Members of the public who have requested the opportunity to ask a question(s) on an item(s) on the agenda will be asked to put their question(s) to the respective Executive Member(s). Each member of the public will be allowed to ask one supplementary question within his/her allocated 3 minutes.
Minutes:
The Executive Leader reported that there had been a request from one member of the public to speak the agenda item relating to item 7: Chorley Council Performance Monitoring Quarter Four 2012/13.
The question was read out by Alan Whittaker: How satisfied are you with the performance of Chorley Council, the Planning Department and DC Committee in particular.
Mr Whittaker explained that he spoke on behalf of Heskin Parish Council and as a resident of the Borough. There were three aspects to the question.
Firstly in relation to Orcheton House which was a long standing issue relating to planning enforcement.
He was secondly unhappy that the Council had not notified Heskin Parish Council of a potential planning application on the former Camelot site. The Parish Council had become aware of the issue via an article in the local press which had been instigated by the developer.
The third aspect of the question related to a planning application for a slurry lagoon. He felt that the Council had placed no importance on the feelings of the Parish Council and the lack of amenity for the local residents.
Councillor Dennis Edgerley, Executive Member for LDF and Planning responded that he was satisfied with the performance, although he felt part of his role was to identify shortcomings and resolve them. Part of the agenda for the meeting included a report which included the performance of the Planning Department which had enable Mr Whittaker to ask his question. The issues which had been experienced by the department were now being resolved as set out in the report.
Councillor Edgerley explained that the Council were proactive in consultation processes. Steps were being taken to improve qualitative measures, including through several corporate projects.
Councillor Edgerley noted that the Council received around 350 enforcement complaints annually. The majority of these could be dealt with quickly; however, a few of these were long standing and could be extremely complex. The case of Orcheton House was one of the latter.
It was not possible for enforcement reports, which were presented to Development Control Committee, to be made publicly available as this would inform the subject of the enforcement of the Council’s enforcement plans.
On the second point, in relation to the former Camelot site, Councillor Edgerley explained that the Council had been in discussions with the developer and had told them to consult with the Parish Council. At the current time a planning application had not been submitted for the Council to consult on.
The site had not been allocated as part of the Local Plan process, which had been widely consulted upon at various stages, including with all Parish Councils. The site was considered a previously developed site within the greenbelt. The developer had also attending the Local Plan hearing to make representations on the site. At the current time the inspector had given an interim view on the Local Plan.
These facts meant that Councillor Edgerley could not accept that the Council had failed to consult, as there was no application to consult upon.
On the third point, in relation to the slurry lagoon application, Councillor Edgerley advised that slurry was already dealt with on the site. It was incorrect to say that the views of local people had not been taken into account. Councillor Edgerley had himself requested that the application be deferred from the last Committee to enable Members to attend a site visit and to have a technical briefing on the matter. Members had taken time to take all of the information on board. Councillor Edgerley noted that a condition would be proposed that restricted the slurry to that generated on the farm.
Mr Whittaker thanked Councillor Edgerley for his response. He commented it would have been appreciated if the Council had kept the Parish Council informed of the progress. He reiterated his view that the Council ought to have told the Parish Council about the potential planning application on the former Camelot site and that communication ought to be two way.
Councillor Alistair Bradley, Executive Leader, advised that the Council had a new strategy, to be discussed later on the agenda in relation to communications. In addition to this, the Council held regular meetings with the Parish Councils and held Neighbourhood Meetings which had Parish Council representation. He accepted that improvements could always be made.