Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence for the meeting were received from Councillors S Carefoot, L Edge and B Holden.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 August 2022 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any disclosable pecuniary, other registrable or non-registrable interest in respect of matters contained in the agenda.

Councillor K Horkin declared he owned business premises in Clitheroe.

Mr Cunliffe spoke on agenda item 6 – Greystones and Longfield, Waddington Road, Clitheroe Tree Preservation Order 2022.

Report of the Director of Economic Development and Planning – copy enclosed

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons:

1.      The proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Policies DMG2 and DMH3 of the Adopted Ribble Valley Core Strategy insofar that approval would lead to the creation of new residential dwellings, located outside of a defined settlement boundary, without sufficient justification. It has not been adequately demonstrated that the proposal is for that of local needs housing that meets a current identified and evidenced outstanding need or that the proposal would meet any of the exception criterion inherently contained within either policy.

2.      The proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Key Statement EN2 and Policy DMG1 of the Adopted Ribble Valley Core Strategy insofar that the introduction of built form and resultant quantum of development in this location, would result in a level of development that would appear both anomalous and incongruous, undermining the character and visual amenities of the immediate area and that of the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding natural beauty.

(Mrs Quinn-Jones spoke in favour of the above application. Cllr J Alcock spoke on the above application)

The Director of Economic Development and Planning updated members with late information regarding a location plan and additional letter of representation.

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons:

1.   The proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Policy DMG1 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy insofar that the proposed development would result in significant measurable harm to the residential amenities of the occupiers of numbers 3-5 ‘The Willows’ by virtue of direct overlooking, from elevated positions from habitable room windows, within close proximity which would afford direct views into the private residential garden areas and habitable rooms of the affected dwellings. As such the proposal would significantly undermine and diminish the sense of privacy enjoyed by occupiers of the existing properties. It is further considered that the proposal would prove harmful to existing residential amenities by virtue of its overall scale and proximity to the affected dwelling, resulting in a significant undue and unsympathetic overbearing impact upon.

2.   The proposed development, by virtue of its overall design, scale and elevational language, would result in the introduction of an incongruous, unsympathetic, and discordant form of development, of an overtly suburban appearance, that fails to respond positively to the inherent visual character of the area or the inherent defining characteristics of the immediate streetscene. As such the proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Policy DMG1 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy and Paragraphs 130 and 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework insofar that the proposed development would be of significant detriment to the character and visual amenities of the area.

3.   The proposed development is considered to be in direct conflict with Policy DMG3 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy insofar that the proposed site arrangement precludes the ability for vehicles to adequately manoeuvre and park safely within the site.

(Cllr S Brunskill spoke on the above application as ward councillor, then left the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote)

The Director of Economic Development and Planning updated members with information regarding a revised Tree Protection report and the consultation response from LCC who had no objections.

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons:

1.   The proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Key Statement DS1 and Policies DMG2 and DMH3 of the Adopted Ribble Valley Core Strategy insofar that approval would lead to the creation of new residential dwellings, located outside of a defined settlement boundary, without sufficient justification - insofar that it has not been adequately demonstrated that the proposal is for that of local needs housing that meets a current identified and evidenced outstanding need or that the proposal would meet any of the exception criterion inherently contained within either of the policies.

2.    The proposed dwellings, by virtue of their elevated nature, overall footprint, and forward projection relative to the adjacent residential development to the west, would result in the introduction of an incongruous and discordant form of development that fails to respond to nearby inherent patterns of development. As such the proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Policy DMG1 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy and Paragraphs 130 and 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework insofar that the proposed development would be of significant detriment to the character and visual amenities of the area.

(Cllr S Brunskill spoke on the above application as ward councillor, then left the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote. Matthew Wyatt spoke in favour of the above application)

(Cllr S Brunskill returned to the meeting before the next item of business)

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons :

1.   Condition 2 can neither be partially nor fully discharged insofar that the development, particularly the elevational configuration, has not been carried out in strict accordance with the approved details pursuant to planning approval ref: 3/2017/0633. It is further considered that the cumulative level of deviation from the approved details goes beyond that which can be reasonably considered under the provisions of S73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Given the deviation from the approved plans the building, as constructed, technically does not benefit from planning permission. As such, these such matters should be regularised via the submission of a Section 73A application.

2.   The proposal is considered to be in direct conflict with Key Statement EN5 and Policies DMG1 and DME2 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy and Paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework in that approval would result in a diminished quality of development, comparative to that of the approved, resulting in a form of development that would fail to respond positively to the character of visual amenities of the area, being of detriment to the character and visual amenities of the defined Whalley Conservation Area

Report of Director of Economic Development and Planning enclosed.

The Director of Economic Development and Planning submitted a report asking committee to consider whether the Greystones and Longfield, Waddington Road, Clitheroe Tree Preservation Order 2022 should be confirmed.

The Council’s Countryside Officer had visited the site and carried out an evaluation following a request for a mature copper beech tree to be felled. The trees were considered to be of visual amenity value to the locality, situated in a prominent position on the fringe of the Conservation Area within the town and were important to the wider tree-scape and a temporary TPO had been placed on two trees.

Committee were reminded that a TPO does not preclude tree work being carried out, but means an application is required to do so in order to protect the tree.

Members discussed this issue in some detail and understood that the owner had taken good care of T1 for many years and should be left to continue to do so.

RESOLVED THAT COMMITTEE

Agree to vary the Order’s name and confirm the Greystones and Fairfield, Waddington Road, Clitheroe Tree Preservation Order 2022 in respect of Tree T2 only.

Report of the Director of Economic Development and Planning enclosed.

The Director of Economic Development and Planning submitted a report for information on Whalley Community Woodland, Calderstones Section 106 monies.

The Section 106 agreement for the planning permission granted on 11 February 2021 for demolition of 34 existing dwellings and construction of 50 new dwellings included an offsite contribution of £9,977.40 for improvements to the open space provision at Whalley Woodland.

£8,000 would be used to improve the woodland in respect of improvements to some sections of the footpath network and removal of trees with ash dieback.

Appeals update

3/2019/0877 – erection of 39 dwellings with landscaping and associated works, and access from adjacent development site at Land at the junction of Chatburn Road and Pimlico Link Road, Clitheroe, BB7 4JX – appeal dismissed and planning permission refused.

3/2019/0877 – erection of 39 dwellings with landscaping and associated works, and access from adjacent development site at Land at the junction of Chatburn Road and Pimlico Link Road, Clitheroe, BB7 4JX – appeal dismissed, and planning permission refused.

None.

There were no minutes of working groups.

None.

There were no reports from representatives on outside bodies.

None.

There were no items under this heading.