Agenda and minutes

Councillors Critchley, Hutton and Stansfield declared a prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 6, Planning Application 15/0842 – Land bounded by Stirling Road, Mather Street, Collingwood Avenue and rear of Addison Crescent (Queens Park and Layton Recreation Ground).  The nature of the interest being that they were Council appointed directors of Blackpool Coastal Housing Ltd who would be responsible for managing the housing units should the application be approved.

To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 9 February 2016 as a true and correct record.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 February 2016 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Committee considered a report outlining details of planning and enforcement appeals lodged and determined since the last meeting.

Resolved:  To note the planning and enforcement appeals lodged and determined.

Background papers: (1) Letters from the Planning Inspectorate dated 2 February 2016. (2) Letter from the Planning Inspectorate dated 3 February 2016. (3) Letter from the Planning Inspectorate dated 16 February 2016.

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 summarising planning and enforcement activity within Blackpool during January 2016.

Resolved:  To note the outcomes of the cases set out in the report and to support the actions of the Service Manager, Public Protection in authorising the notices.

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 application 15/0702 for the use of existing temporary egress and servicing access/exit onto Fleetwood Road as permanent egress from amended supermarket car park.

Mr Shaw, Principal Planning Officer, presented the Committee with a brief overview of the application and site layout plans.

Members were advised that temporary planning permission had been granted in October 2014 for a period of two years for the use of the servicing access from Fleetwood Road as an egress for customers from the car park in order to relieve congestion at the junction of Anchorsholme Lane West and Fleetwood Road. The application under consideration was requesting permission for permanent use of the egress onto Fleetwood Road. 

The Committee considered the representations made against the proposal, particularly in relation to safety concerns raised by objectors due to a conflict of traffic between vehicles egressing the site onto Fleetwood Road and residents’ vehicles entering and egressing neighbouring properties. In response to questions from Members, Mr Patel, Group Engineer, Traffic Management, confirmed that he was not aware of any reported accidents at this location since the temporary permission had been granted and although he had received complaints he considered that they were due to poor driver behaviour rather than as a result of the temporary arrangement.  Mr Patel confirmed that he did not consider that there were sufficient highway concerns to justify objecting to the proposal.  

Whilst the Committee acknowledged the difficulties for residents accessing and egressing neighbouring properties, it was also mindful of the improvement in the traffic flow as a result of the egress from the application site onto Fleetwood Road and did not consider that the proposal would result in an increase in highway safety issues.

Resolved:  That the application be approved.

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 application 15/0842 for the erection of two and three storey development comprising 81 dwelling houses and 18 self-contained permanent flats, with associated  public open space, play areas, car parking, with accesses from Stirling Road, Laycock Gate and Phase 1, boundary treatment and landscaping works (Phase 2 of Queens Park Redevelopment) following the demolition of existing buildings (including Churchill Court, Walter Robinson Court and Elizabeth Court high-rise flats and Boys and Girls Club).

Mr Shaw presented the Committee with a brief outline of the application and site layout plans.  He advised Members that the application was Phase 2 of the residential development of the site and that Phase 1 had been completed.  He reminded Members that outline planning permission for the second phase of the redevelopment had previously been granted.  Mr Shaw reported on a slight reduction in the number of houses from 106 to 99 from the original outline planning application. 

The Committee was informed of an amount of £600,000 that had been set aside for an upgrade to the recreation ground with considerably improved facilities would be funded.  Mr Shaw reported that temporary facilities had been provided for the Boys and Girls Club following demolition of the community facility and that work was ongoing in relation to securing permanent premises for the Club.

Mr Shaw referred to the information in the Update Note that had been circulated to Members which detailed slight amendments to the floor levels of the proposed plots following development of the detailed drainage network design at the site.  Further consultation on the changes had been undertaken and as the consultation period was not due to expire until 14 March 2016, the officer’s recommendation had been changed to agree the application in principle and delegate approval to the Head of Development Management, subject to no significant objections being received.

In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr Shaw confirmed that if significant objections were received the application would be brought back to Committee for consideration.

Responding to further questions, Mr Shaw referred to proposed condition 4 which would be attached to the permission if approved, which required improvements to the on-site play/open space provision prior to occupation of any dwelling.  Although no formal scheme had yet been agreed, he confirmed that there would be a replacement open space area to compensate for the loss of public space.

Resolved: To agree in principle the granting of the application, subject to conditions, and to delegate the issuing of the decision notice to the Head of Development Management, provided no significant objections being received as a result of the recent consultation.

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

NOTE:  Councillors Critchley, Hutton and Stansfield, having declared a prejudicial interest, left the meeting for the duration of this 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 outline application 15/0859 for the erection of a four storey mixed use (retail, food and leisure) development on the existing surface level car park.

Mr Johnston, Head of Development Management presented the Committee with a brief overview of the application and the site layout plans.  He reported on a previous permission that had been granted for a part four/part five storey building on the site that had since lapsed.  The site had been allocated for development in the Blackpool Local Plan and the application was in accordance with Policy SR1 of the Plan.

Mr Johnston referred to the proposed conditions to be attached to the application and suggested that, if the Committee approved the application, proposed condition 8 should be removed as it was a duplication of proposed condition 3.

In response to a question regarding the percentage split of space for retail and leisure use, Mr Johnston confirmed that proposed condition 6 restricted the use of the ground floor to A1 retail and A3 restaurant/ café use to ensure that there was only retail and food offer on the ground floor whilst the upper floors would be available for mixed use purposes.

A Member of the Committee questioned the lack of detailed plans and Mr Johnston explained that the application was for outline planning permission only and that a further application that dealt with reserved matters would be submitted to a future meeting of the Committee for consideration.  

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.

The Committee considered application 15/0868 for the erection of a 12.6 metre high building to form a new elephant house with enclosure, hay store, landscaping, viewing platform and associated ramped access.

Mr Johnston provided the Committee with a brief overview of the application and site layout plans for the proposed development.  He referred to Policy RR15 of the Blackpool Local Plan which was generally supportive of developments at the site, subject to meeting specified criteria.  He advised that the application provided for improved public viewing and enhanced internal and external facilities for the animals, relative to the existing provision. 

Members were advised that the Update Note detailed the minimum standards for internal and external floorspace and Mr Johnston confirmed that the proposed development exceeded those requirements.  In response to a question, Mr Johnston confirmed that he was unware of any plans to demolish the building currently used for housing elephants and that, as it was a locally listed building, appropriate approval would be needed prior to its demolition. 

Mr Johnston referred to the significant number of objections to the application that had been received which were related to ethical and welfare issues rather than relating to legitimate planning considerations.

Members of the Committee acknowledged the concerns raised by the objectors relating to the ethics of keeping elephants in captivity and the welfare of the animals.  Although the Committee gave careful consideration to the concerns raised, it agreed that the issues raised were not material planning considerations and therefore were not relevant in determining the merits of the application before it. 

Members noted the reassurances that had been provided in the officer’s report and the Update Note in terms of the size and design of the proposed development and the applicant’s adherence with necessary licence requirements.  The Committee considered that the application, if approved, would provide enhanced facilities for the elephants. It agreed that there were no material planning considerations that would justify refusal of the application.

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.