Agenda and minutes

a)    Webcasting;

b)    Introductions of Members and Officers;

c)    Other announcements.

The Chair announced the following:

a)    The meeting was being broadcast live to the internet via the usual webcasting facility and was capable of repeated viewing. The images and sound recording could be used for training purposes within the Council. The Chair had the discretion to terminate or suspend filming if it was his opinion that continuing to do so would prejudice the proceedings of the meeting. Any views expressed by any speaker in the meeting were the speaker’s own and did not necessarily reflect the views of Staffordshire Moorlands District Council.

b)    Members of the Committee and Officers present were introduced by the Chair.

c)    Members had made site visits the day before the meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 29 February 2024 be approved as a correct record.

There were none.

i. Disclosable Pecuniary Interests;

ii. Other Interests;

iii. Lobbying Interests.

RESOLVED:

That the Late Representations report be noted.

Installation of a 49.9 solar photovoltaric array/solar farm with associated infrastructure (Cross boundary site with East Staffordshire Borough Council

(Report recommended approval subject to conditions)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application

Mr Neil Warburton – local resident

Cllr Steve Buckley – Parish Councillor

Cllr Toby Collins – Parish Councillor

For the application

Mr Chris Sowerbutts – applicant

Members debated the scale, type, and location of the proposed development together with the potential environmental and significant visual impact on the surrounding area and local residential amenity.  It was suggested that there should be greater distance between the panels and neighbouring properties.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations be noted;

2.    That contrary to officers’ recommendation the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

a.    Contrary to policies DC1, DC3,SD2 and SD4

b.    Contrary to policy SS10 (paragraphs 3.3 and 4.2)

c.    Impact of the site in terms of visual and residential amenity

d.    Detrimental impact on the landscape

e.    Cumulative impact of the development on the area

3.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Flunder and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

(Councillor O’Shea did not take part in the consideration or voting on the application)

Variation of condition 9 of SMD/2023/0343 to permit the use of the access with Gorsey Bank for a maximum of 30 days per calendar year (without the use being restricted to the summer months / 1^st May to 30^th September)

(Report recommended approval subject to conditions)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Ms Linda Brookes – Local Resident

Ms Tracy Kirton – Local Resident (written statement read out on her behalf by Ms Brookes)

For the application:

Mr Rob Duncan – Agent

Members considered the impact of the proposal on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations report be noted;

2.    That, contrary to officers recommendation, the application be REFUSED due to the adverse impact on neighbouring residential amenity;

3.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Hulme)

Change of use from Agricultural Building to Category B Vehicle Maintenance and Repair workshop (Use Class B2)

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Mr David Byatt – Agent

Members commented on the desire to support diversification of the farm business and the re-use of existing buildings subject to suitable conditions.  Some concern was expressed regarding the rural location of the proposal.

RESOLVED:

1.    That contrary to officers’ recommendation, the application be APPROVED for the following reasons:

a.    The proposal is in accordance with policy E1 and SS10 (paragraphs 1 and 2)

b.    Support for the diversification of the farm

c.    Support for rural jobs and income for farmers;

2.    That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services in consultation with the Chair to determine suitable conditions and informatives to attach to the approval, including the conditions recommended by Environmental Health as set out at paragraph 6.5 of the report, and the times of operation

3.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Flunder)

This application had been deferred to a future meeting

Proposed single storey extension

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Ms Della Rowbottom – Applicant

Councillor Linda Malyon – Ward Councillor

Members considered the impact of the proposal in relation to the main building in terms of size and material, the public benefit and overall harm to the historic significance of the Grade II Listed Building.

RESOLVED:

That the applications be deferred to enable further discussions by the applicant with officers around the design of the proposed extension.

