Agenda and minutes

Members are asked to declare any interests in the items under consideration and in doing so state:

(1) the type of interest concerned either

(a)   personal interest

(b)   prejudicial interest

(c)    disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI)

and

(2) the nature of the interest concerned

If any member requires advice on declarations of interests, they are advised to contact the Head of Democratic Governance in advance of the meeting.

Councillors Hugo and Owen declared a prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 6, Planning Application 9/0149 – Anchorsholme Methodist Church, North Drive, Blackpool.  The nature of the interest being the potential impact of the development on their home address.

Councillor Stansfield declared a prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 7, Planning Application 18/0122 – 296-298 Highfield Road, Blackpool.  The nature of the interest being that the applicant was a personal friend.

Councillors T Williams declared that he owned property on Luton Road, however, clarified that his only interest in Agenda Item 6, Planning Application 9/0149 – Anchorsholme Methodist Church, North Drive, Blackpool was as a Ward Councillor.  Councillor Galley also declared that he was in attendance as Ward Councillor for the same application.

Councillor Baker, on commencement of Agenda Item 9, Planning Application - 442 Midgeland Road, Blackpool, declared a prejudicial interest in the item. The nature of the interest being that he was a member of the Marton Moss Neighbourhood Forum. 

To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 4 June 2019 as a true and correct record.

The Planning Committee considered the minutes of the last meeting held on 4 June 2019.

Resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting on 4 June 2019 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Committee to note that there have been no planning/enforcement appeals lodged or determined since the last meeting.

The Committee noted that there had been no planning/enforcement appeals lodged or determined since the last meeting.

The Committee will be asked to note the outcomes of the cases and support the actions of the Service Manager – Public Protection.

The Committee considered a report detailing the planning enforcement activity

undertaken within Blackpool during May 2019.

The report stated that 45 new cases had been registered for investigation, 9 cases had been resolved by negotiation without recourse to formal action and 22 cases had been closed as there was either no breach of planning control found, no action was appropriate or it was not considered expedient to take action.  The report also provided comparative information for the same period last year.

The report also noted that three enforcement notices had been authorised and notices served during May 2019.

Resolved: To note the outcome of the cases set out in the report and to support the

actions of the Service Manager, Public Protection Department, in authorising the notices.

To update the Planning Committee of the Council’s performance in relation to

Government targets.

The Committee considered the Planning Application and Appeals Performance Report and positive comments were made regarding the Council’s performance in relation to Government targets.

Resolved:  To note the report.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

The Committee considered planning application 19/0149 seeking planning permission for the erection of a single storey retail store with 21 car parking spaces and associated vehicle access and service access from North Drive including loading bay, service yard, external plant area with associated landscaping and boundary and service yard fencing.

Mr Shaw, Principal Planning Officer, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented an aerial view of the site and the site layout, location and elevational plans.  He also provided supplementary information from the highways engineer received following publication of the update note.  Mr Shaw provided a summary of the history of the site in terms of planning, advising that the second application approved in 2017 for eight houses was still valid. He advised that the last application submitted in November 2018 had been recommended for refusal for three reasons which included the availability of sequentially preferable sites, adverse impact on existing local centres and impact on the character of the street scene.  The applicant had subsequently withdrawn the application prior to it being considered by the Committee.

The application had subsequently been revised and Mr Shaw reported on the key changes from the original application.  The changes included a reduction to single storey, a reduced number of parking spaces, access to the site restricted to North Drive and a minimally larger floor space. The resubmitted application had been accompanied by a Sequential Test and Impact Assessment. The sequential test demonstrated there were no suitable available sites within the local centres or Cleveleys Town Centre following the intended occupation of the former Tesco store by another retailer. The Impact Assessment had indicated an impact on the local centres but in the planning officer’s view and following advice from the Council’s retail consultants, it was not considered that the impact would be sufficiently significant to justify refusal.  In the planning officer’s view the requirements of Policy CS4 of the Core Strategy had been met.  Mr Shaw referred to the Highways and Pedestrian Safety/Servicing and Car Parking Provision as detailed in the officer’s report that illustrated the Head of Highways and Traffic Management’s view that the proposed development was not considered to have an unacceptable impact on highway safety.  Mr Shaw also referred to the design of the development that had sought to address previous concerns regarding the visual impact on the streetscene.  With regards to the impact on the amenity of nearby residents Mr Shaw referred to the opening hours which were considered standard for this type of store, an acoustic fence along the eastern boundary of the site and a condition that could be attached to the permission if granted to restrict the delivery hours and size of delivery vehicles.  He advised that there had been no objection from Environmental Protection and no issues had been raised by them regarding the noise impact assessment submitted by the applicant.

