Agenda item

Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Approval of all reserved matters under outline planning permission VAR/2020/0159 for three industrial/warehouse units (B2/B8)

1 Magnesium Way Hapton Lancashire BB12 7BF

A motion to delegate authority to the Head of Housing and Development Controlto approve the application subject to the recommended conditions and subject to the receipt of an amended layout confirming that the approval does not grant or imply any consent for any development to land west of the extension of Magnesium Way was moved and seconded.

On being put to the vote the motion was declared to be lost.

The Locum Regulatory Solicitor issued the following Cost Warning to members:

‘May I remind members that any decision taken in this matter must be based on, and only on, proper planning grounds reflecting your planning judgement on the case. Your officers have advised fully in relation to the relevant material considerations and policy background and you should consider that advice carefully. Whilst you are not bound to follow that advice, in any appeal proceedings arising out of the decision you make, the Council will be expected to produce evidence to substantiate each reason for refusal, by reference to the Development Plan and all other material considerations. If the Council fails to, or cannot do so, then costs may be awarded against it.

To reiterate, you are not bound to adopt the professional or technical advice given by your own officers or received from statutory bodies or consultees. However, you will be expected to show that you had reasonable planning grounds for taking a decision contrary to such advice and are able to produce relevant evidence to support your decision in all respects. If the Council were to fail to do so, it may be liable to have costs awarded against it.

Whether or not a costs order may, or may not, be made and how much that may, or may not, amount to, is, however, not a material consideration and is therefore not something you should be considering in deciding whether planning permission should be granted or not.

A motion to refuse the application was moved and seconded.

As the motion was contrary to Officer recommendation Officers recorded the voting as follows:

Decision

That the application be refused for the following reason:

Reason

The proposed development, by reason of the height (exceeding 7.0m) and siting of Units A and B would result in a visually dominant and overbearing form of development such that it would cause an unacceptable adverse impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties adjacent to the site`s northern boundary, contrary to both Policy SP5 of Burnley`s Local Plan (July 2018) and the Site Specific Policy Requirements and Design Principles in Policy EMP1/2 of Burnley’s Local Plan (July 2018).