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor L Swindlehurst)

(A motion to refuse the application had been moved by Councillor Cawley and seconded by Councillor Johnson but was lost)

Change of use of agricultural land to dog walking field with associated fencing, landscaping and parking, and improvements to existing vehicular access and bio-diversity

(Report recommended refusal)

Representation received from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Lucy Gellatley – Applicant

Cllr Gary Bentley – Supporter

Cllr Mark Deaville – Ward Councillor (written statement read by the Legal Representative)

Members received responses to questions concerning whether the applicant resided at the site, security arrangements and limits around the numbers of dogs at one time.  Members considered matters relating to sustainability, tourism and employment opportunities.  Regarding opening hours, it was suggested that this could be restricted to daylight hours during the winter months.  Arrangements for dealing with dog waste were set out.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations Report be noted;

2.    That contrary to officers’ recommendation, the application be APPROVED for the following reason:

a.    The application is in accordance with Policies C1 ad SO 6 & 7 in terms of employment opportunities and tourism

3.    That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services in consultation with the Chair to determine suitable conditions and informatives to attach to the approval, including the conditions recommended by Environmental Health as set out at paragraph 6.5 of the report, and the times of operation

4.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Cawley and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

Outline for residential development with access considered (all other matters reserved)

(Report recommended approval subject to conditions and the prior completion of a S106 Agreement)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Councillor Ken Unwin – Parish Councillor

Councillor Mike Worthington – County Councillor

Councillor Stephe Ellis – Parish Councillor

Councillor James Aberley – Ward Councillor

For the application:

Mr John Coxon – Applicant

Members sought and received clarification from the Legal Advisor around the additional education contribution from the applicant as set out in the Late Representations Report. Members also considered the location of the proposed development being within open countryside, the scale of the proposed development, the lack of supporting infrastructure, the potential for visual harm, impact of local landscape character and visual intrusion into the countryside.  Concern was also expressed around the potential impact on highways in the area.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations Report be noted;

2.    That contrary to Officers’ recommendation, the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

a.    That the proposal is contrary to spatial polices in the adopted Local plan which seek to focus new housing development on sites within the Development boundary of Cheadle contrary to SS2, SS3, SS4, SS10 and H1  

b.    The proposal would result in adverse landscape and visual  harm contrary to Policy DC3

c.    The proposal would result in harm to the setting of Broad Hayes Farmhouse, a Grade II Listed building and harm to the visibility of St Giles church, Grade 1 Listed in Cheadle contrary to Policy DC2

3.    That an informative be added to the decision notice to express Members’ concern regarding highway safety in respect of the proposed roundabout and traffic speeds on Froghall Road and the fact that this proposal will lead to increased levels of traffic congestion in the town centre including at key junctions.

4.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Plant)

Demolition of existing buildings on site.  Redevelopment to provide a good store (Class E) and associated access, car parking and landscaping works.

(Report recommended approval subject to S106 agreement and conditions)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Rebecca Dias – Applicant

Councillor Stephen Ellis – Town Councillor

Councillor Gary Bentley – Ward Councillor

Members welcomed this project, and consideration was given to the inclusion of additional energy efficiency measures and enhanced public transport initiatives in the area.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations Report be noted;

2.    That the application be APPROVED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the amended recommendation as set out in the Late Representations Report;

3.    That an informative be added to the decision notice suggesting support for enhanced public transport initiatives in the area;

4.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Plant)

Change of use from dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to care home for children (Use Class C2)

(Report recommended approval)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Ms Xanthe Downings – Resident

Mr Jamie Lewis – Resident

Mr Christopher Miles – Resident

For the application:

Mr Rob Duncan – Agent

Mr Alex Hayward – Applicant

Members sought and received information from the applicant around how long the business had been in operation and matters relating to Ofsted.  Members considered the location of the proposal, the residential amenity of neighbouring properties, anti-social behaviour issues in the area and the absence of police support for the proposal and the need to support vulnerable children.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the application be approved for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report;

2.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Cawley and seconded by Councillor Kempster)

Construction of 9 extra care units/dwellings (C2), communal lounge/office building and associated works

(Report recommended approval subject to S106 and conditions)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Caroline Rayne – Applicant

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations Report be noted;

2.    That the application be APPROVED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report, subject to:

a.    the additional condition from the Tree and Landscape Consultee as set out in the Late Representations Report