Mr Shaw concluded by referring Members to the suggested amendment to proposed condition 6, restricting the display of goods  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

The Committee considered planning application 18/0122 seeking permission for the Installation of a new shop front, internal alterations and use of premises as altered as a mixed travel agency (Use Class A1) and associated administration offices (Use class B1).

Mr Johnston, Head of Development Management, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented a visual image of the shop frontage and the site layout and location plans.  He advised that it was a retrospective application and reminded the Committee that it had previously resolved to defer the application at its meeting on 20 June 2018 to enable the application to be amended in order that the Committee could consider the shopfront and use of the premises at the same time.  At the time the Committee had been generally satisfied with the design of the shop front. 

The Committee considered the application and agreed with the officer recommendation that the application be approved.

Resolved:  That the application be approved, subject to the conditions and for the reasons set out in the appendix to the minutes.

Background papers:  Applications, plans and replies to consultations on the application.

Note:  Councillor Stansfield, having declared a prejudicial interest, left the room prior to consideration of the above item and took no part in the discussion or voting on the application.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

The Committee considered planning application 18/0204 seeking outline planning permission for matters of access, layout and scale for the erection of a three-storey block of 12 self-contained flats accessed from Arnott Avenue with associated car parking and landscaping.

Miss Parker, Senior Planning Officer, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented an aerial view of the site and the site layout, location and elevational plans. She reported that the application was outline only at this stage to agree matters of access, layout and scale. The proposed development would be on the vacant site of the former Waterloo Methodist Church which was located in a primarily residential area.  The access to the site had been amended from Waterloo Road to Arnott Avenue in accordance with a request from the Head of Highways and Traffic Management. She also reported on further amendments to the design, layout, scale and footprint and advised on the separation distances designed to safeguard the amenity of the residents of neighbouring properties and the streetscene.  The parking provision was also considered to be acceptable.

Ms Harbinson, member of the public, spoke against the application. Her main concerns related to the impact of the proposed development on her amenity and that of her neighbours in terms of overlooking, privacy and an increase in traffic using Arnott Avenue and parking issues.

Miss Parker responded by advising that the level of parking provision was considered acceptable given the accessible location and referred to the requirement for there to be a severe impact on the highway to justify refusal. 

The Committee considered the application and noted the separation distances from the proposed development to neighbouring properties and that the orientation of the building had been designed to safeguard the amenities of the neighbouring residents.  It also noted the changes to the access from Waterloo Road to Arnott Avenue in response to a request by the Head of Highways and Traffic Management due to the proximity of the signalised junction.  It also noted that the applicant was seeking outline permission for matters of access, layout and scale only.

Resolved:  That the application be approved, subject to the conditions and for the reasons set out in the appendix to the minutes.

Background papers:  Applications, plans and replies to consultations on the application.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

Note:  On commencement of consideration of this item, Councillor Baker declared a prejudicial interest and left the room and took no part in the discussion or the voting upon the application.  The nature of the interest being that he was a member of the Marton Moss Neighbourhood Forum. 

The Committee considered planning application 19/0168 seeking outline planning permission for the erection of up to 19 retirement bungalows and an associated community building with car parking and landscaping.

Miss Parker, Senior Planning Officer, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented an aerial view of the site and the site layout and location plans. She explained that the outline planning application represented a resubmission of a previous application for 23 units that had subsequently been withdrawn by the applicant.  The current application was seeking permission for 19 retirement bungalows and means of access only.  Miss Parker advised that the application site fell within the designated Marton Moss Strategic Site and Marton Moss Conservation Area and the proposed access to the site was from Midgeland Road.  Members were referred to the additional information in the Update Note which included a letter provided on behalf of the applicant.

