To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

To confirm the minutes of the South Planning Committee meeting held on 13 September 2016.

Contact Linda Jeavons (01743) 257716.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the South Planning Committee held on 13 September 2016 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any questions or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.  The deadline for this meeting is 5 pm on Thursday, 6 October 2016.

There were no public questions or petitions received.

Members are reminded that they must not participate in the discussion or voting on any matter in which they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and should leave the room prior to the commencement of the debate.

Members were reminded that they must not participate in the discussion or voting on any matter in which they had a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and should leave the room prior to the commencement of the debate.

With reference to planning application 14/05151/OUT, Councillors Andy Boddington and Robert Tindall declared that they were members of The Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership.

With reference to planning application 14/05151/OUT, Councillor David Turner declared that he was a member of The Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership and The Shropshire Hills AONB Transition Board.

RESOLVED:

That agenda item 6 (Dun Cow Farm, Rocks Green, Ludlow, Shropshire, SY8 2DS – 14/05573/OUT) be considered as the next item of business.

Outline application for the erection of a new foodstore (Use Class A1), associated petrol filling station, and associated car parking to include access.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, she drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  She confirmed that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.  She explained that the Environment Agency had subsequently withdrawn its objection, subject to an additional condition to ensure that the above ground tank compound was appropriately bunded.  She drew Members’ attention to an extant planning permission for a hotel on this site.

Members noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting.

Mr R Heighway, representing local residents, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Ms J Rowlatt, a local business owner, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor J Smithers, representing Ludlow Town Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor P Lawley, representing Ludford Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

With the permission of the Chairman and in response to the number of speakers, the applicant was permitted to speak for up to six minutes.  Mr S McGrath, the applicant, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees and responded to questions from Members.

(At this juncture, the meeting adjourned at 2.30 pm and reconvened at 2.44 pm.)

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Viv Parry, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During her statement, the following points were raised:

·         The site was on a main busy A road where traffic did not keep to the 40mph speed limit.   There was only one small road through to Dun Cow;

·         There were other supermarkets in Ludlow so people of Ludlow did not object to supermarkets per se, but wanted them to be in the right place;

·         There was no need for another supermarket selling the same merchandise as the other supermarkets; and

·         There was no need for another petrol station and this one would cause congestion with traffic queuing onto the main road.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers and Officers.  Members expressed concern with regard to the increased traffic and the detrimental impact this would have on Rocks Green.  They noted that a screening opinion had been applied for with regard to LUD017 and they considered that the Transport Assessment submitted with the outline planning application 14/05573/OUT should have taken this into account.  Some Members requested that, if approved at this stage, any future application should be considered by this Committee. 

In response  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

Erection of dwelling and alterations to existing vehicular access (outline application to include means of access, but with matters of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale reserved).

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  

Members had undertaken a site visit on a previous occasion and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area. 

In the ensuing debate, a Member commented that a statement setting out the number of affordable properties in the area and the local need for affordable housing would have been preferable in order to make an informed decision on whether or not to permit this proposal without securing an affordable housing contribution.  He requested that such information be made available when any appropriate applications are considered by this Committee in the future.

RESOLVED:

That Outline Planning Permission be granted as per the Officer’s recommendation, subject to no development taking place until a Stability Report in respect of the boundary wall and a Construction Method Statement has been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority as agreed and set out in the Minutes of the South Planning Committee meeting held on 3 November 2015.

Erection of new commercial retail unit, with alterations to existing wall fronting

Lower Galdeford, and formation of 2 new pedestrian access areas onto unit, including

auxiliary works.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.   He confirmed that Members had undertaken a site visit that morning and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.  Arising from the site visit, he informed the meeting that, in the interests of visual amenity, the applicant had agreed to cedar clad an existing building within the application site.

Members noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting.

