Planning Committee

Cllr Rhodes declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 23/0011N as a governor of the applicant school.

Cllr Faddes declared a submitted objection to 22/4698N

Cllr Murray declared a submitted objection to 23/0042N

RESOLVED: That the minutes are approved as a true record of the meeting

None

RESOLVED: That whilst the committee does not object to the principle of development, the committee objects to the proposals on the following grounds:

i.                    That EV Charging point facilities are included to meet planning and also Cheshire East policies to support sustainability

ii.                   That waste storage operational details are provided in an accessible and clear format

iii.                 That the development demonstrates net biodiversity gain to fulfil planning and Cheshire East Council policy

iv.                 That the development demonstrates sustainable energy production (eg Solar/PV) to fulfil planning and Cheshire East Council policy

v.                   That the form of heating seeks to achieve sustainability (eg ground source heat pump or similar alternative method)

vi.                 That the development will create localised parking issues and the development should contribute towards mitigation and minimise the impact of related on street parking

vii.               The site does not provide the minimum parking provision within local plan policy

viii.             The location is not accessible in terms of public realm drop kerb crossings and access to public transport

RESOLVED: That the committee objects to the proposals based on the proximity of the site to sensitive buildings:

170m to Beechwood Primary School

245m to Adelaide School

235m to little cherubs pre school

45m to Pickmere Residential Home

45m to Cyprus Court Care Home

RESOLVED: The committee supports and welcomes the application but seeks enhancements to the proposals to meet planning policy and sustainability:

i.                    The provision of sustainable energy generation (eg Solar/PV)

ii.                   The provision of additional features that supports net biodiversity gain (eg bat boxes, invertebrate nesting, bird nesting)

iii.                 The provision of bike parking

No objection

No objection

i.                    The proposals represent overdevelopment of the site, creating high density accommodation.

ii.                   There is concern that the proposals are in effect a work around the intents and actions of the Article 4 Directive to reduce the proliferation of HMOs in Crewe

iii.                 The development will further exacerbate localised on street parking issues and associated congestion and risks to pedestrians and cyclists.

iv.                 The proposals do not demonstrate safe egress from the first floor in the event of an emergency

v.                   Lack of amenity space

vi.                 Risk of on street waste due to poor access to waste storage for 1^st floor accommodation which will have a negative impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents

RESOLVED: That the committee objects to the proposals on the following grounds:

i.                    Loss of heritage roof feature windows – The removal of the existing dormer features will be detrimental to the heritage character of the building and the overall street scene as the existing dormer features are in keeping with the surrounding properties. The dormers should be retained.

ii.                   Loss of gable end window 2^nd floor having a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the street scene

iii.                 The proposals demonstrate over development of the site and would deliver low quality/ high density accommodation

iv.                 It is not clear that adequate headroom on 2^nd floor living accommodation can be demonstrated

v.                   Lack of appropriate bike storage

vi.                 Lack of adequate bin storage which will lead to on street waste adversely impacting the amenity of neighbouring residents

vii.               Fire steps for 1^st & 2^nd floor should be provided to ensure safe egress in the event of an emergency

viii.             Risk of the basement being used as living and/or sleeping accommodation

ix.                 The development will further exacerbate localised on street parking issues and associated congestion and risks to pedestrians and cyclists.

x.                   Lack of amenity space

xi.                 The proposals do not demonstrate appropriate storage for waste for Flat 2, with a gate opening in to the public realm causing potential issues for others.

xii.               There is concern that the proposals demonstrate a work around of the intents and actions of the Article 4 Directive to reduce the proliferation of HMOs in Crewe

Whilst the committee does not object to the proposals, it is sought that the final design and finish of the shutters adds value to the street scene in terms of colour and design, potentially to reflect the attractive heritage nature of the building.

Whilst the committee does not object in principle, there should be clear conditions to limit any noise nuisance cased by use of the new facilities during anti-social hours that would be to the detriment of the amenity of adjoining and existing residential neighbouring properties

No objection

No objection

Noted

Members thanked the Cheshire East Officer and noted the engagement and consultation related to the Mini Holland proposals for south west Crewe

8.2 resident’s email received relating to application 22/4061N

Noted

9.1 Cllr Murray – 20’s Plenty in Cheshire East

RESOLVED: That the committee recommends to council that Crewe Town Council supports the principle of 20’s Plenty for Crewe.