Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd January 2011 Part 3 APP/11/00044 (Bay View Nursing Home, 69 Albion Street, New Brighton, CH45 9JG)

Matthew introduced agenda item 4 APP/11/00044 (Bay View Nursing Home, 69 Albion Street, New Brighton, CH45 9JG). He said there had been an outline application for ten apartments in 2008 and that it was a primary residential area. He said policies HS4 & SPD 2 applied and the main issues were design and demonstrating whether … Continue reading “Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd January 2011 Part 3 APP/11/00044 (Bay View Nursing Home, 69 Albion Street, New Brighton, CH45 9JG)”

Matthew introduced agenda item 4 APP/11/00044 (Bay View Nursing Home, 69 Albion Street, New Brighton, CH45 9JG). He said there had been an outline application for ten apartments in 2008 and that it was a primary residential area. He said policies HS4 & SPD 2 applied and the main issues were design and demonstrating whether the homes were affordable. The applicant had supplied a detailed financial assessment which had been verified by a quantity surveyor which explained why affordable houses here were not viable. The density and design were very similar to the 2008 application, but an extra unit had been added in a basement. This property also had a sunken garden space. The density of 110/hectare was high but it was near shops and services. The design and appearance were slight different to the 2008 application but was recommended for approval subject to conditions. One of the conditions was that the foot way was reinstated and an extra condition had been added.

The Chair asked if anyone had any comments?

Cllr Dave Mitchell indicated he wished to propose accepting the application. Cllr Eddie Boult seconded accepting the application.

There was a vote:

For: 11 (Cllrs Elderton, Clements, Boult, Johnson, Kenny, Salter, Realey, Mooney, Walsh, Kelly and Mitchell)
Against: 0 (None)
Abstention: 0 (None)

The application (APP/11/00044) was approved (with conditions) (11:0:0).

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd January 2011 Part 2 APP/11/00954 – 6 MILLBROOK ROAD, POULTON, CH41 1FL – Change of use from industrial unit to auctioneers – sui generis

The Chair directed those present to page 27 and agenda item 6 (APP/11/00954), 6 Millbrook Road, Poulton, CH41 1FL, Change of use from industrial unit to auctioneers.

Matthew said it was for a change of use to an auctioneers which was the sui generis class. It was in a mainly industrial area on an industrial estate, the Unitary Development Plan allowed uses B1, B2 and B8 here so it was not an acceptable use as they should locate somewhere easy and sustainable. There was a shortage of land for industrial purposes. One auction was held a week on Wednesday evening. It was not conflicting with adjacent businesses, but was still not an acceptable use. There was insufficient information to justify the loss on two grounds, Unitary Development Plan EM8 and the fact it was not sustainable.

Cllr John Salter said he would declare a personal interest as he had had a chat with the owner and a discreet visit to the premises. He said the business needed a large premises and the business had been established for eight years. There was no parking problem and no problem on the one day they had sales. He wanted to draw attention to the fact that 75% of the trade at the public auction was to other businesses, local traders such as second hand shops and it was not mainly for the public.

On the subject of public transport he disagreed with officers as about hundred metres away was Birkenhead Park railway station which he had walked many times. He wanted to overturn officer’s recommendation that it was up for refusal and asked for it to be approved, he did have a form of words.

The Chair said he wanted everybody to have their say, his only concerns was supporting the Unitary Development Plan except for good reasons especially in Bromborough and Ellesmere Port.

Cllr Dave Mitchell asked whether the applicant had been in touch with the Economy & Regeneration Department over moving to more acceptable premises. He commented that the business had been running for eighteen months and said it might benefit from having a look at venues available.

The Chair asked officers if they’d like to come back on alternative venues?

Matthew said that there were vacant sites in the Town Centre, but they hadn’t pushed the applicant to go through hte process. He said it was difficult to make the case.

Cllr Stuart Kelly said it was interesting as it was a sui generis class and in Latin. He had googled it and hadn’t come across auctioneer in government advice. He said that Matthew’s advice was surrounding a change of use. He asked what assessment had been done to see if it didn’t fall into the acceptable B1, B2 or B8 categories? He said there was no mention in the Unitary Development Plan and there was an absence of advice. He had resorted to Google to see what was out there and what it really is? He said it cut across B1, B2 and B7 and referred to Cllr John Salter’s comments about the auction being once a week. The rest of the time it was storage and distribution (class B8) which they didn’t appear to have a policy for the B-class and sui generis. He asked where would they be on appeal as it was near B8 and was 50/50. The report established the numbers of cars used and that B1/B2/B8 uses which was close enough to make no difference, unless the officers came up with a good argument to the contrary.

The Chair thanked Cllr Kelly for his interesting points.

Matthew said the element of concern was the public sales as a proportion were to the general public. People movements were not supposed to happen here but to the Town Centre where there was public transport provision. He agreed that some of the use was storage and distribution (B8 class), but the sales to the general public were moving it to an A1 use. There was some case law categorising it as A1 use. However the balance of case law was that each sui generis class should be decided on its own merits. The sole issue was sales to the general public.

Cllr Brian Kenny said he would not be happy to support an application not in accordance with the planning policies, but as detailed in the application it had been running for ten years and this was a retrospective application. There were no highway issues, no health and safety implications, no environmental implications which made it difficult to oppose. In principle he was not happy in opposing the Unitary Development Plan. He asked what words they would use to support it. He reserved the right to decide.

The Chair said there would have to be an urgent reason to outweight the Unitary Development Plan.

