To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Richard Huffer and Michael Wood (Substitute: William Parr).

To confirm the minutes of the South Planning Committee meeting held on 13 March 2018.

Contact Linda Jeavons (01743) 257716.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the South Planning Committee held on 13 March 2018 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the resolution at Minute No. 106, bullet point 5(i) being amended to read as follows:

·         (i)           an affordable housing contribution of 15%.

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 no later than 24 hours prior to the commencement of the meeting.

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 applications 17/06051/FUL and 17/06052/ADV, Councillor David Evans declared that he was the owner of the building.

With reference to planning application 17/06074/FUL, Councillor Robert Tindall declared that he was a member of the Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership.

With reference to planning application 17/06074/FUL, Councillor David Turner declared that he was a member of The Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership and The Shropshire Hills AONB Management Board.  He confirmed that he had taken no part in any discussion relating to this application. 

Erection of a building for the housing of alpaca, the storage of hay and associated agricultural equipment for alpaca husbandry; formation of access track

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 and had viewed the site and had assessed the impact of a proposal on the surrounding area. 

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

Councillor G Wadsworth, representing Farlow Parish Council, 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) Councillor Gwilym Butler, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement.  He then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         He raised awareness regarding the undulation of the land;

·         Alpacas were a valuable commodity and he considered that it would be more beneficial to house them closer to home;

·         He did not object to this application in principle, but he considered that the proposal as it stood would be to the detriment of neighbouring properties and the building would be better re-positioned to the rear of the manege; and

·         A position by the manege would avoid the need for a long drive across the paddock.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15) Councillor Madge Shineton, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement.  She then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During her statement, the following points were raised:

·         She welcomed new business to the area; and

·         She was not convinced that this was the best location for this building.

In the ensuing debate, Members noted the comments of all speakers and considered the submitted plans.  Members considered that there was merit in deferring the proposal in order that further consideration could be given to the location of the building.

RESOLVED:

That the application be deferred to a future meeting to enable the applicant to give further consideration to the location of the building in order to address the impact on the surrounding area and neighbouring properties.

Installation of ATM and internally illuminated signage (17/06051/FUL)

Erect and display 1 No: internally illuminated top sign and 1 No: internally illuminated ATM logo panel   (17/06052/ADV)

In accordance with his declaration at Minute No. 112, Councillor David Evans left the room during consideration of this item.

Councillor David Turner took the Chair.

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 and had viewed the site and had assessed the impact of a proposal on the surrounding area. 

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans, and it was

RESOLVED: That, as per the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission (17/06051/FUL) and Advertisement Consent (17/06052/ADV) be granted, subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

(At this juncture, the Chairman returned and took the Chair.)

Erection of an affordable dwelling and installation of a package treatment plant.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  He drew Members’ attention to the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting and provided a verbal update on comments in support of and against the proposal received following its publication.

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

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

Ms C Perkins, a local resident, 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) Councillor Nigel Hartin, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement.  He 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 welcomed the site visit;

·         Recognised Settlement - He drew Members’ attention to the mixed views, received verbally, in writing and as set out in the Officer’s report, on whether or not Clunton Coppice was or was not a recognised settlement;  

·         Paragraph 6.1.5 indicated that the applicant had met the majority of the tests/criteria;

·         No concerns had been raised by Highways, Ecology and Drainage Officers;

·         Clunton Coppice was a very small settlement and had been for a very long time.  Houses had changed over time - some two small properties had merged to become one;

·         Paragraph 6.2.4 of the report indicated that the lodge would not be prominent in distant views but its very presence would erode the essentially open character of the landscape and be detrimental to the scenic beauty in this part of the AONB.  However, paragraph 6.3.4 of the report suggested that the design would be in keeping with the character of the land; and

·         On balance, he supported the application.

Mr S Jones, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In the ensuing debate, Members noted the comments of all speakers and considered the submitted plans.  Members concluded that Clunton Coppice was a recognised settlement.  To ensure minimal impact on the surrounding area, elevations should be of an appropriate colour and the use of skirtings would help to enhance the external appearance.

RESOLVED:

That, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, for the following reasons:

·         Clunton Coppice is a recognised named settlement and the erection of a dwelling and associated activities in this location would not detract from the intrinsic character and scenic quality of this part of the Shropshire Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Accordingly, it would therefore be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies CS5, CS6, CS11 and CS17 of the Shropshire Local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

Erection of a detached double garage with office above.

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 and had viewed the site and had assessed the impact of a proposal on the surrounding area. 

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15) Councillor David Evans, on behalf of Councillor Cecilia Motley, the local Ward Councillor, read out the following statement:

·         “The only reason this application is coming forward to the Planning Committee is because the applicant is an employee of Shropshire Council.  19 Burley is one of a pair of semi-detached cottages lying just off the junction of the lane running between Burley and Vernolds Common.  This is an application for a double garage, with office over, lying well within the curtilage of 19 Burley.  It should not be greatly visible behind the high gates of the property and there has been no comment or objection from the neighbouring property, 19a Burley. 

Culmington Parish Council considered the application at its April meeting and agreed to support it unanimously.

As Division Councillor I have no objection to this application.”

            In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans, and it was

            RESOLVED:

That, as per the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the southern area as at 9 May 2018 be noted.

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

2.00 pm on Tuesday, 5 June 2018, 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, 5 June 2018 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND.