Agenda item

The Committee is requested to consider an application for planning permission, details of which are set out in the accompanying report.

The Committee considered planning application 17/0060 for the re-development of Anchorsholme Park to include new pumping station and associated buildings, storage tank control building, six vent stacks, erection of cafe and bowling club/maintenance building, re-contouring and landscaping of Park, new amphitheatre feature, new footpaths, provision of MUGA (multi-use games area), trim trail, and children’s playground, new access from Princes Way, new walls and fencing. (Re-submission of 15/0820)

Mr Shaw, Principal Planning Officer, presented the Committee with an overview of the application and the proposed site layout and elevational plan, location plan and aerial views of the site.  He reminded Members of a previous scheme that had been granted planning permission and that the current application represented a revision of the original scheme.  He reported on the amendments in the revised application, the main one being the location of the water pumps above ground.  He also reminded Members that the application before it had been deferred by the Committee at its meeting in April 2017 due to concerns relating to the lack of detail in the application and the extent of the changes from the previously approved scheme.  Consideration of the application had also been deferred by the Committee at its last meeting due to concerns that appropriate notice of consideration of the application had not been given to local residents.

Mr Shaw reported on the requirement to improve sea water quality and reduce the risk of flooding which the application sought to do.  He advised the Committee on the expected benefits of the scheme which included the gain of a high quality park and improved flood protection. He confirmed that no objections to the revised scheme had been received from the Council’s Highways department, Parks department, Environmental Protection department or Lancashire Constabulary.  The revised scheme was considered sustainable and in accordance with local and national policy.  Responding to questions from the Committee, Mr Shaw reported on discussions he had had with Environmental Protection colleagues regarding noise levels and referred to the report which detailed the outcome of those discussions.

Ms Firth spoke in objection to the application and referred to additional information that she had circulated to Members at the meeting.  Her main concerns related to the lack of consultation by the applicant, potential noise, vibration and odour from the location of the pumps above ground and the changes to swale drainage.  She presented her view that the scheme would be contrary to the Council’s Core Strategy for reasons which included that it would not enhance the character and appearance of the area.

Councillor T Williams, Ward Councillor, spoke in objection to the application and questioned the reasons behind the changes which in his view were detrimental to the previously approved scheme.  He expressed doubts as to the asserted use of the pumps due to a lack of comparative evidence and the above average amount of rainfall in Blackpool.  Further concerns raised included potential noise from the water pumps, health and safety issues from the swale drain and the appearance of the Park.

Councillor Galley, Ward Councillor, also spoke in objection to the application and expressed similar concerns as the previous objectors in terms of noise, odour and vibration from the relocation of the pumps above ground and their potential impact on residents’ properties.  He also expressed concern regarding the extent of the area that United Utilities had agreed to undertake surveys on properties within and considered that this ought to be extended. Further concerns related to the design of the park and its impact on users and residents and potential drainage and flooding issues. He requested the Committee to consider including a condition to install CCTV and lighting to deter anti-social behaviour.  In response to a question from the Chairman, Councillor Galley referred to the handout distributed by Ms Firth which in his view demonstrated the poorer quality of materials to be used in the revised scheme.

Mr Watson, on behalf of the applicant, accompanied by Mr Sharp, spoke in support of the application.  He reported that a number of consultation events had been held which had resulted in changes to the revised scheme. He explained the reasons for the relocation of the motors for the pumps above ground which included a reduced risk of pump failure and flooding of nearby properties and ease of future maintenance.  He reported his view that the noise levels would be the same as the previously approved scheme and outlined improvements in the revised scheme which included upgrading of the pathways and an increase in green space retained for the park. He expressed willingness to accept conditions being attached to the planning permission, if granted, in relation to noise and the installation of ducting and wiring for lighting and CCTV provision. The Committee questioned the reasons that United Utilities could not revert to the previous design and Mr Watson responded by advising that it could not revert back to the earlier design as it posed a greater risk of breakdown of the pumps which could result in a greater risk of flooding. 

On invitation from the Chairman, Mr Latham, Park Services Manager, confirmed that the Council’s Parks department was satisfied with the revised scheme and reported on expected improvements to the park as a result of the scheme.

During consideration of the application, the Committee raised concerns relating to the impact of noise on local residents and considered that a condition imposing a maximum noise level would be necessary to avoid impacting on the amenity of local residents.  In response to questions from the Committee, Mr Shaw reported that enforcement action could be undertaken for non-compliance with planning conditions.  The Committee also raised concerns regarding potential anti-social behaviour incidents and considered that a further condition relating to the installation of ducting and wiring to enable future lighting and CCTV provision would be appropriate.

The Committee also questioned the removal of the swale drain in the southern area of the Park that had been included in the original approved application. Mr Sharp responded by presenting his view that the swale drain in the original approved application had subsequently been deemed unnecessary and had been reduced in length accordingly, however, it could be extended if required.

The Committee noted the significant concerns raised in objection to the revised scheme, however, it did not consider it reasonable to refuse the application on this basis but did consider that appropriate additional conditions would be necessary to mitigate those concerns.

The Committee agreed:  That the application be approved, subject to the conditions, including additional conditions relating to compliance with a maximum noise level of 36 Decibels, the installation of ducting and wiring for lighting and CCTV in the Park and a reversion to the original approved swale drainage scheme, and for the reasons set out in the appendix to the minutes.

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