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 meeting held on 20 June 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 solar array, substation and associated works forming an extension to Blythe Solar Farm (ref: smd/2022/0160).

(Report recommended approval subject to conditions)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Rob Parish - Applicant

Nicola Jones – Applicant

Members were of the opinion that the applicant had taken into account their previous concerns and had satisfactorily amended the plans.

There was some concern in relation to the cumulative impact due to the volume of solar panels in this location, the risk of fire and safety testing of converters. It was confirmed that battery energy storage systems were not contained within the proposed scheme and members were advised that there was various legislation to ensure the safe operation of the site.

RESOLVED:

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

2.     For an informative to be included to remind the applicant of their responsibilities to ensure compliance with other legislation and safe operation of the site;

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)

Full planning application for residential development comprising 14 dwellings (Use Class C3), access and internal road for vehicle, footpaths and cycle linkages, parking, landscaping, ecological habitats and associated infrastructure and earthworks.

(Report recommended approval subject to a Section 106 agreement)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Mrs Sophia Bostock – Local resident

For the application:

Sam Rogers – Applicant

Some members sympathised with the speaker objecting to the development as they were under the impression that the site would provide more open space than required. It was commented that the site was becoming overdeveloped and the importance of open space was highlighted. The biodiversity of the site was discussed and some members commented positively on the design of the scheme and the hedgerows/trees being retained.

The Officer clarified the location of the significant open space within the site, the S106 requirements and the number of affordable housing units. The area was not protected and was part of an allocation for development.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the Late representations be noted;

2)    That the application be APPROVED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report;

3)    For off-site play provision to be clarified with the Open Space Officer and, if applicable, incorporated within the Committee’s decision;

4)    For the Section 106 to specify a total of 5 affordable dwellings;

5)    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 Parkes and seconded by Councillor Johnson)

(Having declared an interest Councillor Holmes withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of and voting on the application)

Application for Permission in Principle for residential development of up to 1 house on land on the North Side of Tompkin Lane.

(Report recommended approval)

There were no registered speakers for this application.

It was noted that there may be potential access issues for refuse collection vehicles.

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 Parkes and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

Outline Planning Permission with all matters reserved for a proposed 2 storey dwelling located on vacant land off Tongue Lane, Brown Edge.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Daniel Beaman – Applicant

During the debate, members discussed improvement of the site, the limited effect a property would have on the Green Belt, mining operations and deemed the development to be infill.

RESOLVED:

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

a.    The proposal was limited infill of previously developed land - Green Belt policy 154.

2.    Authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services in consultation with the Chair to impose suitable conditions

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 Wilkinson and seconded by Councillor Roberts)

Conversion of existing building to form dwelling.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Charlie Dean – Applicant

Jim Malkin – Agent

Councillor Sandra Peck – Parish Councillor

The Committee was reminded that personal circumstances were not a material planning consideration. Members were of the opinion that improvements could be made to the design of the proposed conversion and commented positively in terms of the access to the property.

RESOLVED:

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

(Proposed by Councillor Wilkinson and seconded by Councillor Pointon)

A motion to refuse the application had been moved by Councillor Roberts  and seconded by Councillor Johnson but was withdrawn)

Extension and refurbishment of existing Leisure Centre including new Swimming Pools, Extended Fitness Gym and associated Parking.

(Report recommended approval)

Received representations from the undermentioned speakers:

Against the application:

Mary Wilson – Local resident

A statement was read out by the Legal Advisor on behalf of Marj Povey – local resident

Since the publication of the report, additional information had now been received in relation to the car parking and loss of trees, as detailed in the Late Representations report.

The speakers comments around the usage of the main sports hall for pickle ball would be fed back to the Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Tourism, Head of Leisure and Environment Services and the interior design team.

Discussion took place around increased biodiversity net gain,  the possibility of cycle storage and spectator seating being incorporated into the scheme.

In terms of design features such as spectator seating, members were reminded of their role as Planning Committee and such concerns should be raised via different channels.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Late Representation report be noted;

2.    That the application be APPROVED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report subject to receipt of the updated Ecology report and AIA and authority is delegated to officers to finalise the details of conditions;

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 Johnson)

(Having declared an interest Councillor Roberts withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of and voting on the application)

Proposed new car park and new access at land adjacent to Hollington Village Hall.

(Report recommended refusal)

Received representation from the undermentioned speakers:

For the application:

Barbara Keeling - Supporter - Village Hall Treasurer

Susie Wilson - Supporter - Village Hall Secretary

Councillor Sandra Peck – Parish Councillor

Legal advice was provided in terms of any variation to the Section 106 Agreement.

Members debated the additional car parking requirements of the Village Hall, various landscaping and suitable materials for the surface of the proposed parking area.

RESOLVED:

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

a.     The proposal is in accordance with policies  T1, C1 and SS10.

2.     That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services in consultation with the Vice - Chair to agree conditions which should include;

a.     Deed of variation to the S106 agreement

b.     Hedge planting scheme

c.     Grasscrete surface instead of tarmac

d.     Deed of variation to the S106 agreement to be entered into

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 Plant)

(Having declared an interest Councillor Wilkinson 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.

Consideration was given to a report on the performance of planning appeals.