Cllr John Salter said that 75% of the business was wholesale, there were similar business in the area such as Moreton Alarms who did lighting and were no different (in selling to members of the public). Cllr Dave Mitchell asked if Moreton Alarms were on the main road as it made a difference? Cllr Mitchell apologised for interrupting Cllr John Salter. Cllr John Salter said he wanted to move it and he’d passed a form of words to Matthew, with alterations on hours. He said it was very accessible, well established for eight years and to move elsewhere he would lose clientele.

The Chair asked if there was something to move? He said each application should be considered on its merits especially the sui generis class.

Cllr John Salter said it was a sustainable business with 78% of its trade being not to the public, but to wholesale. He added a condition that the total number of auctions not exceed one a week. These would happen on a Wednesday from 1700 to 2100 and at no other time. This would not compromise the operation regarding industrial uses in the area. He referred to policy EM6 of the Unitary Development Plan and said that public access would be limited.

The Chair said that the proposal had been proposed and seconded and that it was a unique application and the circumstances had been demonstrated.

The first vote was on approving the application.

For: Cllrs Elderton, Clements, Boult, Johnson, Kenny, Salter, Realey, Mooney, Walsh, Kelly (10)
Against: Cllr Dave Mitchell (1)
Absentions: None (0)

Application APP/11/00954 was approved (10:1:0)

The Chair said they now needed to consider the conditions which he asked an officer to reiterate.

Matthew said they had one condition which was that the total number of auctions not exceed one a week and that this sole auction was restricted to Wednesday between 5pm and 9pm.

The second vote was on the condition.

For: Cllrs Elderton, Clements, Boult, Johnson, Kenny, Salter, Realey, Mooney, Walsh, Kelly (10)
Against: Cllr Dave Mitchell (1)
Abstentions: None (0)

The condition was approved (10:1:0). Two members of the public left.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 3rd January 2011 Part 1, Minutes (15/11/11 and 6/12/11), Declarations of Interest, Site Visits, item 5 (APP/11/00582, Hesketh Hall, Boundary Road, Port Sunlight, CH62 5ER Conversion of Hesketh Hall into 13 self-contained C3 flats with rear conservatory)

Present:
Conservative councillors
Chair: Cllr David Elderton
Vice-Chair: Cllr Wendy Clements
Cllr Eddie Boult
Cllr Peter Johnson

Labour councillors
Cllr Brian Kenny (spokesperson)
Cllr John Salter
Cllr Denise Realey
Cllr Bernie Mooney
Cllr Joe Walsh

Lib Dem councillors
Cllr Dave Mitchell (spokesperson)
Cllr Stuart Kelly

Absent
Conservative councillor
Cllr Paul Hayes

Members of public: 9

The Chair introduced himself and said on the two wings were elected members of the Council who would be making decisions. To his left were planning officers and support staff who were officers of the Council. He welcomed people and wished them a happy and beneficial New Year.

He asked if the amended minutes of the meeting held on the 15th November 2011 and the minutes of the meeting held on the 6th December 2011 were agreed. He thanked Cllr Brian Kenny.

He asked if there were any declarations of interest. No declarations of interest were declared by the eleven councillors present.

He asked if there were any requests for site visits. No requests for site visits were made.

The Chair said he would be taking the agenda out of order to reflect which items members of the public were here for. He said the first item he would take would be item 5 (Hesketh Hall, Boundary Road, Port Sunlight, CH62 5ER). He asked for a presentation and pointed out this item was pages 23 to 26 on the agenda pack.

Matthew gave a presentation stating it was an application for thirteen apartments and a new conservatory. He outlined the implications of a requirement for affordable housing and the fact the building was a Grade II listed building. He said (if approved) the planning application would lead to changes to the building and the internal layout, however certain features would be retained. Externally there would be new windows to the roof, also a ramp and railings. Wirral Council was sympathetic to the alterations proposed. It was on the boundary of the Liverpool City Region Inner Area which would normally mean there would be a requirement for affordable housing. Bringing a Grade II listed building into viable use was a material consideration in its favour. It was near New Ferry Town Centre and there were a number of conditions on the application.

The Chair asked if any ward councillors wished to speak? No ward councillors wished to speak.

The Chair asked for any comments? There were no comments, he asked councillors if they were happy. Cllr John Salter proposed accepting the planning application, Cllr Joe Walsh seconded it. Matthew said there had been one extra condition added which was for cycle parking.

For : Cllrs Elderton, Clements, Boult, Johnson, Kenny, Salter, Realey, Mooney, Walsh, Mitchell, Kelly (11)
Against : None (0)
Abstentions: None (0)

Application APP/11/00582 was approved (11:0:0).

Two members of the public left with one saying thank you to the Planning Committee as he left.

Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association 11/11/2011

Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes and Jim Wilkie from Local Government Association 11/11/2011 from Dr Gill Taylor of the Local Government Association

UPDATED: 14th April 2015

The second paragraph of page 1 of this letter contains the sentence:

"The Whistleblower, who had been dismissed by the authority, had made allegations against the backdrop of long standing concerns about Adult Social Care but also the wider corporate governance issues around the authority’s failure to recognise or act on information which it had received over a number of years."

"The Whistleblower" is Mr Martin Morton and he was not dismissed by Wirral Council. A compromise agreement was agreed between Mr Martin Morton and his former employer Wirral Council which ended his employment.

The Local Government Association have apologised to Mr Morton for incorrectly stating in their letter below that he was dismissed. They now realise this sentence in their letter was inaccurate and have asked for this amendment to be published here.

Click on images for larger version.
 
Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 1 of 6

 
Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 2 of 6

Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 3 of 6
Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 4 of 6

Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 5 of 6
Letter to Cllr Steve Foulkes from Local Government Association Page 6 of 6