Agenda and minutes

            The Minutes of the meeting held on 11^th September 2006 having been printed and circulated, were taken and signed as a correct record.

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

            The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site. It was noted that 12 letters of objection had been received on the grounds of which were detailed in the report. In addition Halton Friends of the Earth had sent a letter of objection which raised concerns over the following;

 

• the justification put forward by the applicants;
• the transport and accessibility;
• loss of amenity of local residents;
• loss of natural habitat;
• accessibility to the public;
• assumption over existing course and funding issues; and
• other uses of the land would be more sustainable.

 

It was noted that this was an initial response and they would be submitting a more substantial response.

 

Mr Worcester from Turley Associates – the planning consultants who were representing the application - addressed the Committee. It was noted that the plans were illustrative plans only and the plans for the siting of the club house would be drawn at a later stage and consideration would be given to residents with regards to the visual impact of the building.

 

In addition the Ward Councillor, Councillor Cross, addressed the Committee on behalf of the residents from Norlands Park as it was felt that the amount of traffic would increase and there were concerns regarding the proximity and scale of the club house.  It was noted that a single storey building would be preferred.

 

Members discussed the possibility of restricting the height of the club house, noise survey assessment, whether the Widnes golf course on Liverpool Road would become surplus to requirements and the public right of way issues.  It was reported that the right of way issues would be dealt with by  Knowsley Borough Council as they fell under its border.

 

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

 

1.             Standard condition relating to timescale and duration of permission.

2.             Reserved matters, layout, scale, appearance, and landscape for future consideration.

3.            Amended Plans condition.

4.              Details of materials required prior to commencement (BE2).

5.              Drainage details required prior to commencement (BE1).

6.            Condition to show the levels details for the proposal and how it links in with the adjacent land uses (BE1).

7.              Details of bin storage required (BE2).

8.         Car parking layout prior to commencement (TP12).

9.         Cycle parking (TP6).

10.             Disabled parking (TP12).

11.             Details tree and hedgerow survey prior to commencement (BE2 & GE24).

12.       Bat survey mitigation measures need to be put in place prior to the commencement of development (GE21).

13.       Great crested newts survey, mitigation measures need to be put in place (GE21).

14.       Barn Owl survey carried out and any mitigation measures need to be put in place prior to commencement (GE21).

15.             Badger survey carried out and any mitigation measures need to be put in place prior to commencement (GE21).

16.             Landscape and ecological plan (GE19).

17.            Lighting scheme plan, showing details of all lighting (BE2 & PR4).

18.       Noise levels report and mitigation measures (BE2 & PR2).

19.             Visibility splay required  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site. It was noted that comments had been received from eight local residents at the time the report was written and were detailed in the report.

 

In addition a letter had been received from Elite Homes, who had previously had an application recommended for refusal on an adjacent site, which was subsequently withdrawn. The letter raised concerns regarding the following:

 

·        the same considerations given to the comprehensive development of the entire residential designation be given equal consideration on this current application;

·        concerns around access and provision of the road and rights across it from third parties which could be achieved through a section 106 agreement; and

·        underground car parking which could cause flooding issues.

 

The Planning Officer informed the Committee that in relation to the first point as detailed in the report the whole basis of the approval was that the site would provide the opportunity to facilitate the link through to the adjacent sites which would have the potential to unlock the access problems, experienced by Elite Homes on their previous application.

 

With regards to the second point it was noted that the applicant had agreed to enter in to a Section 106 Agreement to facilitate this access for future development on the adjacent land.  A decision would only be issued on completion of this Agreement.

 

In relation to the third point the Committee was advised that the Environment Agency had raised no objections to the scheme based on the provision of the underground car parking.

 

It was reported that amended plans had been submitted which successfully dealt with the following:

 

• design quality;
• delineation of private space at entrance;
• improvement to elevations; and
• indication of type of boundary treatment.

 

The amended plans illustrated the building set back a further 4.8m which would provide additional protection of the privacy and outlook of the existing occupiers of the terraced properties on Hale Road.

 

The Committee was advised that the Council’s Highway Engineers had requested further amended plans to improve the highway, car parking layouts and location of cycle stores.  It was considered that these improvements could be achieved though planning permission. 

 

It was reported that the applicant had been requested to provide a financial contribution towards the HGV Relief Road. 

 

            RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the following 18 conditions including a Section 106 Legal Agreement for the provision of off site open space and free access through to the adjacent site without recourse to ransom.

