Agenda item

The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.

 

This application was deferred at the Development Management Committee meeting on 9 May 2022, to allow for a site visit.

 

The Committee was addressed by local resident Bernard Carr, who spoke in objection to the proposal; he referred to the previous objections made by Mr Walker at the last meeting.   He argued the following inter alia:

 

·         The field has been used over the past 50 years until it was stopped by the applicant;

·         Section 6 of the report should be scrutinised to see why the application should not be approved;

·         The boundary of the proposal now included land that the scout hut was in;

·         The application is not in accordance with the development plan;

·         This green space had an important role in the community and is recognised as an asset of community value;

·         The site was not surplus to requirements as claimed;

·         He quoted planning policies HE4 and CS21 and said the application was contrary to these, so urged the Committee to refuse the application.

 

The Committee was addressed by Ms Eren, who spoke in support of the application.  In response to comments made at the last meeting regarding monetary worth of the Church of England, she provided the monetary worth of the Scouts, stating that these facts aside, each Parish was an organisation in its own right.  She also argued inter alia:

 

·         The Church had owned the field for the past 90 years;

·         The Scouts had only used the field since the 1950’s;

·         She clarified that the number of houses on the site was 6, not 10;

·         The field would not be used going forward, regardless of the outcome tonight.

 

Members were then addressed by Janet Paul, who spoke in support of the application on behalf of the applicant.  She clarified some issues regarding the background to the application, which was originally submitted in 2019 when the site was designated for residential development in the then UDP.  She also stated:

 

·         The plans were amended to retain the Scout hut, following recommendations from planning officers;

·         She contradicted the comments that the field was used for recreational purposes;

·         Only part of the field is used, and this was not throughout the year;

·         The 204 objections received related to the first application submitted – this had now been amended and would have satisfied the objectors and their concerns; and

·         They would use the proceeds from the sale for specific needs within the community.

 

She urged the Committee to consider the facts before making a decision.

 

In response to some of the comments made, Officers explained that the amendment to the plans was so that the existing Scout hut building would be retained; this would be secured by condition.  It was also explained that although the application was made prior to the adoption of the new Delivery and Allocations Local Plan (DALP), it must be considered under the new DALP, not the previous Unitary Development Plan (UDP).

 

Members discussed the application and comments made by speakers and raised concerns over the fact that the application was a departure from the DALP.  The proposed development would result in the loss of Greenspace as designated by the Halton Delivery and Allocations Local Plan (DALP) Policies Map.  This Greenspace has a Specific Greenspace Category of Amenity Greenspace.  The Halton Open Space Study 2020 Quantitative Update is an evidence-based document to accompany the recently adopted DALP.  This considered the supply of such sites on the basis of the Area Forum Areas which encompassed the former wards of Broadheath, Ditton, Hale and Hough Green rather than the community area affected by the proposals. 

 

It was commented that there was not a significant concentration of Amenity Greenspace in this area and to the South of the major artery, which is Liverpool Road; the only other amenity greenspace sites were at Brackenwood Drive and Derwent Road.  The site is considered to be multifunctional having been used ancillary to a longstanding community building (also located on the site) as well as being a satellite site to Hough Green Park and supporting biodiversity.

 

It was noted that the protected trees on the boundary of the site would remain, however this does not mitigate for the loss of the Amenity Greenspace.  This site whilst not being publicly accessible was considered to have an important visual and structural role to play particularly for the streetscene in this locality.  The loss of the Amenity Greenspace would therefore have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of this predominantly residential locality.

 

In conclusion, the Committee agreed that there is not considered to be a surplus of Amenity Greenspace in the recently created Bankfield Ward in which the site is located and to allow the proposal would be contrary to the provisions of Policies HE4, CS(R)18, CS(R)21 and GR2 of the DALP.

 

After taking into account these considerations the Committee agreed that the harm that would be caused with the loss of Amenity Greenspace in the area outweighed the need for the development.  One Member moved a refusal, this was seconded and the Committee voted to refuse the application.

 

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused, due to it being contrary to the provisions of Planning Policies HE4, CS(R)18, CS(R)21 and GR2 of the DALP.