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.

Councillor Gerard Walsh declared a personal interest in Item 6 and advised that whilst he did not consider himself to have a close association, he advised that he knew the applicant via charity work.

To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 25 July 2023 as a true and correct record.

The Committee considered the minutes of the last meeting held on 25 July 2023.

Resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 July 2023 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Planning Committee considered a report on Planning/Enforcement Appeals lodged and determined since the last meeting and was advised that two appeals had been lodged and five had been determined. Of the five appeals determined, two had been allowed and three had been dismissed.

Resolved:

To note the report.

The Committee will be asked to note the outcomes of the cases and support the actions of the Service Manager, Public Protection, for the July 2023 report.

The Committee considered the report which provided a summary of planning enforcement activity within Blackpool between 1 July and 31 July 2023. In total 60 new cases had been registered for investigation, 336 live cases were outstanding, 16 cases had been resolved by negotiation without recourse to formal action and 59 cases had been closed.

Resolved:

To note the update.

To update the existing Scheme of Delegation to reflect changes in Council structure and officer responsibilities and changes to the planning system since the existing scheme of delegation was adopted.

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Development Management that sought the Committee’s approval to update the existing Scheme of Delegation to reflect changes in the Council structure, officer responsibilities and changes to the planning system since the existing Scheme of Delegation had been adopted.

Ms S Parker, Head of Development Management, advised the Committee that the main change was to include major-scale applications proposed for refusal on the list of applications that can be determined under delegated powers, subject to written agreement from the Chair of Committee. This amendment would allow major-scale applications that were missing key information, or that were clearly contrary to planning policy, to be refused by officers within deadline without compromising the Council’s statutory planning performance deadlines.

The Committee discussed the report and was advised that the Committee had previously extended delegated powers to Senior Planning Officers and that these powers would only be used in the event of the Head of Development Management and Principal Planner being unavailable and for smaller applications. Ward Councillors would also retain the right to bring items before the Planning Committee.

Resolved:

To adopt the proposed amended Scheme of Delegation as outlined in the Committee report and Appendix 5(a).

To consider planning application number 21/1085 for erection of 52 houses on land to rear of 65-71 Moss House Road, Blackpool, FY4 5JF with associated public open space, landscaping, infrastructure and access from Moss House Road.

The Committee considered planning application 21/1085 for the erection of 52 houses with associated public open space, landscaping, infrastructure and access from Moss House Road situated on land to the rear of 65-71 Moss House Road, Blackpool.

Ms S Parker, Head of Development Management, presented the application to the Committee and provided an outline of the planning history of the site. In particular she noted that the site had originally been included within the originally approved Kensington development site but had been excluded from the second reserved matters scheme in 2017 as it was intended for use by United Utilities as part of a drainage framework for the area. Two smaller permissions had been granted on parts of the site which remained extant, along with the wider Kensington permission. In addition an area located in phase 2 of the original permission was also built on by Elan Homes.

The Committee was advised that whilst Kensington could legally continue to implement their original approval on the land, officers had no reason to believe that this was likely. Ms Parker informed the Committee that the application had not been determined before now due to matters of financial viability as the proposal was liable for significant planning obligations along with 30% affordable housing, which the applicant had sought to claim was not financially feasible. The applicant had submitted an appraisal in relation to this which had been reviewed by an independent consultant, which had resulted in a state of disagreement. Ms Parker confirmed that this disagreement had not been entirely resolved, however a level of affordable housing had been offered which had been considered justifiable by planning officers.

In relation to planning policies and procedures, the Committee was advised that the application had been submitted in 2021 prior to the adoption of Part 2 of the Local Plan. However as this had been approved by the Council and was in force at the time of determination of the application, it did constitute part of the Development Plan against which the proposal must be judged. In addition Ms Parker noted that the proposal made a notable contribution to the Borough’s housing supply, despite the fact that, given historic planning application in and around the site, the 600 homes allocated in the Core Strategy would not be achieved.

The Committee was advised that although the design of the scheme was considered acceptable and would provide a good standard of amenity for occupants, Ms Parker acknowledged that there were some shortfalls which included a failure to deliver a housing mix to accord with Policy, parking spaces fell short of minimum size standards and the scheme did not deliver street trees as required by the National Planning Policy Framework.

In relation to highways matters, access and egress from the site was originally proposed to be from Midgeland Road to the east, however the junction of Midgeland Road and Progress Way was already operating at capacity and in addition, a long vehicle exiting the site via Moss House  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To note the date of the next meeting as 10 October 2023.

Resolved:

To note the date of the next meeting as 10 October 2023.