Agenda and minutes

No apologies for absence were received.

Temporary replacements

County Councillor Hind replaced County Councillor Yates.

County Councillor Whittam replaced County Councillor Pope.

Members are asked to consider any Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests they may have to disclose to the meeting in relation to matters under consideration on the Agenda.

County Councillor Green declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 as the application was in his electoral division and he was a Cabinet Member.

County Councillor Dad declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 6 as he was a Hyndburn Borough Councillor.

The committee are asked to agree that the Minutes of the last meetings held on 7 December 2022 and 21 December 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chair.

Resolved: That the minutes of the meetings held on 7^th and 21^st December 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chair.

The Update Sheet will be considered as part of each related agenda report.

The Update Sheet was circulated prior to the meeting (copy attached).

A report was presented onan application for a proposed cricket facility on land at Woodcock Estate, Stanifield Lane, Farington, Leyland. The proposals comprised 2 cricket ovals and associated pavilion building and spectator seating, covered cricket nets, access, parking, landscaping and associated works (including temporary event overlay facilities on ticketed match days), and realignment of public rights of way.

The report included the views of South Ribble Borough Council including Environmental Health, Farington Parish Council, National Highways, LCC Highways, the Environment Agency, Lead Local Flood Authority, United Utilities, Sport England, Jacobs UK Ltd (Ecology comments), the LCC Landscape Officer and LCC Historic Environment Service. Sixteen representations objecting to the application had been received along with three representations in support.

Committee's attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which included an amendment to the Recommendation to refer the application to the Secretary of State, due to the floorspace of the building exceeding the 1000 sq metres threshold outlined in the legislation, and various amendments to the conditions proposed in the Committee report.

The Development Management Officer presented a Powerpoint presentation showing a site location plan, detailed location plan of the nearest residential properties, an air photograph, general layout plan, views of the site looking south with and without the development, visualisation of the pavilion and cricket ovals looking south east, visualisation of the pavilion building, car park and nets facility, and section through the pavilion/nets area. Photographs were also shown of the view looking north across the application site, view across the site towards Fowler Avenue, view from Fowler Avenue towards the proposed pavilion/nets area, view across the site from no.6 Fowler Avenue and view northwards along Stanifield Lane towards the site access.

The Chair drew Committee's attention to an error on page 33 of the Committee report on the first bullet point of South Ribble Borough Council's comments which should have read:

·  'The development should not result in inappropriate development within the Green Belt and consideration as to whether the pavilion would be exempt under National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and Local Plan policies.'

Mr Peter Francis, a local resident, addressed the Committee and made the following points:

'The law states that Green Belt land and openness should be maintained and the building of the pavilion, raised bungs and viewing sites do not support these principles. It is highly likely that a function venue/restaurant/public house would not have received planning permission on Green Belt land and the developers have indicated they will be seeking to use the venue for a minimum of 50 days per year, on top of the 20 days per year for cricket reasons. I have just heard a further amendment to that for further events and this does not meet Green Belt criteria at all; the pavilion is not conducive with Green Belt planning laws. We have submitted alternative plans for re-siting the pavilion to face east, rather than west. The building could be moved to the other side of the oval pitches and adjacent  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

A report was presented on an application for the erection of a building for metal storage and processing atUnit 3E, Bolton Avenue, Huncoat Industrial Estate, Accrington. The application site was currently used for scrap metal processing outdoors. The proposal would allow for the metal processing and recycling facilities to take place in a fully enclosed environment.

The report included the views of Hyndburn Borough Council, the Environment Agency, LCC Highways, United Utilities and the Lead Local Flood Authority. Seven representations objecting to the proposal had been received.

Committee's attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which included details of a further letter of objection received and the officer's response to those concerns.

The Development Management Officer presented a Powerpoint presentation showing a site location plan with the nearest residential properties, an aerial view of the application site and existing site, site layout plan, swept path analysis and cross sections, proposed elevations and photographs of the proposed site entrance off Bolton Avenue, views of the current condition of the site and the view from Whinney Hill Road.

Mr Sproston, agent for the applicant, addressed the Committee and made the following points:

'The site is currently used to process scrap metal and lies within the Huncoat industrial estate, with the applicant owning the adjoining site to the north. As detailed in the officers report, the applicant received planning permission in March 2020 for the erection of a metal storage and processing building by Hyndburn Borough Council although, due to the nature of the application, the application should have been dealt with by Lancashire County Council. A number of comments were received from local residents once the site was operational, due to the noise issues from the works associated with the site. The Environment Agency were involved in investigating the activities at the site and, wanting to resolve this issue, the applicants met with Hyndburn Borough Council to discuss the preferred method forward, whereby it was suggested that the works could be enclosed within a building to reduce the noise impacts. As such, HML Recycling Ltd then submitted this application to Lancashire County Council. As also alluded to, Hyndburn Borough Council have expressed their support in favour of this when consulted, during this live application. The submitted noise impact report further shows that the building will allow the activities to be continued at the site enclosed within this building, without causing adverse noise and disturbance impacts to the local residents. The Environment Agency are in agreement with the findings of the report and supportive of the proposals. Therefore, in my opinion, the main concern and reason for this application has been addressed through this submission. The officers report also notes that the remaining consultees do not object to the proposals, subject to a number of conditions being imposed, including both drainage and highways matters, and the applicant is happy to accept all of the conditions as proposed with any pre-commencement conditions discharged in due course. Overall, this application has addressed the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

A report was presented on an application for the creation of bund atMoss Farm, Salwick Road, Preston. The application was for the construction of a screening bund adjacent to the M55 motorway. The applicant had planning permission to carry out various building works to the original farmhouse and to convert an adjacent barn to a residential dwelling. The bund was proposed in order to reduce noise levels from the M55 motorway at these proposed dwellings.

