Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
RESOLVED – That the application be DEFERRED
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
RESOLVED – That the reserved matters be APPROVED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 1 below. Note 1 Subject to amended access plans being submitted to revise the kerb radii and the Highway Officer confirming agreement to the amendments
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24)
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 2 below. Note 2 Temporary permission granted for 18 months rather than 12 months. Condition 01 amended as follows: The stand, together with any associated plant and infrastructure, shall be removed entirely from the site on or before the 8th of October 2025.
RESOLVED - That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Planning and Regulatory as set out in report (COEP25/24) and noted below i. Members confirmed that all 3 reasons for refusal are now withdrawn ii. The Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a Statement of Common Ground confirming that the reasons for refusal have been addressed, for the reasons set out in the report. iii. In the event the developer does not agree to either defer the appeal until application P/2021/0436 has been determined or to withdraw the appeal, the Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a draft suite of planning conditions along with the terms of a Planning Obligation to secure appropriate arrangements for education provision, the provision and maintenance of on-site open space and affordable housing provision, should the appointed Inspector be minded to allow the appeal and grant outline planning permission.
An apology for absence was received from Councillor Stella Matthews
The Minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2024 were submitted. AGREED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2024 be signed as a correct record
Members were reminded of their responsibility, under Paragraph 11 of the Members’ Code of Conduct, to declare any interests in relation to any of the business to be transacted at this meeting. The following declarations were made: Agenda Item 4 – Development Management Applications Item No 4i – Councillor David I Bithell - Application P/2023/907 Personal – The Councillor is a steward at the Racecourse on match days. The Councillor remained in the meeting for this item. Item No 4i – Councillor Marc Jones - Application P/2023/907 Personal – The Councillor holds a season ticket at the Racecourse. The Councillor remained in the meeting for this item.
The Chief Officer Economy and Planning submitted a report (COEP/31/24) asking Members to determine the listed planning applications. Attention was drawn to the Addendum Report where necessary.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
The Head of Service, Development Management advised Members that the proposed application was for the conversion of upper floors to 9 apartments and 3 offices (use Class A2). The building is currently vacant and was last used for retail on the ground floor with a mixture of retail, offices and ancillary storage purposes on the upper floors. · In introducing the report he advised Members of the following points: · There was no loss of retail unit as a result of the proposed development. · The current policies support the re-use of buildings in the city centre · Members’ attention was drawn to a plan in the report showing the external changes to the rear of the building · There is limited change to the front of the building. A new entrance off Hope Street will provide access to the proposed upper floor office space and apartments · Retention of the rear access, which will be for emergency access and bin and cycle stores · The layout of the proposed plan showed sufficient space internally and the open plan nature of the units ensured adequate day light · No objections received from the public protection officer relating to noise · Welsh Water have confirmed that there was capacity at Five Fords and in the wider sewer networks Non committee member (Councillor Andy Gallanders) spoke in relation to the application and raised the following concerns: · Potential noise concerns to occupants of apartments due to the close proximity to the city centre night scene · If use of the emergency exit onto Abbott Street was required during the busy night time period · Had there been a former application for a development of all offices at this site? The Head of Service, Development Management confirmed: · That development itself is a reasonable distance away from Abbott Street for any potential noise to be acceptable · The site is mixed use, any former application may have shown offices only and this could be an alternative scheme from an applicant. · The main emergency access is through a second stairwell on site, the internal fire safety arrangements are will be dealt with under building control regulations The Public Protection Officer assured members that for city centre accommodation the proposed site is an adequate distance from the night time economy area. Local Member (Councillor Phil Wynn) spoke in relation to the application and was now satisfied that the provision for an entrance from Hope Street to the units had been agreed. A discussion ensued and members raised the following: · There is currently no proposal to retain lift provision in the building, therefore no provision for an occupier who may have mobility issues. · Clarification given that there is no policy to demand that a development of this scale provide a lift provision and in this case the existing lift is in the retail floor space. · Concern due to the lack of provision of parking spaces for residents of apartments · Residents occupying this type of accommodation will beware that due to the location no parking provision is available · Pleasing to see that we are revitalising the city centre by utilising unused parts of buildings and providing accommodation to bring people back to the city centre RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
