To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence

To confirm the minutes of the South Planning Committee meeting held on 30 June 2020

Contact Tim Ward (01743) 257713

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Southern Planning Committee held on 30 June 2020 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 no later than 2.00 pm on Friday 24 July 2020.

There were no public questions of statements 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 meeting 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 20/01847/FUL, Councillor Cecilia Motley declared that she was a member of The Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership and The Shropshire Hills AONB Strategy and Performance Committee. She confirmed that she had taken no part in any discussion relating to this application.

With reference to planning application 19/00826/FUL, Councillor Cecilia Motley declared that the applicant was known to her and that she would withdraw from the meeting and take no part in the debate and would not vote on the item.

With reference to planning application 20/01847/FUL, Councillor David Turner declared that he was a member of The Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership and The Shropshire Hills AONB Strategy and Performance Committee. He confirmed that he had taken no part in any discussion relating to this application.

With reference to planning application 19/03637/VAR Councillor Madge Shineton declared a perceived bias due to her relationship with the applicant.  She confirmed that she would take no part in the debate and would not vote on the item.

Application for a southern extension to the existing sand and gravel quarry, retention of all existing operational facilities and site access and revised restoration of the existing site

The Principal Planner introduced the application which was an application for a southern extension to the existing sand and gravel quarry, retention of all existing operational facilities and site access and revised restoration of the existing site, and with reference to the drawings and photographs displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.

The Principal Planner drew Members attention to the information contained in the list of late representations.

A Member commented that local quarries would play an important part in the development of local infrastructure.

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with the Officers recommendation permission be granted and that authority be delegated to planning officers to make any amendments to the conditions and legal obligations set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

Variation of condition no.8a (max. tonnage of materials imported) pursuant of 15/02626/MAW to allow for an increase in tonnage per annum

In accordance with the declaration made at minute 122 and the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15) Councillor Madge Shineton, local Ward Councillor, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Principal Planner introduced the application which was an application for a Variation of condition no.8a (max. tonnage of materials imported) pursuant of 15/02626/MAW to allow for an increase in tonnage per annum, and with reference to the drawings and photographs displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.

The Principal Planner drew Members attention to the information contained in the list of late representations and to two representations that had been circulated to Members by email.

The Principal Planner advised Members that reference to a legal agreement had been included in the recommendation in error and that the recommendation should be amended to remove this.

In accordance with virtual meeting speaking protocol the following Public Speaker statements were read out:

·         Mrs Dorothy McBride, local resident in objection to the proposal

·         Cllr John Greaves on behalf of Cleobury Mortimer Town Council in objection to the proposal

·         Dr Anthony Yates on behalf of the Applicants

During the ensuing debate Members comments included: -

·         They understood the objections around odour but felt that the matter was sufficiently regulated by the Environment Agency licence and by Shropshire Council regulatory services.

·         Concern regarding the fact that the slurry buffer tank and the digestate tank were not covered and asked that a condition be imposed to ensure that the tanks were covered to help minimise odour

·         Concern regarding noise emitted from the site and asked that adequate noise mitigation measures be put in place.

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with the Officers recommendation permission be granted and authority be delegated to planning officers to make any amendments to the conditions contained in appendix 1 to the report as deemed necessary to include: -

·         The roofing of the slurry buffer tank and the digestate tank

·         Adequate noise mitigation measures

Erection of 8 No Dwellings with Car Shelters, Reprofiling of Ground; Restoration of Stone Boundary Wall and Creation of 2 No Vehicular Access Points.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15) Councillor Andy Boddington, local Ward Councillor, having submitted a statement, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

In accordance with the declaration made at minute 122 Councillor Cecilia Motley took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Consultant Planner introduced the application for the erection of 8 No Dwellings with Car Shelters, Reprofiling of Ground; Restoration of Stone Boundary Wall and Creation of 2 No Vehicular Access Points and with reference to the drawings and photographs displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations. 

The Consultant Planner advised Members that the application was subject of an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate on grounds of non-determination and had been brought to Committee in order that Members could give an indication on how they would have dealt with the application which would guide the Councils response to the appeal.

The Consultant Planner reminded Members that there was an existing planning permission for 3 houses and that work had commenced to enable this application.  He advised Members that a further application for 4 houses had been submitted and would be brought before Committee shortly.

The Consultant Planner drew Members attention to the information contained in the list of late representations and to the updated ecological report which had been circulated to Members by email.

In accordance with virtual meeting speaking protocol the following Public Speaker statements were read out:

·         Richard Hurlock, Chairman on behalf of Ludlow Civic Society Committee in support of the application

·         Councillor Andy Boddington – Local Member in objection to the application

·         Mark Turner on behalf of the Applicants in support of the application

During the ensuing debate Members comments included: -

·         Members generally felt that the application was an improvement on that already granted and welcomed the planned renovation of the boundary wall.

·         Members expressed concern that a large number of trees would be affected by the proposal.

·         A Member suggested that the application should be deferred to enable a site visit as suggested by the applicant.  Members were advised that due to timescales imposed by the Planning Inspectorate this would not be advisable.

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with the Officers recommendation the Committee indicate to the Secretary of State that it would have been minded to refuse the application for the reasons set out in the report

Erection of 1 No. holiday let lodge

The Principal Planner introduced the application for the erection of 1 No. holiday let lodge and with reference to the drawings and photographs displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations. 

In accordance with virtual meeting speaking protocol the following Public Speaker statements were read out:

·         Councillor Dan Morris, the local Ward Councillor, in support of the proposal. (In accordance with the public speaking protocol, Cllr Morris read out his own statement)

·         Kelly Homden on behalf of the Applicants in support of the proposal

During the ensuing debate Members comments included: -

·         Council must be seen to support rural businesses

·         The proposed holiday let lodge would be a useful addition to the existing business.

RESOLVED:

That, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, with planning officers having delegated authority to attach appropriate planning conditions for the following reason: -

The proposal would provide for sustainable tourism and would provide economic benefits to an established rural enterprise, adding to existing pool side holiday lodge by allowing larger groups to be accommodated in response to demand.

Erection of replacement dwelling and alterations, including erection of detached annex and construction of garden bridge.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15), the Chairman Councillor David Evans, local Ward Councillor, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Vice Chairman Councillor David Turner took the Chair for this item.

The Principal Planner introduced the application for the erection of replacement dwelling and alterations, including erection of detached annex and construction of garden bridge. and with reference to the drawings and photographs displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.

The Principal Planner drew Members attention to the information contained in the list of late representations

During the ensuing debate Members comments included: -

·         Some Members considered the modern design does not fit in with the design of the surrounding buildings although other Members expressed an opposing view that the design would be appropriate for this location

·         Large building on a relatively small plot.

·         Effect of the new development has no greater impact on neighbouring woodland than existing building.

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with the Officers recommendation permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the southern area as at 28 July 2020 be noted.

To note that the next meeting of the South Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday,25 August 2020

RESOLVED:

That it be noted that the next meeting of the South Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday 25 August 2020