Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Greg Morgan and Geoffrey Russell.  Councillors Mick Muncaster and Alison Hansford attended the meeting as their respective substitutes.

To confirm the minutes of the Development Control Committee held on 5 February 2013 as a correct record and be signed by the Chair (enclosed).

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the Development Control Committee held on 5 February 2013 be confirmed as a correct record subject to a minor amendment on Minute 13.DC.9 the word ‘Your’ which should have read ‘York’,  and signed by the Chair.

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any pecuniary interest in respect of matters contained in this agenda.

If you have a pecuniary interest you must withdraw from the meeting. Normally you should leave the room before the business starts to be discussed. You do, however, have the same right to speak as a member of the public and may remain in the room to enable you to exercise that right and then leave immediately. In either case you must not seek to improperly influence a decision on the matter.

There were no declarations of any interest submitted.

The Director of Partnerships, Planning and Policy has submitted 12 reports for planning applications to be determined (enclosed).

Please note that copies of the location and layout plans are in a separate pack (where applicable) that has come with your agenda.  Plans to be considered will be displayed at the meeting or may be viewed in advance by following the links to the current planning applications on our website.

http://planning.chorley.gov.uk/PublicAccess/TDC/tdc_home.aspx

The Director of Partnerships, Planning and Policy submitted twelve applications for planning permission.

In considering the applications, Members of the Development Control Committee took into account the agenda reports, the addendum and the verbal representations and submissions provided by officers and individuals.

Decision deferred until full application for new house on the land is scheduled for a future Committee

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That the decision deferred until the full application for new house on the land is scheduled for a future Committee

Planning permission approved subject a Section 106 legal agreement and conditions

Speakers: Objector – Kath Almond, Ward Councillor – Councillor Doreen Dickinson and the applicant’s agent – Matthew Symons.

RESOLVED (11:2:2) - That planning permission be approved subject to a Section 106 legal agreement and the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda. Members resolved that their support for parking restrictions to be included in any Section 278 agreement be conveyed to County Highways.

Planning permission approved subject to conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement and request that the land negotiations consider limiting the timescale for negotiations, parking for residents outside normal hours and providing the land sale income to support local improvements

Speaker: Ward Councillor – Councillor Alistair Bradley

RESOLVED (13:2:0) – That planning permission be approved subject to a Section 106 legal agreement with delegated authority to officers to negotiate an open space contribution to be reported back to Chair’s briefing and to Ward Members, the conditions within the report in the agenda and that a request that the land negotiations consider limiting the timescale for negotiations, parking for residents outside normal hours and providing the land sale income to support local improvements.

At that point the Chair announced that the following two items which related to Logwood Stables, Brinscall Mill Road, Wheelton, Chorley would be heard jointly but that the resolutions would be taken separately.

Planning permission approved subject to conditions

Speakers: Objector’s agent – Sophie Marshall and the applicant’s agent – Tony Lang.

RESOLVED (10:4:1) – That planning permission be granted on the grounds that the development related to:

1.    Positive economic benefit to the rural area of this particular business with the individual circumstances submitted and;

2.    This is a specialist rural business located within a rural community.

Permission was subject to conditions including lighting, hours of working, control of manure, external materials and a restorative scheme should the building no longer be used for the approved purpose the wording for which to be delegated to officers, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Development Control Committee. Discharge of the lighting condition to be reported back to Development Control Committee.

Planning permission approved subject to conditions

RESOLVED (10:4:1) – That retrospective planning permission be granted subject to conditions, the wording for which to be delegated to officers, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Development Control Committee.

Reserved matters planning permission approved subject to conditions

Speaker: Objector – Nick Hall

RESOLVED (14:0:1) – That the reserved matters planning permission be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda, and the additional conditions within the addendum.

(At this point Councillor Danny Gee left the room for the remainder of the meeting.)

Planning permission approved subject to conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement and conditions

Speaker: Applicant’s agent – Alban Cassidy

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That planning permission be approved subject to a Section 106 undertaking, the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda and the additional condition detailed in the addendum.

Planning permission approved subject to conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement

Speaker: Objector – Caroline Mead

RESOLVED (13:1:0) – That planning permission be approved subject to a Section 106 legal agreement, a condition relating to construction management and the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda.

Planning permission approved subject to conditions

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda.

Reserved matters planning permission approved subject to conditions

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That the reserved matters planning permission be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the report in the agenda and the amended condition detailed in the addendum. 

Approved

RESOLVED – That prior approval of the local planning authority was not required for the proposed demolition or restoration of the site.

Approved

RESOLVED – That prior approval of the local planning authority was not required for the proposed demolition or restoration of the site.

Report of the Director of Partnerships, Planning and Policy (enclosed).

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That the decision deferred until the full application for new house on the land is scheduled for a future Committee.

Members of the Committee considered two reports from the Head of Governance which sought instruction on whether to confirm Tree Preservation Orders be made permanent without modification.

Report of the Head of Governance (enclosed).

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That the Tree Preservation Order No. 4 (Charnock Richard) 2012 be confirmed without modification.

Report of the Head of Governance (enclosed)

RESOLVED (unanimously) – That the Tree Preservation Order No. 7 (Adlington) 2012 be confirmed without modification.

Members of the Committee received two reports from the Head of Governance which sought approval for formal revocation of Tree Preservation Orders.

Report of the Head of Governance (enclosed).

Resolved (12:1:1) – That the Tree Preservation Order No. 2 (Clayton-le-Woods) 2012 be revoked to allow a fresh order to be made to protect the trees covered by the Order.

Report of the Head of Governance (enclosed).

Resolved (12:2:0) – That the Tree Preservation Order No. 14 (Chorley) 2011 be revoked to allow a fresh order to be made to protect the trees covered by the Order.

Report of the Director of Partnerships, Planning and Policy (enclosed).

The Director of Partnerships, Planning and Policy submitted a report which gave notice of one planning appeal that had been lodged with the Planning Inspectorate, two appeals that had been dismissed, one planning appeal allowed, and one enforcement appeal that had been lodged.