Agenda and minutes

Minutes of meeting held on 11^th December 2017 (previously circulated). 

The minutes of the meeting held on 11^th December 2017 were signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. 

Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting). 

Whilst not a legal requirement, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 and in the interests of clarity and transparency, Members should declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, at this point in the meeting. 

In accordance with Part B Section 2 of the Code Of Conduct, Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any other interests as defined in paragraphs 8(1) or 9(2) of the Code of Conduct. 

Councillor Malcolm Thomas declared an interest in item A6 17/01244/FUL Church Hall, St Luke’s Church, Shady Lane, Hest Bank. The reason being that he is a Member of St Luke’s Church.

During the meeting, Councillor Eileen Blamire also declared an interest in item A6 17/01244/FUL Church Hall, St Luke’s Church, Shady Lane, Hest Bank. The reason being that she is a Cabinet member and part of the land being used for development is owned by Lancaster City Council.  

With the Committee’s agreement the Chairman moved item 3 ‘Items of Urgent Business authorised by the Chairman’ to the end of the agenda.

Under the scheme of public participation, Robert Smith spoke against the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Helen Helme and seconded by Councillor Mel Guilding:

“That the application be approved.”

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

Councillor Malcolm Thomas had previously declared an interest in the following item.

During the Officer presentation Councillor Eileen Blamire also declared an interest in the following item. Councillor Eileen Blamire left the meeting during the Officer presentation and returned after deliberation of the item. Councillor Eileen Blamire did not participate in the vote.

It was proposed by Councillor Sylvia Rogerson and seconded by Councillor Stuart Bateson:

“That the application be approved.”

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

It was proposed by Councillor Helen Helme and seconded by Councillor Sylvia Rogerson:

“That the legal agreement attached to planning permission 02/00416/CU be discharged.”

(The proposal was contrary to the case officer’s recommendation that the application be approved).

Members clarified the reasons for the contrary proposal, being that, there was a precedent set by the unusual wording contained within the existing legal agreement that allowed for some degree of permanent residential use, which had already been established.

Upon being put to the vote, 7 Members voted in favour of the proposition and 4 against, with 2 abstentions, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

That the legal agreement attached to planning permission 02/00416/CU be discharged. This formally removes the occupancy restrictions previously imposed.

It was proposed by Councillor Jon Barry and seconded by Councillor Malcolm Thomas:

“That the application be approved.”

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

It was proposed by Councillor Eileen Blamire and seconded by Councillor June Ashworth:

“That the application be approved.”

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

In accordance with Section 100(B)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the Chairman had agreed with this item being considered as an item of urgent business. The reason being that this planning application is connected to the upcoming closure of the Greyhound Bridge on 29^th January 2018 and therefore was considered urgent business as the next meeting of the Planning and Highways Regulatory Committee is not scheduled until after this date (i.e. 5^th February 2018).

It was proposed by Councillor Helen Helme and seconded by Councillor Eileen Blamire:

“That the application be approved.”

Upon being put to the vote, 11 Members voted in favour of the proposition and 2 against, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

Resolved:

That Planning Permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below, but the application be delegated back to the Chief Officer for Regeneration and Planning for issuing a decision upon the conclusion of the consultation period (unless valid material considerations are raised in correspondence received after Members’ resolution that have not been considered by Members in reaching their decision):

1. Standard 3 year timescale.

2. Works in accordance with approved plans.

3. White lining to mark out parking bays and re-surfacing to occur prior to car park being brought into use.

Councillor Eileen Blamire left the meeting at this point and did not return.

The Chief Officer (Regeneration and Planning) submitted a Schedule of Planning Applications dealt with under the Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions to Officers.

Resolved:

That the report be noted.