The Technical Specialist Planning Officer introduced the application and 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.   With reference to the drawings displayed, she drew members’ attention to the location, layout, access and elevations.

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting which detailed a further comment from a member of the public in relation to materials to be used given the historic setting.

By virtue of the amendment made to Shropshire Council’s Constitution, as agreed at the meeting of Full Council held on 27 February 2014, Councillor Andrew Bannerman, as the local Ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote. During his statement the following points were raised:

·         He had no dispute with the principle of conversion as the proposal could make a good living space;

·         He felt that the recommendation as it stood was unsatisfactory as it was a sensitive site in the heart of an historic town and it was important to create something of architectural merit;

·         Design was key, but was something that the Committee rarely considered, although training on this issue had been requested;

·         It was not good enough to say that the design was subjective, officers should consider the views of experts;

·         He felt that more weight should be given to the opinion of English Heritage in relation to the elevational details, materials and finishes;

·         He drew attention to paragraph 6.2.4 in relation to the facades facing Princess Street and High Street, and paragraph 6.2.6 in relation to proposed solar PV Panels on the first floor elevation;

·         Led into accepting the proposal without the proper guidance and requested that a Design Review Service (eg MADE) be consulted in order to provide independent, objective, expert feedback on the design of the proposed development; and

·         He urged the Committee to defer its decision until the proposal had been submitted to a design review panel.

In response to concerns about the proposed solar pv panels on the first floor elevation of the main block, the Technical Specialist Planning Officer explained that the solar panels were included to add interest as the developer was required to retain the current ventilation apertures and that if approved a condition would be imposed requiring full details to be submitted for approval.

Concern was raised about an appeal against non-determination if the matter were to be deferred.

It was suggested that an appropriate way forward would be to form a small consensus group with the Chairman, Councillor Bannerman, English Heritage and the Planning Officers in order to oversee the discharge of Conditions.

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

RESOLVED:

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

·         Officers resolving the issues contained in Condition No’s. 3, 4 and 6, namely materials, doors and windows and solar PV Panels, in consultation with Councillor Bannerman;

·         The conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report; and

·         A Section 106 Agreement to secure two affordable units.