3.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Flunder and seconded by Councillor Cawley)

Proposed change of use of former reservoir structure to a single dwellings

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Councillor Dave Proudlove – Parish Councillor

Mr Peter Yates – Planning Consultant

Mr Paul Adams – Architect / Agent

Councillor Jim Garvey – Ward Councillor

Councillor Andrew Hart – Ward Councillor

Members considered design and landscape matters and the re-use of a redundant structure.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations Report be noted;

2.    That, contrary to officers’ recommendation, the application be APPROVED for the following reasons:

a.    The application is in accordance with policies DC1 and DC3 in terms of design and landscape matters

3.    That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services in consultation with the Chair to determine suitable conditions and informatives to attach to the approval, including the conditions recommended by the Trees and Landscape consultee as set out in the Late Representations Report

4.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Cawley and seconded by Councillor L Swindlehurst)

The application has been deferred to a future meeting

Outline planning permission with all matters reserved for a proposed 2 storey dwellings located on vacant land off Tongue Lane, Brown Edge

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Simon Burgess – Agent

Members considered the objection to the application from the Coal Authority, the effect on the Green Belt and the insufficient ecology information.

RESOLVED:

That the application be deferred to enable the applicant to obtain and submit the outstanding coal mining and ecology information as set out in the report.

(Proposed by Councillor Plant and seconded by Roberts)

Outline application for a single affordable dwelling

(Report recommends refusal)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Ms Lisa Egerton – Applicant’s daughter

Ms Teresa Critchlow – Agent

Councillor Mike Worthington – Ward Councillor

Members considered matters relating to the Green Belt and development boundaries, affordable housing and the loss of bio-diveristy.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representations report be noted;

2.    That the application be REFUSED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report;

3.    That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision

(Proposed by Councillor Johnson and seconded by Councillor Kempster)

(A proposal to approve the application had been moved by Councillor Emery and seconded by Councillor Roberts but was lost)

Demolition of existing public house and erection of farm shop and café/restaurant with associated works including change of use of adjacent field to car park, upgrading and improvement to existing field access and hard and soft landscaping.

(Report recommends refusal)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Councillor Mike Worthington – Supporter

Ms Teresa Critchlow – Agent

Members considered the impact on the Green Belt, the increase in footprint of the proposed development and the deterioration of the former public house building.

RESOLVED:

That the application be deferred to enable further discussions by the applicant with officers.

(Proposed by Councillor Plant and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

The Committee considered whether notwithstanding the objections received, the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) No. SM.330 should be confirmed with modifications as summarised in Section 2.4 of the report and shown on the proposed amended plans attached at Appendices B & C, and proposed amended schedule attached at Appendix D.

(Report recommended approval)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Mr Stuart Greenhalgh – Resident

Mr John Frewer – Resident

Councillor Phil Barks – Resident

Mr & Mrs Shuker - a letter in support of the confirmation of the TPO from the owner of Westwood Hall Farm was read by the Legal Advisor.

RESOLVED:

That, notwithstanding the objections received, the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) No. SM.330 be confirmed with modifications as summarised in Section 2.4 of the report and shown on the proposed amended plans attached at Appendices B & C, and proposed amended schedule attached at Appendix D.

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Johnson)

(Councillor Cawley withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of and voting on the application)

The Chair to move:-

 “That pursuant to Section 100A (2) and (4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or nature of the proceedings whereby it is likely that exempt information as defined in Section 100A (3) of the Act would be disclosed to the public in breach of the obligation of confidence or exempt information as defined in Section 100I (1) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act would be disclosed to the public by virtue of the paragraphs indicated.”

The Chair moved:

That pursuant to Section 100A (2) and (4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or nature of the proceedings whereby it is likely that exempt information as defined in Section 100A (3) of the Act would be disclosed to the public in breach of the obligation of confidence or exempt information as defined in Section 100I (1) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act would be disclosed to the public by virtue of the paragraphs indicated.

RESOLVED:

That the exempt minutes of the meeting held on 29 February 2024 be approved as a correct record.