Shropshire Council website

This is the website of Shropshire Council

Contact information

E-mail

customer.service@shropshire.gov.uk

Telephone

0345 678 9000

Postal Address

Shropshire Council
Shirehall
Abbey Foregate
Shrewsbury
Shropshire
SY2 6ND

Agenda and minutes

North Planning Committee
Tuesday, 6th May, 2014 2.00 pm

Venue: Shrewsbury/Oswestry Room, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY2 6ND. View directions

Contact: Shelley Davies  Committee Officer

Items
No. Item

153.

Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Gerald Dakin and Councillor David Minnery. 

154.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 72 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 8th April 2014, attached, marked 2.

 

Contact Emily Marshall on 01743 252726.

 

Minutes:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 8th April 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

155.

Public Question Time

To receive any questions, statements or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.

Minutes:

There were no public questions, statements or petitions received.

156.

Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

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.

Minutes:

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.

 

Councillor  Walpole declared that he had a close association with the owner of the adjacent brown field site for which an application was being prepared, and would leave the room prior to consideration of planning application 14/00831/OUT Tawnylea, Prescott Road, Prescott, Baschurch, Shropshire due to perception of bias.

 

Councillor Walpole, also explained that as the local ward Councillor for planning applications 13/05139/FUL Cross Keys Inn, Kinnerley, Oswestry, and 14/01018/FUL Ashford Hall, Knockin, Oswestry, and in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Constitution he would make a statement on each application, but would take no part in the debate and would not vote on these applications.  He would vacate the Chair and Councillor Wynn, as Vice-Chairman would preside for consideration of these applications.

157.

Land Off Pixley Lane, Hinstock, Shropshire (12/04209/FUL) pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Change of use of land for the stationing of caravans for residential purposes for 3 no. gypsy pitches together with the formation of additional hard standing and utility/dayrooms ancillary to that use

Minutes:

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for the change of use of land for the stationing of caravans for residential purposes for 3 no. gypsy pitches together with the formation of additional hard standing and utility/dayrooms ancillary to that use and drew Members’ attention to the schedule of additional letters, which included additional correspondence from Hinstock Parish Working Group, summarizing the objections of residents of Hinstock.  The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit that morning to view the site and assess the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area. 

 

Ms. S. Tucker, on behalf of objectors, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                  i.        The development was separated from the nearby settlement of Hinstock by the busy A41 trunk road and was in open countryside;

                 ii.        Locals questioned the extent to which occupants would become integrated into the local community;

                iii.        The proposals did not comply with Policy CS12 of the Shropshire Council Core Strategy in that deliberate isolation had not been avoided as the site would be physically and visually separated by the A41 trunk road;

                iv.        The development was inappropriate in terms of its pattern, design and was contrary to Policy CS6 of the Shropshire Council Core Strategy and did not meet the criteria to be considered sustainable development; and

                 v.        The development was sporadic, unsustainable, alienating and in open countryside.

 

Councillor Mark Williams, representing Hinstock Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                          i.        The site was a green field site and therefore in open countryside;

                         ii.        The proposed development was not in accordance with Paragraph 23 of the Planning Policy for Travellers Sites;

                        iii.        The applicant had not provided details of proposed occupants so the criteria in Policy CS12 had not been met;

                        iv.        There was no evidence of a connection to Shropshire or the surrounding area;

                         v.        The nearby sewage treatment plant was operating to capacity;

                        vi.        There was no information on smell or noise;

                      vii.        The site was not covered by public transport and the local school was full;

                     viii.        Alternative sites were available; and

                        ix.        138 local residents had made representations at a recent public meeting, which indicated strong local opposition.

 

Mr Matthew Green, agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

           

                      i.        The site was clearly close to the village;

                    ii.        There were always large numbers of objections to the development of sites of this nature, but this wasn’t a reason to refuse the application;

                   iii.        The presumption in favour of sustainable development was engaged;

                   iv.        Acoustic Fencing could be conditioned if considered necessary by the Committee; and

                    v.        There were no reasons to refuse the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 157.

158.

Cross Keys Inn, Kinnerley, Oswestry, SY10 8DB (13/05139/FUL) pdf icon PDF 320 KB

Erection of four dwellings; retention of public house; formation of new vehicular accesses and alterations to existing car parking arrangement; associated landscaping.

Minutes:

 

(The Chairman, as the local ward Councillor for this application vacated the Chair and the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Paul Wynn presided for this item.)

 

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of four dwellings; retention of public house; formation of new vehicular accesses and alterations to existing car parking arrangement and associated landscaping.  He drew Members’ attention to the schedule of additional letters and confirmed that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had assessed the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.

 

Mr Peter Clark, on behalf of Kinnerley Neighbourhood Plan Committee, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                      i.        The Cross Keys public house occupied a very important position within the village of Kinnerley and as such it was important to protect and enhance the area for the future;

                    ii.        The Parish did not need any more houses, 73 additional dwellings were planned, with an additional 34 houses agreed, this represented a 46% increase in the number of houses within Kinnerely;

                   iii.        An additional brownfield site within the village that was currently being considered would lead to a further increase in houses;

                   iv.        The application did not comply with the Local Development Plan (LDP) and that the LDP should be given more weight due to the amount of development planned for Kinnerley; and

                    v.        A residential development was not appropriate in that particular location.