The Head of Development Management introduced the report. The application proposed a rear extension of 1962m2 to the existing logistics building. Members were minded to support the application. RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the application be DEFERRED
Member’s attention was drawn to the addendum Due to the late submission of the additional objection and the technical nature of the matters raised, it has not been possible to give the matters full consideration RESOLVED – That the application be DEFERRED
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
The Chair welcomed Mr Nick Wild (Canal and River Trust) to the meeting who spoke in favour of the application. The Head of Development Management introduced the report for the removal of Condition No. 26 of planning permission P/2021/0560 and in doing so informed members of the following points: · The Condition was imposed in in 2021 when the number of boats operating from the boat hire business was restricted to 17. · The reason for the condition was to prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no pollution of or detriment to the environment. · The Condition was imposed prior to the Cefn Mawr Waste Water Treatment Plant operating. · There are no objections from Highways · Assurances were given in relation to the phosphorus issues, which had now been addressed. Members raised the following points: · Clarity sought on a potential impact on the numbers of visiting boats to the site. · Assurances given that when the Hire Boats are moved to the rear this would free up space for visitors. A proposal was made for a site visit. The proposal was seconded and put to the vote. The vote was lost. RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
The Chair welcomed Mr Chris Emery to the meeting who spoke in favour of the application. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum and the information of a further condition under recommendation C, relating to permitted development rights. The Development Management Lead introduced the report which was for the construction of new access road, lorry park, weighbridge and building, car park, facilities block, roundwood storage areas,132kv substation and ancillary works In introducing the report a plan of the site was shared and he informed members of the following: · No objections had been received from Highways or North Wales Trunk Road Agency. · The new access road was an improvement and would reduce the amount of traffic through the village of Chirk. · Whilst there would be construction traffic on a short term basis, a Construction Traffic Management Plan would be a condition in the recommendation. · No adverse effects from noise to the residents of the development east of the site. · Members attention was drawn to the AONB Joint Committee additional comments in the addendum. · No adverse impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Joint local ward member (Councillor Terry Evans) thanked the new management committee at Kronospan for the application. He suggested that no heavy vehicles (over seven tonne) should use the road existing access and that the former weigh bridge and lorry park should be decommissioned. Assurances given by the Development Management Lead that the discharge of Condition 26 states that prior to the first beneficial use of the approved development, an Operational Traffic and Parking Management Plan, to include arrangements for the future use of the existing vehicular access and Lorry Park, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall be fully implemented as approved for the lifetime of the development. Joint local ward member (Councillor Frank Hemmings) spoke in support of the application · Assurances were sought that local residents would be protected from noise pollution. · Pleasing to see this application and welcomed reduction in traffic passing through the village. · Requested to be kept informed regarding conditions relating to the AONB. · The additional comments received from the Clwydian Range and Dee Valley AONB Joint Committee were noted. · However, based upon the submitted information and as outlined within the Committee Report, Officers considered that subject to the implementation of the comprehensive landscape planting which was recommended to be secured by condition, there would be no long-term harmful impact upon the natural beauty of the AONB, as is required by LDP Policy NE4. Members were minded to grant the application subject to a Section 106 Agreement RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the reserved matters be APPROVED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 1 below. Note 1 Subject to amended access plans being submitted to revise the kerb radii and the Highway Officer confirming agreement to the amendments
