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 … Continue reading “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 25th October 2011 Agenda Item 6 APP/11/00834 Part 3

Cllr David Elderton asked officers to respond on demolition & security, parking & access. The officer said Wright Street had been raised in the past. There was a lack of space and there had previously been waiting restrictions. The restrictions had been removed for extra parking spaces. The view expressed was that one more property would not lead to much extra highway demand. Access to the garage was dependent on whether it was used as a garage or storage. The size of any vehicle would also affect access. If a vehicle was obstructing the way out the police could take action, however there were no grounds to refuse the application on highway safety as it was already recommended the application be subject to conditions 2 & 5. He said there were no grounds to object to the application on highway safety.

Matthew Rushton said that the issues raised by the petitioner were not planning issues, safety on the site was the Health and Safety Executive‘s responsibility. He said any damage caused by construction was a civil matter between the two parties. Construction could be looked at under the building regulations to make sure it was safely built.

Cllr John Salter said he had been to the Site Visit. He sympathised with the residents, as parking even in the garage if there was a vehicle parked opposite would be “very, very hard”. Cllr Salter understood that it was not under their remit and there was nothing to turn the application down for refusal. He said he supported the application.

Planning Committee 25th October 2011 Part 1 Minutes, Declarations of Interest, Site Visit

Present:
Cllr David Elderton
Cllr Eddie Boult
Cllr Wendy Clements
Cllr James Keeley (deputy for Cllr Paul Hayes)
Cllr Peter Johnson
Cllr Dave Mitchell
Cllr Stuart Kelly
Cllr Patricia Glasman (deputy for Cllr Brian Kenny)
Cllr John Salter
Cllr Denise Realey
Cllr Joe Walsh
Cllr Bernie Mooney

The agenda and reports for this meeting can be found by clicking on the link.

The Chair, Cllr David Elderton thanked people for coming, he introduced himself, the councillors on the Planning Committee and officers.

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on the 6th September and 20th September were agreed.

The Chair, Cllr David Elderton asked for any declarations of interest. Cllr Bernie Mooney declared a prejudicial interest on item 11 with regards to an email she sent on behalf of Cllr Darren Dodd.

The Chair then asked for any requests for site visits. A site visit was requested by Cllr John Salter with respect to agenda item 4 (APP/10/01105) for a dozen houses on vacant land at the junction of Wharf Street and Water Street in Bromborough. This was agreed by the Planning Committee.

The Chair asked to vary the order of the agenda to take into account petitions. This was agreed.

The first planning application to be considered was APP/11/00834 – Land adjacent to 47 WRIGHT STREET, EGREMONT, CH44 8BD – Erection of a new dwelling. Matthew Rushton said it was a planning application for a new dwelling which followed the existing building line. It was also for a garage for one car. He said it was in line with Supplementary Planning Document 4. He said the staircase and the rear terrace had been deleted and mentioned the separation distance.

Standards Committee 29/9/2011 Part 13

The Chair, Brian Cummings said he wanted to consider an urgent request in respect of whistleblowing from Mr. Martin Morton.

Cllr Pat Williams declared a prejudicial interest in this matter as Mr. Martin Morton had made a complaint about her.
Cllr Denise Roberts declared a prejudicial interest in this matter as Mr. Martin Morton had made a complaint about her.
Cllr John Salter declared a prejudicial interest by virtue of being on the Initial Assessment Panel.

Cllr Gerry Ellis asked Surjit Tour a question which was answered.

Cllr Pat Williams, Cllr Denise Roberts and Cllr John Salter having declared a prejudicial interest in this matter left the room.

Cllr Dave Mitchell asked for clarification as he had been involved in a call-in.

Surjit Tour said there were no further conflicts of interest.

The Chair, Brian Cummings said something about it being “before his time”.

Surjit Tour said the letter regarding the standards matter and whether it should be urgent business had only been sent to the Chair [Brian Cummings]. There were issues involved. He suggested they consider representations this evening and make a decision. Surjit Tour said the complaint had been addressed and gone through due process. The level of detail, would require sufficient time for representations however there was not time limitation and would be more appropriate by the next meeting when the full range of issues could be discussed.

Deputy Mayor Cllr Gerry Ellis asked if it was the same letter from a West Kirby resident?
Cllr Les Rowlands said in his opinion it should be on the next committee’s agenda, it was not right to digest it all and make decisions.

Standards Committee 29/9/2011 Part 10

Cllr John Salter said he would disagree for the first time [with the Deputy Mayor Cllr Gerry Ellis], he called regularly and calls were answered within three to four seconds. He though they were always excellent, but his local library was a bit untidy.

Cllr Dave Mitchell said that his local library was brilliant.
Cllr John Salter said he had a passport.
Cllr Bob Wilkins asked a question about mystery shoppers.
Malcolm Flanagan said their queries could not be person specific and they couldn’t make up a hole in the road. They were testing to see if they knew the information or were looking at the information. The mystery shoppers had the information in front of them.
Cllr Chris Blakeley said he agreed with [Cllr] John [Salter] and [Deputy Mayor Cllr] Gerry [Ellis] that it was a mixed bag. Streetscene three weeks ago had answered within three minutes. He said he thought it was a good service 90% of the time and bad service 10% of the time.
Stella Elliott asked about accessibility about disability, how was this evidenced?
Malcolm Flanagan said there was a minimum standard but it keeps being raised. They figured out which was worst and spoke to Asset Management. The One Stop Shops and libraries in some cases required minor adjustments. However the age of the buildings was a problem. He said all were at a minimum standard.
Cllr Pat Williams said it would be good to have more information.
The Chair Brian Cummings said the report was noted.