Agenda item

Planning Working Group

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 11 June 2019 (Minute Nos. to-follow).

 

To consider application 19/500050/FULL & 19/500051/LBC Tunstall Church of England Primary School, Tunstall Road, Tunstall, ME9 8DX

 

Tabled update published 20 June 2019.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 11 June 2019 (Minute Nos. 39 – 40) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

 

19/500050/FULL & 19/500051/LBC Tunstall Church of England Primary School, Tunstall Road, Tunstall

 

The Area Planning Officer reported that following the site meeting a further letter of objection had been received from a local resident disputing the contention that the use of the land to the rear of the building was used as parking for the school.  However, Appendix B within the applicant’s Design and Access Statement included an aerial view dating from 20 April 2015 which showed a number of cars parked on the land.  

 

The Area Planning Officer stated that he was aware that Members of the Planning Committee had received a letter from Tunstall Parish Council.  He referred to the tabled paper which outlined details of possible amendments to condition (16) and additional condition (17).

 

The Area Planning Officer reported that if permission was granted, the applicant would have to pay the Strategic Mitigation payment relating to the effect on the Special Protection Area and this could be dealt with by a unilateral undertaking or advance payment. 

 

The Chairman moved the officer recommendation to approve the application and this was seconded by the Vice-Chairman.

 

Members debated the application.

 

A Ward Member also a Member of the committee spoke against the application.  She stated that the application would have a significant adverse impact on the setting of the listed building.  It would also have an adverse impact on the adjoining footpath and was over-intensification of the site.

 

Members raised the following points: the harm of the application did not outweigh the need for housing; did not consider that condition (17) was required; appreciated the need to preserve the building; access to the site was dangerous; and highway issues were a concern.

 

Councillor James Hunt moved the following addendum:  That condition (16) be imposed.  This was seconded by Councillor Cameron Beart.  On being put to the vote the addendum was not agreed.

 

The following further points were raised: concerns about construction traffic accessing the site; the school previously managed the traffic flow; application needed to be more sympathetic; concern regarding the setting of the listed building; should impose condition (17); and deeper hedgerows were required.

 

On being put to the vote the motion to approve the application was lost.

 

Councillor Monique Bonney moved the following motion:  That the applications be refused as they would be an over-intensification of the site resulting in harm to the Listed Building and Conservation Area from the public realm and streetscape.  Poor residential amenity.  The access to the site was too narrow.  This was seconded by Councillor Nicholas Hampshire.

 

Councillor Benjamin Martin moved the following addendum:  It would affect the setting of the listed building.  This was seconded by the Chairman, and agreed by the proposer and seconder of the original motion.

 

On being put to the vote the motion to refuse the application was agreed.

 

Resolved:  That application 19/500050/FULL be refused as it was an over-intensification of the site resulting in harm to the Listed Building and Conservation Area from the public realm and streetscape.  Poor residential amenity.  The access to the site was too narrow.  It would affect the setting of the listed building.

 

Resolved:  That application 19/500051/LBC be refused as it was an over-intensification of the site resulting in harm to the Listed Building and Conservation Area from the public realm and streetscape. Poor residential amenity.  The access to the site was too narrow.  It would affect the setting of the listed building.

 

Supporting documents: