To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Joyce Barrow, (substitute: Councillor Steve Davenport), Councillor Steve Charmley, Councillor Vince Hunt (Substitute: Councillor Nick Hignett) and Councillor Alex Wagner (Substitute: Councillor Colin Taylor).

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 18^th June 2024, attached, marked 2.

Contact:           Emily Marshall on 01743 257717

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 16^th July 2024 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any public questions or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.  The deadline for this meeting is 5.00 p.m. on Thursday, 11^th July 2024.

There were no public questions or petitions received.

Members are reminded that they must declare their disclosable pecuniary interests and other registrable or non-registrable interests in any matter being considered at the meeting as set out in Appendix B of the Members’ Code of Conduct and consider if they should leave the room prior to the item being considered. Further advice can be sought from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

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.

Change of use of existing steel frame barn and extension to provide disabled access holiday accommodation on ground floor and tea room at first floor, together with provision of four glamping pitches and a compost amenity building.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for the change of use of existing steel frame barn and extension to provide disabled access holiday accommodation on ground floor and tea room at first floor, together with provision of four glamping pitches and a compost amenity building.

Councillor Graham Bould, on behalf of Sutton Upon Tern Parish Council spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire 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 Rob Gittins as local ward councillor, made a statement in support of the application and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

Holly Cooper, the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by all of the speakers, the majority of members expressed their support for the officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.  Members commented that they were concerned that the viability and sustainability of the proposed tea room had not been demonstrated and the development of the existing steel framed barn was tantamount to a new building construction. 

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused, in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, for the following reason.

The proposed disabled holiday accommodation and tearoom building is tantamount to a new building construction and will be located in open countryside and does not fall within or adjacent to any recognised settlement providing services or an established and viable tourism enterprise where accommodation or food and drink provision are required. As such the development would represent unsustainable development within the open countryside, conflicting with the Shropshire Core Strategy Polices CS5, CS6, CS8 and CS16 and SAMDev Plan policy MD11 as well as the overall aims and objectives of sustainable development as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. There are no other material considerations which outweigh this conclusion in the overall planning balance.

Removal of modern entrance porch and replace with oak enclosed porch.

The Development Manager introduced the Listed Building Consent application for the removal of modern entrance porch and replace with oak enclosed porch.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by all of the speakers, Members unanimously expressed their support for the proposal.

RESOLVED:

That Listed Building Consent be granted subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer’s report.

Erection of a three bay detached garage with room over and conversion of outbuilding to gym/entertainment room

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of a three bay detached garage with room over and conversion of outbuilding to gym/entertainment room.

Members’ attention was drawn to the information contained within the Schedule of Additional letters.

Mr Graham Moss, Agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by all of the speakers, members unanimously expressed their support for the officer’s recommendation, to refuse the application.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused in accordance with the officer recommendation for the following reasons.

1. The proposed two storey building will sit forward of the main grade II* listed building it is intended to serve (Stone Grange) and occupies a prominent location in relation to the site context.  Taking into account this site context in combination with the scale, height and fenestration details of the proposed building then it is considered by the Local Planning Authority that the proposed development would not be visually subservient to the principal grade II* listed building but rather will create an overly dominant feature that will not only adversely impact upon the visual character, appearance and setting of the listed building would further partially obscure the ability to view this important designated heritage asset from the road (particularly the from the north east approach) and cause harm to the significance of this designated heritage asset.  No clear and convincing justification for any harm to the designated heritage asset has been provided.  Further, it is considered that the harm would not be outweighed by any public benefits arising from development.  Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal fails to comply with the requirements of adopted Shropshire Core Strategy policies CS5, CS6 and CS17; Site Allocation and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan policies MD2 and MD13; the Council's SPD on the Type and Affordability of Housing; Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

  2. No ecology assessment/s, report/s or survey work has been submitted with the application.  In the absence of adequate ecological information, or any information to enable the Council to conclude that such ecological information would not be required, then it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable in that inadequate ecological information has been submitted with the application to allow the impact of the development on statutorily protected species and the natural environment to be fully considered and assessed.  Further, in the absence of adequate ecological information, it is not possible to conclude that the proposal will not cause unacceptable harm to protected species.  Accordingly, the proposal is considered contrary to policies CS6 and CS17 of the adopted Shropshire Core Strategy 2011; policy MD12 of Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework in relation to the requirement to conserve, protect and enhance the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Erection of a three bay detached garage with room over and conversion of outbuilding to gym/entertainment room

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for listed building consent for the erection of a three bay detached garage with room over and conversion of outbuilding to gym/entertainment room.Members’ attention was drawn to the information contained within the Schedule of Additional letters.

Mr Graham Moss, Agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by all of the speakers, members unanimously expressed their support for the officer’s recommendation, to refuse the application.

RESOLVED:

That listed building consent be refused in accordance with the officer recommendation for the following reasons.

1. The proposed two storey building will sit forward of the main grade II* listed building it is intended to serve (Stone Grange) and occupies a prominent location in relation to the site context.  Taking into account this site context in combination with the scale, height and fenestration details of the proposed building then it is considered by the Local Planning Authority that the proposed development would not be visually subservient to the principal grade II* listed building but rather will create an overly dominant feature that will not only adversely impact upon the visual character, appearance and setting of the listed building would further partially obscure the ability to view this important designated heritage asset from the road (particularly the from the north east approach) and cause harm to the significance of this designated heritage asset.  No clear and convincing justification for any harm to the designated heritage asset has been provided.  Further, it is considered that the harm would not be outweighed by any public benefits arising from development.  Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal fails to comply with the requirements of adopted Shropshire Core Strategy policies CS5, CS6 and CS17; Site Allocation and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan policies MD2 and MD13; the Council's SPD on the Type and Affordability of Housing; Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2. No ecology assessment/s, report/s or survey work has been submitted with the application.  In the absence of adequate ecological information, or any information to enable the Council to conclude that such ecological information would not be required, then it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable in that inadequate ecological information has been submitted with the application to allow the impact of the development on statutorily protected species and the natural environment to be fully considered and assessed.  Further, in the absence of adequate ecological information, it is not possible to conclude that the proposal will not cause unacceptable harm to protected species.  Accordingly, the proposal is considered contrary to policies CS6 and CS17 of the adopted Shropshire Core Strategy 2011; policy MD12 of Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework in relation to the requirement to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

RESOLVED:

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

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

2.00 pm on Tuesday 13^th August 2024 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury.

It was noted that the next meeting of the North Planning Committee would be held at 2.00 p.m. on Tuesday 13^th August 2024, in the Shrewsbury/Oswestry Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury.