An appeal over Cheshire East Council's refusal to grant planning permission for a church meeting hall has been adjourned due to an administrative error.
An appeal hearing for Mobberley Developments Limited in relation to their plans to demolish a former riding school located in the Green Belt in Mobberley and replace it with a church meeting hall was scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 27th March.
However, due to the Council's failure to notify local parish and town council's about the hearing it was adjourned by the Inspector.
A Cheshire East Council spokesperson said: "The council apologies for the inconvenience caused, following an administrative oversight in this matter. It was discovered the day before the scheduled appeal hearing that adjacent parish/town councils had not been notified of the hearing date.
"The adjournment was clearly the right decision to ensure no party was prejudiced in presenting their views.
"A new date has yet to be arranged and all parties will be notified when this has been confirmed."
A group of local residents and the consultants appointed by them attended the hearing on Tuesday, 27th March, only to have it adjourned by the Inspector as a result of the Council's failure to meet its obligations.
A spokesperson for the group said "This has put us to inconvenience and expense and the cost of the consultant's wasted time and effort preparing and attending the hearing.
"The failure of the Council involved not sending out notification letters to a number of people including town and parish councils and one of these Wilmslow Town Council informing the LPA yesterday that it would have attended the appeal hearing had it known.
"In addition, despite several requests to the Council it failed to post important and key documents on its website. These included our Statement of Case, a Statement of Common Ground and a significant number of other third party objections. When asked by the Inspector the Council Officer seemed particularly unconcerned only saying only that she 'would try to get them posted today'.
"This constitutes an especially poor performance by the Council, putting the Council Tax payers to a significant cost and we ask that strong action is taken against those involved in the failure. This is also intended to put the Council on notice that we shall be applying for costs for the wasted costs to our consultants as a consequence of the Council's unreasonable behaviour."
Mobberley Development Limited has appealed against the decision of the Council's Northern Planning Committee at its meeting in February 2017 to refuse permission for the demolition of existing buildings on site and the erection of a church meeting hall with associated access, parking and landscaping and infrastructure at the former Mobberley Riding School site.
The plans were refused on the grounds that the proposal is inappropriate development within the Green Belt; is unsustainable and would require reliance on the private car and, by virtue of the parking areas and access proposed, will have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity and character of the rural area.
The appeal documentation states "It is clear that there are no reasonable grounds to justify refusal of the application on any of the three reasons for refusal. The scheme does not constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt; it constitutes sustainable development; and it will have no detrimental impact on the visual amenity and character of the rural area.
"Furthermore it is important to note that no objections were raised by any of the statutory consultees during the application process and the proposal makes effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed."
In February 2018 Cheshire East Council lost an appeal against their refusal to grant planning permission for the change in use of the former Kings Arms Service Station on Alderley Road, Wilmslow to a hand car wash and valet business.
As well as winning their appeal, Shines was awarded full costs because the Council failed to submit a statement in support of its reasons for refusing planning permission within the given timescales.
The Planning Inspectorate said that this failure amounted to "unreasonable behaviour on the Council's part" which resulted in "the appellant incurring unnecessary and wasted expenditure".
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
To fail to follow processes once recently (the car wash debacle) is in itself inexcusable, but having done that, to go on and do it again..... What's on earth is going on in CE planning? Are they totally unaccountable?