 

 

Councillor Rick Bright, on behalf of Kinnerley Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

           

                      i.        The proposed development would be overbearing and have an adverse visual effect on the character and street scene of the area;        

                    ii.        The objection from English Heritage relating to the setting of the Church had not been removed;

                   iii.        Highways safety was a concern; and

                   iv.        The loss of car parking spaces would have an adverse effect on the viability of the Cross Keys Public House.

 

Mr Malcolm Guest, agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                      i.        The agent and the applicant had recently met the Parish Council to discuss the proposals and during that consultation amendments to the scheme had been made;

                    ii.        The Planning and Conservation Officers at Shropshire Council were supportive of the scheme;

                   iii.        The Cross Keys Public House needed investment and had been subsidised by the landlord which was the only reason the business was still able to open;

                   iv.        How did the Parish Council intend to make the business financially viable if the application was refused;

                    v.        The further submissions made by the Parish Council were inaccurate; and

                   vi.        Going against the Planning Officer’s recommendation to approve the application would be detrimental to the village.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 158.

159.

Land Adjacent Tawnylea, Prescott Road, Prescott, Baschurch, Shropshire (14/00831/OUT) pdf icon PDF 217 KB

Outline planning permission for residential development to include access.

Minutes:

 

(Councillor Wynn as Vice-Chairman presided for this item).

 

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the outline application for a residential development to include access, drawing Members attention to the Schedule of Additional Letters.  He confirmed that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had assessed the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.

 

The Principal Planning Officer circulated an update that had been received from Shropshire Council’s Planning Ecologist, which provided an update on ecology issues, stating that the Council’s ecology officer had raised no objections and the conservation status of the Great Crested Newts remained intact. 

 

Mr Michael Griffiths, local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                      i.        The development would have a negative effect on the view point and would be out of character with the surrounding area, which in turn would have a negative impact on tourism in the area;

                    ii.        It would take approximately 20 minutes to walk from the site to the local amenities referred to in the report, and would mean crossing a busy main road, used by large agricultural vehicles;

                   iii.        Concerns for the safety of school children walking to school were highlighted;

                   iv.        The site had intrinsic landscape and visual character; and

                    v.        The ecology report proved that there are Great Crested Newts and Bats in the area;

 

Councillor Colin Case, on behalf of Baschurch Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                 i.             A decision by the Committee may be considered premature;

               ii.             The development proposed was very substantial; and

              iii.             The SamDev Plan was at an important pre submission Draft Plan stage and appropriate weight should be given to this.

 

Mr Martin Parish, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

              i.        Mr Parish reiterated the points contained within the Planning Officers report

 

In accordance with Rule 6.1 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in Part 4 of Shropshire Council’s Constitution, Councillor Bardsley addressed the Committee as a Local Member, during which the following points were raised:

 

              i.        He was not against additional housing within Baschurch, however there were more suitable sites than this one;

            ii.        The site was not favored for housing within the SamDev Plan;

           iii.        The site was not close to local amenities, particularly the school;

           iv.        Due to the site’s distance from the local schools, it was considered that most parents would make the journey by car which would go against the Shropshire Council recommendation to reduce cars along Eyton Lane;

            v.        Children would have to cross a very busy road to get to school;

           vi.        The proposals were a departure from the local development plan; and

          vii.        It seemed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 159.

160.

Ashford Hall, Knockin, Oswestry, SY10 8HL (14/01018/FUL) pdf icon PDF 197 KB

Change of use of agricultural land to domestic garden land.

Minutes:

(Councillor Paul Wynn as Vice-Chairman, presided for this item).

 

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the outline application for the change of use of agricultural land to domestic garden land, drawing Members attention to a submission by Knockin Parish Council, clarifying their concerns, which was included within the Schedule of Additional Letters.  She confirmed that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had assessed the impact of the proposed development on neighboring properties and the surrounding area.

 

Councillor David Ward, representing Knockin Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                      i.        The height of the proposed railings would have an adverse impact and appear overly dominating within the conservation setting of the village;

                    ii.        Requested that the Committee either refuse the application or Condition a more acceptable form of railing at a maximum height of 1.5 metres.

 

Mr Rob Mills, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

 

                      i.        It was not unusual to have railings around a property of this type and within its location;

                    ii.        The proposed scheme had been produced following guidance given by Shropshire Council Planning Officers;

                   iii.        2 metres was a standard height of railing and the small brick plinth was included within the 2 metres;

                   iv.        The Conservation Officer had considered the railings to be acceptable; and

                    v.        The fencing would be screened by several species of hedgerow.

 

By virtue of the amendment made to Shropshire Council’s Constitution, as agreed at the Council Meeting held on 27th February 2014, Councillor Arthur Walpole, as the local Ward Councillor, made a statement, took no part in the debate and did not vote. During his statement he acknowledged that the railings would be screened by hedging, however during the winter months the railings would be visible.  To conclude he reiterated the comments made by the Knockin Parish Council, detailed at paragraph 4. of the Officer’s report.

 

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal, the majority of Members expressed their support for the Officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

 

(Councillor Walpole rejoined the meeting at this point.)

161.

Appeals and Appeal Decisions pdf icon PDF 43 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

That the appeals and appeal decisions for the northern area be noted.

162.

Date of the Next Meeting pdf icon PDF 63 KB

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

2.00 pm on Tuesday 4th June 2014 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

 

Minutes:

It was noted that the next meeting of the North Planning Committee would take place on Tuesday, 3rd June 2014 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

 

 

 

Print this page

Back to top