The report included the views of Fylde Borough Council, LCC Highways Development Control, Newton with Clifton Parish Council, Treales, Roseacre and Wharles Parish Council, the Canal and Rivers Trust, LCC Ecology, the Environment Agency, National Highways, the Lead Local Flood Authority and the Ministry of Defence. No representations objecting to the proposal had been received. Two letters of support from neighbouring schools had been submitted.

County Councillor Jones had confirmed that he agreed with the comments expressed by the Borough Council and both Parish Councils.

Committee's attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which provided additional comments from Newton with Clifton Parish Council and the Canals and Rivers Trust and the officers response to these comments.

County Councillor Stewart Jones, the local county councillor for the application site, addressed the Committee and made the following points:

'This application had previously gone through the planning process and was withdrawn by the applicant because it was too high. The applicant has since made some changes to the area and tried to deal with the concerns of the River Trust in relation to the bridge not being damaged. From a Fylde point of view, it actually is in the countryside and there are pictures that the Treales, Wharles and Roseacre sent in of a big HGV vehicle that takes up most of the narrow country lane and there are concerns in relation to that. I think it is out of keeping with the area and it does not justify the creation of a bund for those two properties that are being converted for this application to go ahead. I know there are conditions attached to try and mitigate this but the people that it's affecting in Newton, Clifton, Treales and Roseacre agree with what Fylde have said, and I understand that it meets national planning guidelines and to do with waste, but I do believe that this should be denied planning permission because it is not in keeping. It is far too big and is not necessary as far as we can see, and we just go back to what the parishes have said, who it is actually going to directly affect. I think that this should be denied.'

The legal officer read out a written representation from Councillor Ian Millichamp,Chair of Treales, Roseacre & Wharles Parish Council.

'Thank you for the opportunity to reinforce and amplify with local knowledge the fundamental material issues that led Treales, Roseacre and Wharles Parish Council to object to this application.

1. On Impact on the Character of the Area -  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

A report was presented on an application for the construction of three additional waste processing/storage buildings and an office building at Hapton Valley Transfer Station, Hapton Valley Estate, Accrington Road, Hapton, Burnley.

The report included the views of Burnley Borough Council, Hapton Parish Council, LCC Highways Development Control, the Coal Authority, the Environment Agency, LCC Lead Local Flood Authority and United Utilities. Two representations objecting to the application had been received.

The Development Management Officer presented a Powerpoint presentation showing a site location plan and aerial view of the site (from 2020) with the nearest residential properties, existing and proposed layout plans, elevations, location of the mine shafts and treatment proposal, and photographs of access to the A679, site entrance, office, and Buildings B and C.

It was noted that three of the buildings had already been constructed and that retrospective approval was requested for these. Committee were informed that the applicant had erected these buildings, presumably due to business need, to manage the waste and to comply with their contractual arrangements with 3^rd parties. It was noted that works could be carried out prior to receiving planning permission, although this was at the applicant's own risk.

After a discussion, it was:

Resolved: That planning permission be granted subject to conditions controlling working programme, hours of working, highway matters, ground investigation, sustainable drainage and access road noise attenuation review, as set out in the Committee report.

A report was presented on an application for the variation of condition 2 of planning permission 03/06/0095, to allow mineral working to continue until 31 December 2023, and final restoration to be completed by 31 December 2024, at Waddington Fell Quarry, Slaidburn Road, Waddington.

The report included the views of Waddington Parish Council, the Environment Agency and LCC Highways Development Control. No comments had been received from Ribble Valley Borough Council, Newton-in-Bowland Parish Council and LCC Lead Local Flood Authority. Two representations objecting to the proposal had been received.

Committee were reminded that planning permission had been granted on 21 December 2022, for a revised quarry restoration scheme incorporating tunnel arisings from the Haweswater Aqueduct Resilience Programme, namely the Bowland and Marl Hill tunnel sections at Waddington Fell Quarry, Slaidburn Road, Waddington (ref. LCC/2021/0015).

The Development Management Officer presented a Powerpoint presentation showing a site location plan and aerial view of the site (from 2020) with the nearest residential properties and remaining mineral reserves, current approved final restoration plan, and photographs of the site including the site entrance, Slaidburn Road heading down to Waddington, Waddington village, Slaidburn Road at the top of Waddington Fell and heading towards Newton and Hallgate Hill rising up from Newton.

After a discussion, it was:

Resolved: That planning permission be granted subject to conditions controlling time limits, working programme, site operations, hours of working, pollution control, highway matters, restoration and aftercare, as set out in the Committee report.

It was reported that, since the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 21^st December 2022, ten planning applications had been granted planning permission by the Head of Planning and Environment, in accordance with the county council's Scheme of Delegation.

Resolved: That the report be noted.

An item of urgent business may only be considered under this heading where, by reason of special circumstances to be recorded in the Minutes, the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion that the item should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.  Wherever possible, the Chief Executive should be given advance warning of any Member’s intention to raise a matter under this heading.

There were no items of Urgent Business.

The next meeting of the Development Control Committee will be held on Wednesday 26 April 2023 at 10.30 am in Committee Room A - the Tudor Room, County Hall, Preston.

Resolved: That the next meeting of the Committee be held on Wednesday 26^th April 2023 at 10.30am in Committee Room A – The Tudor Room, County Hall, Preston.