Cheshire West and Cheshire approved the application by nine votes to two. Its approval had been recommended by the planning inspectorate, who produced a long document weighing up the pros and cons of all aspects of the development, but it was the committee itself - made up of local counsellors - who had the final say.
One of the key points was whether the plans satisfied "very special circumstances" requirements that allow for developments on green belt land, and while one hotel and an education centre could, the planning inspectors thought that two hotels and a garden centre was "egging the pudding", hence their removal from the application (as mentioned on my Tweet this afternoon).
Because the development is on the green belt, it now has to be approved by the Secretary of State under the 2009 directive. It could be rubber stamped, but if it is not, then the next step would be a public enquiry.
It's important to differentiate between the different phases of the application. It's a "hybrid" application, which means that some elements are approved in detail while some are "outlined". The detailed elements include the Heart of Africa biodome and new traffic infrastructure and entrance, for which the zoo submitted detailed plans.
The outline application covers the remainder of what we know as Natural Vision (including the hotel) and are approved in principal. This means that individual elements within the project, such as outlying buildings, still have to be submitted for approval and still have to meet "very special circumstances" criteria.
Work on both phases must begin within the next five years.
It was a long meeting and I don't think anyone wants to be bored by all the finer points, but most of the issues raised were as one would expect. Local representatives mentioned the native wildlife, one stated that the zoo needed to foster a better relationship with its neighbours, there were questions about the dome's height (apparently visible from Liverpool airport), the light pollution, and that the outlying plans were too vague and commercial. The most vehement objections came from Anne Jones of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, who was disappointed in the lack of detail in regards to the green belt within the planning inspectorate's assessment, and from a Mr. Hobbs representing (some) local residents, who said that the zoo had treated the public with "contempt" and manipulated opinion by asking NEZS members to write letters of endorsement.
Most of the objections related to the outline portion of the plans and their potential commercialism, whereas most, even Upton residents, approved of Heart of Africa due to its zoological nature. The chosen location for the hotel was the subject of some debate, with its visibility from the A41 being cited as a negative aspect. A number of people asked why it couldn't be built "inside the zoo itself" (on the elephant paddock perhaps?).
A number of local counsellors spoke and it was noticeable that some began their addresses with "these aren't my opinions", explaining that that they were duty bound to relay the concerns of those the represent. A number worded their submissions carefully as to relay objections and yet still appear in favour of the project.
There was also a lot of support for the plans, including from Philip Martin of the Green Bough Hotel and president of the Chester hotels association. He explained that every single one of his members, from the Grosvenor Hotel down, were in favour of the plans (thereby nullifying objections based on the grounds of the zoo hotel taking business away from existing establishments). Professor Gordon McGregor Reid spoke on behalf of the zoo. A number of the planning committee also voiced their support, one rightly saying that the advantages both from commercial and conservation standpoints of such a significant development vastly outweighed the issues local residents may have, and that it was unrealistic of those who had moved to Upton in the period since the 1930s when the zoo first opened, not to expect it to develop over time.
There were a few minor issues, such as continuing access to Flag Lane, and it was requested that the zoo's opening hours be extended to allow for a more staggered "going home time", something I doubt many regular visitors will complain about.
Questions; fire away.
. Does this SofS have to approve them aswell, or does he have another role?
)