 

1          The entering into a Legal Agreement for off-site open space provision and allowing free access through site to adjacent land. (Policy RG5 and H3).

2          In accordance with amended plans (Policy RG5 and BE1).

3          Prior to commencement the applicant to install security gates for the access to the rear of 353-363 Hale Road following approval of details by the Local Planning Authority (Policy BE1).

4          Prior to commencement the submission of material samples  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

            The application was refused as per the printed agenda.

            It was noted that this application had been withdrawn.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site. It was noted that 26 letters of objection had been received (including a Ward Councillor) on the grounds of which were detailed in the report.  In addition it was reported that 11 further letters of objection had been received following consultation regarding the removal of the B2 use from the description which were the same as the ones detailed in the report. 

 

Mr Thomas addressed the Committee on behalf of local residents objecting to the application on the grounds that the site was too close to the proximity of local residents, also it was felt that residents were recovering from the pollution scare five years ago.  In addition their concerns were noted regarding increase of traffic flow and the height of the buildings. Mr Thomas requested that the application be deferred.

 

Ward Councillor, Councillor M. Hodgkinson also addressed the Committee to oppose the application  on the grounds of which were detailed in a document that was tabled at the meeting. (see appendix a).

 

Members raised concerns regarding the privacy and noise level issues for local residents.  In reply it was noted that there were no planning reasons to defer the application.

 

It was reported that the Health and Safety Executive had confirmed they did not wish to call in the application.

 

RESOLVED: That authority be deferred to the Operational Director of Environmental & Regulatory Services in consultation with the Chairman subject to the application not being called in by the Health and Safety Executive to approve subject to the following 24 conditions and additional 6 conditions listed below:

 

1.                  Reserved matters condition, for the submission of and approval prior to the commencement of development.

2.                  Time limit for the submission of reserved matters.

3.                  Time limit for the commencement of development.

4.                  Reserved matters to be submitted and carried out as approved.

5.                  Materials condition, requiring the submission and approval of the materials to be used (BE2).

6.                  Drainage condition, requiring the submission and approval of drainage details (BE1).

7.                  Landscaping condition, requiring the submission of both hard and soft landscaping (BE2).

8.                  Boundary treatments to be submitted and approved in writing (BE1).

9.                  Wheel cleansing facilities to be submitted and approved in writing (BE1).

10.             Parking conditions to ensure parking and servicing areas is provided and maintained at all times. The use of the premises shall not commence until the vehicle access and parking has been laid out (TP12).

11.             Details of the design of the bin storage (BE2).

12.             Construction hours to be adhered to throughout the course of the development (BE1).

13.             Delivery hours to be adhered to throughout the life of the permission (BE1).

14.             Condition that construction traffic is to use Weston Point Expressway (BE1).

15.             To maintain the minimum distances to the residential properties (BE1).

16.             The parking shall be provided to a ratio of 1 Space per 30sqm.

17.             Subject to a travel plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site. It was noted that no objections had been received and the Council’s Environmental Officer had raised no concerns.

 

RESOLVED: That authority be deferred to the Operational Director of Environmental & Regulatory Services in consultation with the Chairman for the resolution of outstanding issues and application be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

1.                        Specifying amended plans (BE1).

2.                        Materials condition, requiring the submission and approval of the materials to be used (BE2).

3.                        Submission, agreement and implementation of site  (BE1).

4.                        Submission, agreement and implementation of scheme for drainage (BE1).

5.                        Landscaping condition, requiring the submission of both hard and soft landscaping (BE2).

6.                        Submission, agreement and implementation of woodland habitat management plan (GE19).

7.                        6 conditions relating to protection of trees to be retained during construction (GE19).

8.                        Boundary treatments to be submitted and approved in writing (BE2).

9.                        Wheel cleansing facilities to be submitted and approved in writing and used during construction (BE1).

10.                   Construction and delivery hours to be adhered to throughout the course of the development (BE1).

11.                   Vehicle access, parking, servicing etc to be constructed prior to occupation/ commencement of use (BE1).

12.                   Agreement and implementation of cycle parking provision (TP6).

13.                    Requiring implementation of agreed Travel Plan (TP16).

14.                   Restricting external lighting (BE1).

15.                   2 conditions restricting external storage and external waste area to defined area (E5).

16.                   Agreement and implementation of cycle parking (TP6).

17.                   Grampian condition relating to off-site footpath / cycleway provision (BE1). It is considered that this can be satisfactorily achieved through condition

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.  It was noted that an objection had been received from the Highways Authority in relation to the use of Stopping Up Orders in such cases. 