Ms J Hulley, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor C Sheward, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Viv Parry, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During her statement, the following points were raised:

·         The existing stone boundary walls despite being in a poor condition and in need of re-pointing in places should be retained, reinstated and maintained;

·         The site was situated next door to a medical centre which required some degree of quietness.  In order to provide a quieter running surface and to protect the amenities of all those living/working close-by gravel should not be used and all surfaces should be tarmaced;

·         There should be no early or late deliveries and no deliveries on Sundays and Bank/Public Holidays; and

·         The layout of the road into the site was not good and large vehicles would find it difficult to manoeuvre and could cause damage to the two small mini roundabouts.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.  Members generally welcomed an application for this site but as this was a prominent site and a gateway to the town centre expressed the importance of getting it right.  Members expressed concerns regarding the detrimental noise impact caused by large vehicles manoeuvring on gravel and suggested the use of other appropriate materials; and also expressed concerns relating to the construction and delivery times and the impact of this on the surrounding area.  In order to improve the outlook of the site it was suggested that the height of the railings be lowered. 

RESOLVED:

That Planning Permission be granted as per the Officer’s recommendation, subject to:

·         The conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, subject to:

Condition No. 13a to be amended to read:

“No deliveries in connection with the operations hereby approved shall take place before 08.00 to 18.00 Monday to Friday and 08.00 to 13.00 Saturdays.  There shall be no deliveries on Sundays and Bank/Public Holidays;

Condition No. 13c (marked 13b in the report) to be amended to read:

“Hours of working for the construction  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

Erection of affordable dwelling and detached outbuilding; formation of vehicular access.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  

Members had undertaken a site visit that morning and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.

Mr G Banks, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr D Francis, representing the applicant, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Evans, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         He was well acquainted with the area;

·         He had helped to fight a successful campaign to retain the local school;

·         The site fell within a settlement known as Brandhill Gutter;

·         The application was supported by the Parish Council and the two local Shropshire Councillors; and

·         Young people who have lived and worked in the area for many years should be given every opportunity and support to remain in the area.

At this juncture, the Chairman left the room and the Vice-Chairman took the chair for this item.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.

RESOLVED:

That, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, subject to:

·         A Section 106 Legal Agreement to ensure the property remains an affordable dwelling in perpetuity; and

·         That Planning Officers be granted delegated powers to attach appropriate conditions relating to materials, ground levels, landscaping, floor area, access, drainage (foul and surface water), ecology, and any other conditions deemed necessary and to include Informatives relating to rights of way and a sustainable drainage scheme (SUDS).

(The Chairman returned to the meeting and resumed the chair.)

Erection of 12 No. affordable dwellings with associated parking, roads, landscaping, sustainable drainage scheme and enhanced access from the Callaughton Lane.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  

Members had undertaken a site visit the previous day and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.

Members noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting.

Mrs L Durbin, a local resident, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr F Harrow, a local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor M Whiteman, representing Much Wenlock Town Council, spoke commenting on aspects of the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Turner, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement.  He remained in the room but   and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         Much Wenlock was a popular tourist destination and was a much sought-after residential location.  It had two good schools, both primary and secondary and there were good amenities within easy reach;

·         The exercise of right to buy had stripped the community of much of its social housing;

·         The average age in Much Wenlock was 49 – this compared with some Shrewsbury wards, for instance, where the average age was 37.  The proportion of its population working locally is comparatively small.  Public transport links were poor except for the Bridgnorth to Shrewsbury service and it was difficult to sustain local employment;

·         The Much Wenlock Neighbourhood Plan's gestation period throughout 2012 and the early part of 2013 was characterised by continuous public consultation. Surveys, drop- in consultations throughout the parish, meetings, press articles, a website, social media and posters around the town ensured that there was wide awareness of the plan as it developed.  A key aspect that emerged was the need for affordable housing for local people;

·         The demand for social housing was borne out by the Housing Needs Survey and is evidenced by the bidding on HomePoint.  This site, just off the lane to Callaughton, close to the primary school, the shops and public transport, was as good as any in the somewhat constrained topography of Much Wenlock.  The proposal had been subject to well-publicised local consultation and comments that have been made had informed changes in the layout and design;

·         As regards this application, it would provide a variety of accommodation.  The plots would be large and the houses were imaginatively designed.  The surface water management proposals were thorough and resilient;

·         He expressed concerns regarding the pedestrian access arrangements along the lane from the Bridgnorth Road but was somewhat reassured given the view of the Highways Officer that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the southern area as at 11 October 2016 be noted.

To note that the next meeting of the South Planning Committee will be held at

2.00 pm on Tuesday, 8 November 2016, in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

RESOLVED:

That it be noted that the next meeting of the South Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 8 November 2016 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND.