Agenda item

The Planning Manager presented a detailed report in relation to the above application, which sought outline approval for 2 large warehouse buildings located next to the northern side of the Markham Vale Employment Site.

The application site straddled the administrative boundaries between Chesterfield Borough Council and Bolsover District Council; Unit A was located in Bolsover District and Unit B was located in Chesterfield Borough. At its planning committee meeting held on 12th December 2022, Chesterfield Borough Council had considered the application and had resolved to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a S106 obligation.

The entrance to the site would be off the access route from the existing road serving Gist Ltd off Seymour Link Road. The proposal was expected to create approximately 880 jobs with good links to the M1.

Footpath 29 crossed the site north/south, which would be less direct if the application was to be approved, however, the new footpath would be fully surfaced.

Chris Creighton (agent) attended the meeting and spoke for the application.

Councillors queried whether the proposed development already had an end user lined up. The agent confirmed that nothing was firmly in place, however, the site itself had received a good level of interest and there was high demand for units within the area.

Local bus companies had been approached relating to routes that would serve the site but currently none wished to extend their services, however, this could change in the future if the development was approved.

Moved by Councillor Duncan McGregor and seconded by Councillor Tom Munro that the application be approved.

For the motion: 3

Against the motion: 3 (including Councillor Jim Clifton)

Abstention: 1

As the votes were tied, the Chair exercised his casting vote and voted for the application.

It was therefore RESOLVED that:

(1) the application be approved and;

(2) the Planning Manager of Development Control be given delegated authority to both formulate the final wording of the conditions (as per the current recommendation) and also to omit some of the conditions in their entirety if they do not pass the legal tests for conditions or are relevant to Chesterfield Borough only.

Statement of Decision Process

Officers have worked positively and pro-actively with the applicant to address issues raised during the consideration of the application. The proposal has been considered against the policies and guidelines adopted by the Council and the decision has been taken in accordance with the guidelines of the Framework.

The decision contains several pre-commencement conditions which are so fundamental to the development permitted that:

·       it would have been otherwise necessary to refuse the whole permission; or

·       are necessary to address issues that require information to show that the development will or can be made safe; or

·       address other impacts which need to be assessed to make the development acceptable to minimise and mitigate adverse impacts from the development.

Equalities Statement

Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 places a statutory duty on public authorities in the exercise of their functions to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it (i.e. “the Public Sector Equality Duty”).

In this case, there is no evidence to suggest that the development proposals would have any direct or indirect negative impacts on any person with a protected characteristic or any group of people with a shared protected characteristic.

Human Rights Statement

The specific Articles of the European Commission on Human Rights (‘the ECHR’) relevant to planning include Article 6 (Right to a fair and public trial within a reasonable time), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence), Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions and protection of property).

It is considered that assessing the effects that a proposal will have on individuals and

weighing these against the wider public interest in determining whether development should be allowed to proceed is an inherent part of the decision-making process. In carrying out this ‘balancing exercise’ in the above report, officers are satisfied that the potential for these proposals to affect any individual’s (or any group of individuals’) human rights has been addressed proportionately and in accordance with the requirements of the ECHR.