Planning Committee Meeting
MINUTES of the meeting held on 22/05/2023
In attendance:
Cllr John Rhodes
Cllr Lena Hogben
Cllr Steve Hogben
Cllr Marilyn Houston
Cllr Jamie Messent
Cllr Toni Mortimer
Cllr Kev Murray
Cllr Dennis Straine-Francis
| PL/23/1/1 | To appoint a chair of the Planning Committee | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| RESOLVED: That Cllr John Rhodes is elected chair of the committee | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/2 | To appoint a deputy chair of the Planning Committee | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| RESOLVED: That Cllr Jamie Messent is elected deputy chair of the committee | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/3 | To receive apologies for absence | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| None | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/4 | To note declarations of Members’ interests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23/1675N – Cllr Straine-Francis declared a pecuniary interest in this application and a close resident to the application site, taking no part in the discussion and abstaining from the voting
23/1523N – Cllr Houston declared a non-pecuniary interest in this application as a governor of the school, taking no part in the discussion and abstaining from the voting |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/5 | To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 20th March 2023 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| RESOLVED: That the minutes are approved as a true record of the meeting | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/6 | Public Participation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| A period not exceeding 15 minutes for members of the public to ask questions or submit comments that relate to the items within the agenda.
A resident spoke on 23/1675N, expressing comments received by Sydney Area residents Association of concern relating to the application, its over bearing nature and proximity to a large number of residences. It was commented that the proposal would be better placed in a less developed location further from homes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PL/23/1/7 |
To consider making a response to the following planning applications:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No Objection
No Objection
The proposal sees the removal of mature trees and also the provision of additional hard standing. Whilst the committee does not object the following issues must be addressed within the proposals prior to further consideration and potential conditioned approval
i. That the development should include for sustainable energy production (eg roof mounted PV) (CEC Planning Policy) ii. That the development should ensure net biodiversity gain (CEC Planning Policy) iii. That the development should include for replanting to more than replace removed trees and lost green space (CEC Planning Policy) iv. That the development should provide details of SUDS and flooding impact assessment due to increased hard standing and risk of additional rainwater run off (CEC Planning Policy) v. That the development should provide for additional cycle parking and EV charge points (CEC Planning Policy)
RESOLVED: That the committee objects to the proposal, supporting the concerns expressed by the residents’ Association and reflecting comments submitted to the planning authority relating to the application, on the following grounds: i. The site is less than 140m from Lansdowne play area and park, which considered a sensitive area, used by the full range of residents including families and young people. ii. The location is considered unsustainable due to obstructive and overbearing nature of the scale of the proposals iii. The proposals are not in scale with the surrounding properties and developments and would be more appropriately sited away from the proposed site iv. The proposed site is an inappropriate location due to housing density.
RESOLVED: That this committee objects to the proposal on the following grounds i. That the proposal represents overdevelopment of the property ii. That the Article 4 directives for Crewe identify the negative social and environmental impacts in this area of Crewe of high density and low quality housing that HMOs provide. iii. That there is no provision for secure cycle storage iv. That room sizes do not meet minimum technical housing standards, which CEC has adopted within policy HOU8.3. v. Loss of amenity for neighbouring residents due to on street waste and ASB vi. Inadequate parking provision due to already observable on street parking issues in that area.
[Cllr Mortimer joined the meeting]
No Objection, but seeks that the lighting is retained and maintained. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/8 | To consider making responses to any urgent planning application consultations that have arisen since this agenda was published
No Objection
No Objection
No objection, but seek obscured glass on any overlooking aspects and gable end elevations
No Objection
No Objection
No Objection |
| Application No: | 22/4698N |
| Proposal: | Demolition of all buildings and structures and the erection of 47 no. retirement living apartments (Use Class C3) all of which would be affordable homes, along with parking spaces, landscaping and associated works. |
| Location: | Sydney Cottage Farm, HERBERT STREET, CREWE, CW1 5LZ |
RESOLVED: That, whilst the committee does not object to the principle of the development, it sustains its objection to the proposal on the following grounds:
- That the development must demonstrate net biodiversity gain as per planning policy (it was not possible to clearly identify this has been demonstrated from the revised plans and documents).
- That the development demonstrates sustainable energy production as per planning policy (it was not possible to clearly identify this has been demonstrated from the revised plans and documents).
- That the form of heating seeks to achieve sustainability eg ground source heat pump or similar method, as per planning policy (it was not possible to clearly identify this has been demonstrated from the revised plans and documents).
- The site does not provide the minimum parking provision within local plan policy and this will inevitably lead to on street parking issues to the detriment of the amenity of neighbouring residences
- It was considered that the proposals are too dense for the site hence the difficulty in provision for parking and meeting policies associated with sustainability
| Application No: | 23/1897N |
| Proposal: | Proposed single storey side and rear extension. |
| Location: | 6, ARDERNE AVENUE, CREWE, CW2 8NS |
No Objection
| PL/23/1/9 | To note responses submitted under delegation since the previous meeting |
| PL/23/1/10 | To note and/or consider correspondence, consultations, planning policy circulated by the planning authority (Cheshire East Council) and member items | ||||||||||||
| 10.1 Cheshire East consultation on diversion of footpath FP5 (associated with planning application 22/4698N)
No objection 10.2 Cheshire East consultation on held funds associated with developments’ provision for affordable housing and community benefit agreements The clerk was directed to respond to the consultation to seek to ensure the funds are secured specifically for the purpose of delivery in Crewe |
|||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/11 | To note correspondence associated with planning enforcement
11.1
Noted
11.2
|
||||||||||||
| Noted | |||||||||||||
| PL/23/1/12 | To note the proposed date of the next meeting Monday 26th June 2023 at 6pm. |
Meeting closed at 7.19pm
Chair Cllr John Rhodes
Clerk P Turner
Recent Comments