The Chair welcomed Mr Matt Grant (Bellway Homes) to the meeting who spoke in favour of the application. The Head of Service, Development Management advised Members that the proposed application was to seek approval for the matters reserved for subsequent approval by outline planning permission, namely appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of a residential development of 74 dwellings. Whilst sharing a plan of the site he advised members of the following points: · The proposed site layout was for a development of 74 dwellings, 18 of which would be affordable homes, of mixed house types. · The affordable homes are in clusters on the development, they are of the same architectural standard therefore comply with the objectives of the relative Planning Guidance Note. The provision for the development is 25% as the Planning Permission was granted before the LDP was adopted. · The open space areas contribute positively towards the appearance of the development and also secure a substantial area of land for recreational use, to the benefit of occupiers of the proposed development and the wider community. · The land hatched on the plan adjoins Council owned land, together the two areas are used as a playing field. The land referred to should be offered to the Council to take ownership of. If the offer is declined, the Unilateral Undertaking (UU) requires the land to be offered to the Community Council. In the event that neither agree to take on the ownership of the land, it is to be made available and maintained solely for sport and/or recreation. · Whilst there are a number of instances where the proposed dwellings would be sited at less than the distances recommended in LGN21 from existing dwellings on the boundary, existing and proposed boundary treatment would prevent ground floor to ground floor overlooking. · Vehicular access would be from Holt Road, this is currently 20 mph road and has adequate visibility. · Pedestrian access would also be from the Holt Road, including a proposal for a 3 metre wide combines footway and cycle way along the southern end of the site. · Whist acknowledging the Highway Officer’s concern in relation to the site access and the kerb radii of 6m instead of 10m and that the swept path analysis demonstrates that refuse wagons extend into oncoming traffic on Holt Road, it was acknowledged that bin and recycling collection only generates 2 weekly return trips to visit the site. · The existing hedgerows at the site will be retained and further hedgerow and tree planting will be provided. · In relation to phosphorus issues the site would connect to the main foul water sewer network. Foul water from the site would drain to the Five Fords Waste Water Treatment Works (WwTW). Welsh Water had confirmed that it had adequate capacity at the WwTW and the wider sewer networks. · Whilst the number of parking spaces does fall short of the maximum the site is in an area with good public transport links, is within cycling distance of the city centre and local amenities are within walking distance. · The plans submitted with this reserved matters application would ensure an appropriate form of development is undertaken on site in terms of layout, design, open space provision and landscaping. The proposals would also not give rise to residential amenity, highway safety or ecology concerns. The proposed development therefore accords with the relevant LDP policies. A discussion ensued and members raised the following points: Joint Local Member (Councillor Mike Davies) raised the following points: · Concern in relation to the proposed Increase in larger size houses on the development · Potential extension to the footpath to be considered at the Dean Road side of the development · Disappointment in relation to the neglected condition of the land, the grass requires cutting The Head of Service, Development Management referred to the pedestrian access from the Holt Road along the southern end of the site, which could in the future link up to Dean Road. Joint Local Member (Councillor Andy Gallanders) raised the following points: · Clarity sought on a potential loss of a public right of way · Concern in relation to the site access and the kerb radii · Confirmation sought on the Section 106 contributions, are they were for the local junior school only. The Head of Service, Development Management gave confirmation that the developer would liaise with the Education Department regarding S106 contributions. Members were minded to approve the reserved matters subject to amended access plans being submitted to revise the kerb radii and the Highway Officer confirming agreement to the amendments RESOLVED – That the reserved matters be APPROVED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 1 below. Note 1 Subject to amended access plans being submitted to revise the kerb radii and the Highway Officer confirming agreement to the amendments
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24)
The Chair welcomed Mr Kirk Denton (Innova Renewables Ltd.) to the meeting who spoke in favour of the application. The Head of Service, Development Management introduced the application which was for the installation of buried high voltage cable. Members were minded to grant the application. RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24)
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
The Head of Development Management introduced the report and in doing so highlighted the following points: · The application site was a vacant retail premises situated on Chester Road, Gresford. · The application was for change of use of building from class A1 (butchers shop) to class A3 (food takeaway and delivery). · Concerns had been raised by a resident of a neighbouring property relating to the access/driveway, however this was a private matter. · The number of parking spaces meets with Planning Guidance Notes. The local member informed committee that the general feedback that he had received was positive. RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 2 below. Note 2 Temporary permission granted for 18 months rather than 12 months. Condition 01 amended as follows: The stand, together with any associated plant and infrastructure, shall be removed entirely from the site on or before the 8th of October 2025.
(Members’ declarations of personal interests in respect of this item are set out under Minute 93 above) The Head of Development Management introduced the report, the application (in retrospect) was for the erection of a temporary stand (capacity 2,289) with additional 20 wheelchair spaces. · The permanent stand would have a capacity of 5,000. · There was no impact on protected species · A waste water management plan had been submitted · Members felt the twelve month period should be extended to eighteen months to ensure adequate time for the works to be finalised. RESOLVED – That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Economy and Planning as set out in COEP/31/24 and note 2 below. Note 2 Temporary permission granted for 18 months rather than 12 months. Condition 01 amended as follows: The stand, together with any associated plant and infrastructure, shall be removed entirely from the site on or before the 8th of October 2025.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED - That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Planning and Regulatory as set out in report (COEP25/24) and noted below i. Members confirmed that all 3 reasons for refusal are now withdrawn ii. The Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a Statement of Common Ground confirming that the reasons for refusal have been addressed, for the reasons set out in the report. iii. In the event the developer does not agree to either defer the appeal until application P/2021/0436 has been determined or to withdraw the appeal, the Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a draft suite of planning conditions along with the terms of a Planning Obligation to secure appropriate arrangements for education provision, the provision and maintenance of on-site open space and affordable housing provision, should the appointed Inspector be minded to allow the appeal and grant outline planning permission.
The Chair advised Committee that this item was not to consider the merits of the planning application it was to deal with the reasons for refusal that were submitted, prior to the adoption of the Local Development Plan (LDP). The Head of Development Management introduced the report which was to outline the significant changes in circumstances since outline planning permission was refused for the proposed development in 2020 and to seek agreement from Members on the recommendations set out below in connection with the forthcoming planning appeal. Members’ attention was drawn to the three reasons for refusal set out in the report and advised of the change in circumstances following the adoption of the Local Development Plan. Confirmation was given that following consultation with BCUHB no objections had been received Councillor Mike Davies (Joint Local Member) made reference to the LDP and the proposed spine road referred to in the LDP. Confirmation given that the spine road and the school are an obligation for Key Strategic Site 2 (KSS2) this will be addressed in a further planning application. Councillor Andy Gallanders (Joint Local Member) expressed concern in relation to the additional number of homes and the lack of current capacity of health services in the area to accommodate. The Health Board should have requested funding from the developers. The Chair confirmed that the Health Board had been asked to confirm their position in relation to this development proposal in October 2023. The Health Board advised that they did not intend to object. They also did not advance any evidence to demonstrate that financial contributions are necessary to fund additional physical capacity in the primary care sector. A discussion ensued and members made the following points: · Disappointing to hear that the Health Board have not raised any issues in relation to the application. Concerns that if provision is not increased now, how will they deliver in the future · Recognition of need to look at infrastructure, schools, highways and health services to accommodate the additional people who will live in the new homes The Chair reminded members that the UDP had now been replaced by the LDP, therefore the reasons for refusal no longer exist as they were under the former plan and not the new one. The Chief Officer Environment and Planning shared the concerns of the committee members in relation to the lack of engagement from the Health Board. The Chief Officer Environment and Planning to make representations to BCHUB regarding their lack of engagement in the planning process in relation to future health provision. RESOLVED - That permission be GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Officer Planning and Regulatory as set out in report (COEP25/24) and noted below i. Members confirmed that all 3 reasons for refusal are now withdrawn ii. The Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a Statement of Common Ground confirming that the reasons for refusal have been addressed, for the reasons set out in the report. iii. In the event the developer does not agree to either defer the appeal until application P/2021/0436 has been determined or to withdraw the appeal, the Chief Officer Economy and Planning is given delegated authority to agree a draft suite of planning conditions along with the terms of a Planning Obligation to secure appropriate arrangements for education provision, the provision and maintenance of on-site open space and affordable housing provision, should the appointed Inspector be minded to allow the appeal and grant outline planning permission.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.