Agenda item

            That application 051043 be considered at a Special Planning Committee meeting to be held no later than 29^th October 2014. 

                        The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.

                        The officer detailed the background to the report and explained that at the meeting on 18 June 2014, Members had resolved to hold a special planning committee meeting as soon as possible to consider application 051043.  Following that meeting, an application had been received for another site in Northop and due to the similar nature of the applications, it was proposed that there would be some merit in considering both proposals at the same meeting. 

            Councillor Marion Bateman proposed the recommendation that a Special Planning Committee be convened as soon as possible to deal with application 051043 (Tyddyn Starkey Lane, Northop) and 052334 (Kelsterton Lane, Near Northop), if it was deemed to be ready for consideration, which was duly seconded.  Councillor Carol Ellis concurred and said that common sense should prevail. 

            Councillor Owen Thomas felt that there was no reason to consider both applications together and that only application 051043, which had been submitted first, should be considered on its own.  Councillor Mike Peers referred to paragraph 6.02 where it was reported that the applications would be considered separately, he suggested that application 051043 be considered before 052334 even if they were both submitted to the same meeting.  The Democracy and Governance Manager asked that officers be able to decide the order for the consideration of the applications.

            Councillor Neville Phillips referred to the resolution from the meeting on 18 June 2014 which indicated that application 051043 should be determined in a special planning committee meeting to be held as soon as possible.  He raised concern that the meeting had not yet taken place.  He spoke of the need for a crematorium but felt that it was unfair to deal with both applications on the same day.  He said that Flintshire could end up with two crematoria if one was approved and the second one refused, but granted on appeal. 

The Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) said that both applications were linked.  He added that the site for application 051043 was in the green barrier and the change in circumstances since the 18 June 2014 meeting was that a second application had been submitted.  He spoke of the need for a robust decision and said that if the application alluded to provide a suitable site, it was right to have regard to it as it would have an impact on the decision on the initial application.  The Democracy and Governance Manager reminded the Committee that the applicant for 051043 could have appealed on the grounds of non-determination but had decided not to do so. 

Councillor Derek Butler felt that there was a need to consider both applications together to decide which one was the most suitable as one was in the green barrier and one was on brownfield land.  Councillor Gareth Roberts concurred that both applications should be dealt with on the same day but that if the second application was not ready for determination, then application 051043 should be dealt with separately. 

Councillor Chris Bithell said that he felt embarrassed at the way the applications had been dealt with and said that it was deplorable that the original application had been submitted 15 months ago but had still not been determined.  Councillor Richard Jones concurred and said that application 051043 should be dealt with regardless of whether there was any link to other applications. 

In response to the comments made, the officer said that the second application (052334) was in the system and consultation had commenced.  He said that if the application 051043 had been appealed on the grounds of non-determination, a report would have been submitted to Committee on the stance to take at an appeal.  The Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) said that officers had approached the decision in a professional manner with defendable reasons for refusal or support of approval and as two applications had now been submitted, it was important to form an opinion on both to make a recommendation to Committee. 

Councillor Ellis sought clarification on whether there was a policy that indicated that other areas had to be explored if a site was in the green barrier.  The Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) responded it was not in the policy, but the fact that the site was in the green barrier had to be considered. 

On being put to the vote, the proposal to convene a special meeting to consider application 051043 and consider application 052334 if it was deemed to be ready was LOST. 

Councillor Phillips put forward a proposal that application 051043 be dealt with as soon as possible and this was duly seconded.  Councillor Richard Jones proposed that the meeting should be on or before the 29^th October 2014 but Councillor Phillips did not feel that a date should be agreed now.  Councillor Carol Ellis queried why both applications could not be considered on the same day if they were both ready. 

In response to the comments made, the Planning Strategy Manager said that two applications had been submitted for consideration for the same type of proposal.  He advised the Committee of the need to comply with two tests for applications in the green barrier with the first being need and the second being that there was no suitable alternative site not in the green barrier.  He said that it was unsafe to deal with application 051043 on its own and said that both should be dealt with at the same meeting but added that application 052334 should be considered first to see if it was a better proposal.  In response to a question from Councillor Peers, the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) said that because the assessment on application 052334 had not been completed, officers may not be able to make a recommendation on 051043. 

Councillor Ray Hughes commented on the embarrassing situation and Councillor Owen Thomas queried whether any suitable alternative sites had been considered as part of application 051043.  In response, the officer said that supplementary information on specific site searches had taken place.  He explained that the applicant for the 052334 site had had an application refused by Denbighshire County Council and had sought suitable alternatives in Flintshire.  Officers wanted to make a strong recommendation to Members and he said that it was important that both applications were considered at the same time. 

Councillor Richard Jones reiterated his earlier comment that the application 051043 be considered on or before 29^th October 2014 on its own. 

The Democracy and Governance Manager reminded Members that there would be a need to take account of any other suitable sites in determining application 051043 as it was in the green barrier. 

In summing up, Councillor Phillips agreed to include the suggestion by Councillor Jones that the application 051043 be heard no later than 29^th October 2014. 

On being put to the vote, the proposal was CARRIED.

            RESOLVED:

            That application 051043 be considered at a Special Planning Committee meeting to be held no later than 29^th October 2014.