  He confirmed that no objections had been received from the statutory consultees, other than the Parish Council; and no objections had been received from the trees officers or highways officers.  He added that the proposal met the LPA’s policy requirements and those of the National Planning and Policy Framework (NPPF).

Members were reminded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

The Committee agreed that the application be approved subject to the conditions listed below.

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved subject to conditions relating to the following:

1.    Time;

2.    Approved plans;

3.    Confirming permitted use class;

4.    Site levels;

5.    Material details;

6.    Landscaping details;

7.    Boundary treatments;

8.    CEMP;

9.    Vehicle access, parking, servicing etc. constructed prior to occupation / use;

10. Cycle parking details;

11. Surface water;

12. Drainage scheme;

13. Contaminated land;

14. Tree protection;

15. No tree felling; and

16. Provision of bird nesting boxes and bat boxes.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

It was noted that this application and the next application related to the same building complex so due to the interrelated nature they were presented as one report and were considered by the Committee under one report.

The Committee was presented with a proposed change of use from Class B1(a) offices to Class C3 (dwellinghouses) which is permitted development under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class O of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as Amended). 

Members were advised of a number of instances where this change of use was not permitted development by Class O, as listed from (b) to (g) in the report.  It was noted that none of these instances applied to these proposals so they were therefore permitted by Class O, subject to the condition that before beginning the development the developer shall apply to the local planning authority for a determination as to whether the prior approval of the authority would be required as to the following:

a)    Transport and highways impact of the development;

b)    Contamination risks on the site;

c)    Flooding risks on the site;

d)    Impacts of noise from commercial premises on the intended occupiers of the development; and

e)    The provision of adequate natural light in all habitable rooms of the dwellinghouses.

It was noted that the provisions of paragraph W (prior approval) of this Part applied in relation to this application also.

The Committee was addressed by Lydia Sadler, who represented the Planning Consultants for the applicant.  She introduced the applicant and stated that they had worked closely with the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to address concerns relating to parking and access to the site, as required under the prior approval application.  These concerns had now been satisfied through the provision of an on-site car park and a pedestrian link to the Town Park to the North. 

The Committee considered the representations made from Mike Amesbury MP, Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service and the results of the investigations made in relation to the above prior approval matters as described in the report.  They agreed with the Officer’s conclusion that the proposals were acceptable and prior approval was required for the change of use.

RESOLVED: That prior approval for the change of use from Class B1(a) offices to Class C3 (dwellinghouses) was required and that the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

1.    Time limit;

2.    Approved plans;

3.    Parking and servicing;

4.    Cycle parking

5.    Electric vehicle charging scheme;

6.    Residential travel plan; and

7.    Highway improvement works.

It was noted that this application and the previous application related to the same building complex so due to the interrelated nature they were presented as one report and were considered by the Committee under one report.

The Committee was presented with an application proposing a change of use of part of the ground floor and third floor from offices into 5 residential apartments, resident’s gym and external alteration.

The Committee was addressed by Lydia Sadler, who represented the Planning Consultants for the applicant.  She advised that the applicant had worked closely with the LPA and consultees throughout the process to arrive at a scheme which matched the aspirations of the applicant and the Council.  She further added that this development would provide regeneration of this key Town Centre site through the provision of a high quality development leading to wider and long term community benefits.  The proposal included significant enhancements to the external appearance of the building and would increase activity to this area of the Town Centre once future residents had moved in thus contributing to the existing retail and service provision.

In response to Members queries over the sizes of apartments, it was confirmed that these were much larger than plans submitted previously by the same applicant.  In relation to parking concerns, with the provision of 70 parking spaces and easy access in and out of the site, the Highways Officer raised no objections.  Also, the site was adjacent to the Town Centre and would benefit from improved pedestrian links and would be close to public transport links, so was considered to be a sustainable location.

Members considered the representations made by Mike Amesbury MP and the Officer’s responses to this, and after considering the information and investigations relating to the application, they agreed that this be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the report and summarised below.

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

1.    Time limit;

2.    Approved plans;

3.    External facing materials (BE1, BE2 and CS18);

4.    Implementation of bin and cycle storage (TP6 and WM9);

5.    Provision of parking and servicing (BE1, TP12 and TP17);

6.    Pedestrian link to the north (TP7 and TP17);

7.    Electric vehicle charging points (CS19);

8.    Travel plan (TP6, TP7, TP16 and TP17);

9.    Soft landscaping (BE1);

10. Hard landscaping and boundary treatments (BE1 and BE22);

11. Tree protection (BE1 and GE27);

12. Breeding birds protection (GE21); and

13. Drainage scheme (PR16 and CS23).