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 during the morning of the meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 23 May 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.

Change of use from retail to mixed use of retail and cafe within Use Classes E(a) and E(b).

(Report recommended approval subject to conditions)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Andy Beckett – Local Resident

Jane McGowan – Local Resident

Gary Ibbs – Local Resident

For the application:

Natalie Taylor – Applicant

Andrew Wright – Local Resident

In response to a question raised over whether this was a retrospective change of use, Officers advised that the applicant was entitled to apply retrospectively and the application would be considered in the same way by assessing the proposal against the policy. Officers responded to concerns raised about failures to comply with the previous application by advising that it was a separate issue and that it was currently with enforcement.

Members thanked the speakers for their constructive approach and suggested the applicant hold discussions with local residents. Members discussed hedge laying, the presumptive use on site and the requirement to follow the rules.

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.

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 that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(Proposed by Councillor Flunder and seconded by Councillor Pointon)

Alterations and extension to existing dwelling house, extension of domestic curtilage and retention of detached garage.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Teresa Critchlow - Agent

Jenny Thompson – Applicant

Cllr Mike Haines – Ward Councillor

Members noted how they could not judge an application based on personal circumstance and the decision would be made based on planning policy. They discussed the history of application refusals for the site and the tie to the Equestrian Centre.

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 that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Hoptroff)

Outline application for erection of 3 dwellings including details of means of access.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application

Mark Bullock – Applicant

Kim Malkin – Agent

Cllr Mark Deaville – letter read out by Justin Price-Jones

Members noted that they could not judge an application based on personal circumstances and the decision would be made based on planning policy, however, they did express their sympathy for the applicant’s circumstances. Members discussed that there was no medical statement to support the applicant, that the site was in green belt, refusal of development on neighbouring sites, impact on ecology and biodiversity, visual impact, empathy for applicant and the application was for three bungalows, not just one.

1.     RESOLVED:
That the application be REFUSED 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 that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(Proposed by Councillor Flunder and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

Two storey rear extension, alterations to roofline of existing single storey rear extension, hard landscaping works, and replacement windows to front elevation.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Laurel Gallagher – Applicant

Ross Ankers – Agent

Members discussed the heritage asset and the design concerns over the flat roof proposal.

RESOLVED:
That the application be DEFERRED to enable the applicant to work with Officers to reach a suitable design agreement.

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Flunder)

Replacement of existing stable buildings with single detached dwelling, landscaping features and a ground-mounted solar array.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Andrew Dukesell – Agent

Ross Ankers – Applicant. Letter read out by Agent.

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

Members discussed the skip business on the neighbouring site and the environmental health concerns, particularly the noise impact. They noted there was no evidence that the skip yard had closed or had changed ownership.

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 that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

(Proposed by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Johnson)

Members considered whether grant consent to fell a Sycamore tree at 1 Bank End, Brown Edge, protected as T117 under Tree Preservation Order (TPO) No. SM.4.

(Report recommended refusal)

Members noted how they could not judge an application based on personal circumstance and the decision should be made based on policy. They expressed sympathy with the applicant’s personal circumstances but made reference to the many reasons for upholding the TPO, including the environmental reasons. Members suggested there was no immediate risk of the tree falling and it was in good health.

RESOLVED:

That consent to fell a Sycamore tree at 1 Bank End, Brown Edge, protected as T117 under Tree Preservation Order (TPO) No. SM.4, be REFUSED for the reasons detailed in the report.

(Proposed by Councillor Johnson and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

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 from the meeting held on 23 May 2024, be approved as a correct record.