 

One letter of support had been received from a local resident in addition to one letter of objection on the grounds of which were detailed in the report.  The Council’s response to the objections was that the fence and gates scheme had emerged because of the requests from several local residents, through local Councillors and Area Forums in order to address anti-social behaviour occurring to the rear of their homes.

 

            It was reported that United Utilities had no objection but would require 24hr access to a water main within the enclosed area.  Should access be needed and no key available access would be gained through forced entry.  United Utilities would not be held liable for the cost of repairing such damage.

 

            RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to 1 condition requiring colour coating Dark Green BE22.

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.  It was noted that an objection had been received from the Highways Authority in relation to the use of Stopping Up Orders in such cases.

 

            In addition comments had been received from United Utilities that they had no objection but would require 24 hr access to a public sewer and manhole within the enclosed area.  Should access be needed and no key available access would be gained through forced entry.  United Utilities would not be held liable for the cost of repairing such damage.

 

            The Committee was informed of an amendment to the fencing detail as the proposed 2m paladin fence was now replaced with details for timber fencing to match adjacent existing fencing (which was similar to the Kingsway refurbishment schemes), as a result of consultation with residents.

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to 1 condition requiring colour coating Dark Green BE22.

Plan No.  06/00570/ADJ

 

Adjoining authority outline application for the laying out of golf course, associated clubhouse and car parking with access to be determined at this stage to the land bounded by Mill Lane / M62 Motorway / Norlands Lane and Pex Hill, Cronton.

 

            The Committee was informed that this proposal was an adjoining authority consultation by Knowsley Council, in respect of an 18-hole golf course.  It was noted that this proposal was also a joint application between Halton and Knowsley, which had been discussed during this meeting (see Minute No. DEV18).

 

            RESOLVED: That Halton Borough Council has no objections to the proposal. 

            It was reported that the following applications had been withdrawn:-

 

06/00461/FUL Proposed erection of 101 No. 2.5/ 3/ 3.5 storey houses and apartments with associated parking at Cameron Industrial Services Ltd. Hale Road Widnes Cheshire.

 

06/00490/FUL Proposed two storey side extension and associated works at 247 Ditchfield Road Widnes Cheshire.

 

06/00553/OUT Outline application for 3 No. two storey office blocks with details of siting / layout and means of access for approval at Clifton Road Sutton Weaver Runcorn Cheshire.

 

06/00558/FUL Proposed two storey side extension and vehicular access crossing at 2 Heralds Close Widnes Cheshire.

 

                                                                                                            Appendix a

Planning Application 06/00594/OUT SOG Ltd. Objection by Cllr. Mike Hodgkinson.

 

In 2000 HCBD was found in quarries at Weston Village. As a result of incentives to leave and unjustified scare mongering, about half the population left the Village. However, most of the residents of Weston Crescent and SOG, who took over the Heath site from the ICI, had faith in the area and stayed.

 

We are pleased that SOG have been successful in attracting businesses to the site to replace the jobs lost when it was vacated by ICI and they have rightly received credit from the highest levels for their achievements.

 

Most local residents support the expansion of the Heath site to create more jobs, but have two major concerns.  The first was that the site’s status as an office and research establishment would be compromised by permitting the introduction of light industry. This has been accepted by SOG.

 

The second major issue relates to Site 1, which is sandwiched between a line of pylons and the housing both in Weston Crescent and that recently constructed by Persimmon Homes. The proposal is of a three-storey building. The SOG design statement says that as it is close to houses, a generous landscape buffer with design measures to avoid overlooking should be provided. The Site 1 analysis recommends a 20m buffer for a three-storey building.  The minimum distance to houses may be 25m, but the distance to the fence lines to some properties is much less than 20m. This will result in a major loss of amenity due to noise, overspill lighting and loss of privacy for the nearby housing.

 

In the Site 4 analysis, it states that the building on this site should be limited to two storeys to allow a roofline relationship with the buildings to the east. This is a valid point even though the buildings on the east are offices.  Why does this not also apply to the housing near Site 1, which has only two storeys and would be overlooked? On this basis Site 1 should be no higher than 2 storeys.

 

The Site 1 analysis also says that the building position on the grid should be aligned to create a relationship with Sites 4 and 5. These sites are much further from Site 1 than the housing in Weston Crescent or the new housing, neither of which are considered in this context, In fact the new housing is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.