Meeting documents

Apologies were received from Mr D Shakespeare and Mr C Clare.  Mr N Brown acted as Vice-Chairman in Mr Clare’s absence.  The Chairman read out the following statement regarding ‘purdah’.

"As this meeting is being webcast, can I remind members to observe purdah requirements as we are in the pre-election period for the forthcoming general election.

For the Council, it still remains very much business as usual, which is why our formal meetings are continuing. However can I ask members to ensure that any comments made during our discussions relate directly to our agenda items and are not seen as, or could be perceived to be, political in nature.

I hope you understand and will adhere to this requirement during this period of heightened sensitivity. If there are any questions on this issue, please raise them now before we begin the formal agenda."

To disclose any Personal, Disclosable or Prejudicial Pecuniary Interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 4 November 2019, to be confirmed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  The minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2019 were AGREED as an accurate record and were signed by the Chairman.

Ms C Kelham, Senior Planning Officer, stated that the application was for the construction of a new nursery with capacity for 52 children in the village of Haddenham on Aston Road.  Ms Kelham provided a presentation and highlighted the following:

• A map of the site location.
• The land was not part of the Haddenham St Mary’s School, but was adjacent to it. 
• The conservation area.
• The site of the new residential development for 280 homes off Aston Road.
• A footway along the length of Aston Road, which would improve pedestrian accessibility within the area, was required as a condition of the new housing development. 
• The application site was part of a larger 5 hectare site which was considered for housing and economic development as part of the supporting evidence for the emerging Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP); the larger site outlined in brown was not allocated in the VALP; the southern part of this site was identified as a prominent landscape and open break in the village footprint and added to the local character with exposed to views from the south to the Chilterns.
• The application site was only a small site of 0.32 hectares and would result in a small loss of open land on Aston Road in the north-west corner, but it would not affect the southern part of the site. 
• The layout of the proposed development including car parking spaces, drop-off spaces and internal two metre wide pedestrian footway. 
• A buggy store and nursery play area would be provided. 
• A hedge was proposed along the eastern and south eastern boundary of the site.
• The nursery would operate from 7.00 am to 7.00 pm, Monday to Friday for 51 weeks of the year.
• Drawings of the buildings and photos of the site from different angles.
• A heritage expert had been consulted regarding the listed building near the proposed entrance and had raised no objection.
• The cars parked on Aston Road; no concerns had been raised from the Highways Authority regarding the capacity of the local highway network.

Public speaking

The Chairman invited Ms A Cheeseman to present her statement on behalf of the residents of Aston Road, appended to the minutes.

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• A member of the committee queried where Ms Cheeseman thought the nursery should be located.  Ms Cheeseman added that there were three large housing developments in Haddenham but the nursery was proposed in an open space storing carbon and asked why it was not being located on the site of one of the large housing developments.
• A member of the committee requested clarification from the officers on whether the people travelling to the primary school would impact on the nursery school movements.  Ms Kelham confirmed that the school and nursery would have different hours of operation but was unsure if the school ran a breakfast club, although a breakfast club would be likely to start at 8.00 am.
• A member of the committee commented that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Mr J Suter, Planning Graduate, stated that this application was for a new building shed for the sorting and baling of plastic and cardboard for the purpose of recycling.  The use of the site for waste importation storage and processing, operational procedures including the vehicle movements and working hours were not proposed to change.  The application was being brought to the Committee as an objection had been received from a local resident regarding dust, odour, noise and traffic from the existing operation being exacerbated by the proposed development.

Mr Suter provided a presentation showing photos of the site which was within an industrial estate.  The site was not subject to any planning constraints as it was not within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or within the Green Belt and was supported by the Bucks Local Minerals and Waste Local Plan.  No new waste streams would be brought to the site; the current waste would be processed more efficiently as currently the waste was moved to another place to be baled.  Photos were shown of the site of the proposed new building and the existing building to be removed, along with photos from different directions on the site.

The Chairman invited Mr T Benson, Environmental Consultant, to speak on behalf of the applicant.

Mr Benson highlighted the following points:

• He had been involved throughout the application process.
• The baling and shredding activities were already being undertaken on site and benefitted from the previous planning application granted in 2009.
• This application sought to enclose the activities undertaken and would result in a betterment as the noise and dust would be enclosed.
• Given that the waste was already received at the site there would not be any increase in traffic or the number of heavy goods vehicle movements.
• To his knowledge, there had been no objections raised from the Highways team and there were no concerns from the Environmental Health team.
• Any dust resulting from the recycling activity would be negligible as the process would be enclosed.
• The shredding and baling was already undertaken on site and was a key contributor to the existing noise climate; however, the proposed development lay within a heavily industrialised area with numerous manufacturing and commercial businesses which contributed to the background noise level.
• The development was approximately 200 metres from the nearest residential receptor and it was screened by intervening buildings.
• In summary the application should result in a ‘betterment’.

The committee members did not have any questions.

Mrs Caprio reminded the committee that they were invited to approve application number CM/0040/19 subject to the conditions set out in Appendix A in the report.  The members of the committee unanimously approved the recommendation.

RESOLVED:  The Development Control Committee APPROVED application number CM/0040/19 subject to the conditions set out in Appendix A of the report.

Monday 27 January 2020 at 10.00 am.

27 January 2020.

RESOLVED:  That the press and public be excluded for the following item which is exempt by virtue of Paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act 1972 because it contains information relating to an individual.

The confidential minutes of the meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 4 November 2019, to be confirmed as a correct record.