Miss Parker reminded the Committee of Policy CS26 of the Core Strategy that restricted development that was not considered appropriate for the area.  She acknowledged that there was a housing need within the town, however the Council was able to demonstrate the requirement for a five year housing supply and reported on the relatively remoteness and inaccessibility of the location.  The Committee was referred to the Head of Highways and Traffic Management’s comments regarding the distance of the site to the nearest bus stop and his view of the relatively inaccessibility of the site. She concluded by referring to the significant number of objections received as detailed in the report.

Ms Fish, member of the public, spoke against the application.  Her main concerns related to pedestrian and equine safety, particularly given the width of the roads in the area and increased traffic flow.  Other concerns included the access to the site, accessibility for emergency vehicles, and an adverse impact on the rural character of the area and the amenity of local residents.

The Committee considered the application and noted that the application site was within the Marton Moss Strategic Site and the Marton Moss Conservation Area and raised concerns regarding sustainability and overdevelopment of the area.

Resolved:  That the application be refused for the reasons set out in the Appendix in the minutes. 

Background papers:  Applications, plans and replies to consultations on the application.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

The Committee considered planning application 19/0172 seeking outline planning permission for the retention of a pedestrian footpath around the western perimeter of the extended holiday village.  With the Committee’s approval Members also considered late information provided by the public objector at the meeting.  The late information had  also been provided to the planning officer and applicant’s agent prior to consideration of the application.

Mr Johnston, Head of Development Management, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented an aerial view of the site and the site layout and location plans.  Visual images of the site were also provided along with videos showing the pathways.  Members were reminded that planning permission for an extension to the Holiday Village had been granted in 2017 which had included proposed improvements to the pathways and as part of the extension works improvements to the existing pathway had been undertaken. The pathway had been available for general use following the first phase of the extension, however subsequently the operator of the Holiday Village had erected a perimeter fence and gates to enable phase two of the development to be undertaken with appropriate signage to an alternative pathway around the perimeter of the site.  The current application sought to retain the alternative pathway around the perimeter of the site for enhanced security to be used in conjunction with the pathway through the site. It was proposed that the opening hours for the pathway around the perimeter would be during the hours of daylight.  The suggested opening hours were 9am to 7pm from March to December and 9am to 5pm from December to March which would enable year round access restricted to certain parts of the day, dependent on the season.  Mr Johnston referred to the information in the update note regarding proposed condition 2 relating to the management plan.

Mr Longworth, member of the public, spoke against the application.  He referred to the additional information that he had submitted at the meeting.  His main concerns included the absence of year round access to the pathway and the lack of accessibility for all, particularly the physically disabled.  He highlighted the aims of Policy CS6 of the Core Strategy in terms of accessibility of greenspace as a means of promoting health and wellbeing.  Further concerns included the height of the perimeter fence and the opening hours for the pathways.

Mr Matta, the Applicant’s Agent, spoke in support of the application.  He highlighted his view of the importance of the Holiday Village in terms of local employment and the tourism economy. He provided his view of the benefits of the application in providing an additional access route and choice of pathway for the general public, the upgrading of the pathways and additional security for the Holiday Village which in his view had improved following restricted access.

The Committee was shown videos to demonstrate the route of the pathway around the perimeter of the Holiday Village site, in response to questions from the Committee, it was confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Committee will be requested to consider an application for planning permission,

details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

Note:  Prior to consideration of this item, Councillor Stansfield left the room and took no further part in the meeting.

The Committee considered planning application 19/0176 seeking outline planning permission for the erection of up to 47 dwellings with vehicular access from Ryscar Way.

Miss Parker, Senior Planning Officer, provided the Committee with an overview of the application and presented an aerial view of the site and site location and layout plans. She referred to the comments from the Head of Highways and Traffic Management and reminded the Committee that access was not for consideration at this stage but could be conditioned at the reserved matters stage.  Miss Parker also referred to a number of proposed conditions to safeguard the hedgerows and maintain the character of the area and the standard requirement for a suitable drainage scheme.  Miss Parker concluded by advising that the proposed development formed part of the Council’s requirement to demonstrate a five year housing supply which weighed heavily in its favour and that no unacceptable impact from the proposed development was expected.

The Committee considered the application and agreed with the officer recommendation that the application be approved.

Resolved:  That the application be approved, subject to the conditions and for the reasons set out in the appendix to the minutes.

The Committee is asked to note the date of its next meeting as Tuesday 31 July 2019 at 6pm.

The Committee noted the date of the next meeting as Wednesday 31 July 2019 at 6pm.