To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Kevin Pardy (Substitute: Jane Mackenzie).

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 27^th September 2018.

Contact Shelley Davies on 01743 257718.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 27^th September 2018 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 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 24^th October 2018.

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 application 18/02747/OUT - Proposed Residential Development Land to the North of Betley Lane, Bayston Hill, Shrewsbury, Councillor David Vasmer declared that his relatives lived in the vicinity and due to a perception of bias he would leave the table and take no part in the consideration of, or voting on, this item.

Outline application (access for consideration) for residential development (up to 140 dwellings) including demolition of building 1; formation of access roads and associated highways, engineering and accommodation works (REVISED SCHEME).

The Area Planning Manager introduced the outline application (access for consideration) for residential development (up to 140 dwellings) including demolition of building 1; formation of access roads and associated highways, engineering and accommodation works (REVISED SCHEME) and explained that at the meeting held on 30^th August 2018 the Committee had resolved to defer the application to allow the applicant to provide further information in relation to traffic issues identified by Members. It was confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit to assess the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area on 30^th August 2018.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1), Councillor Ioan Jones addressed the Committee as the local ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The information provided was a summary of the previous traffic assessment;

·         The Grange site of the Shrewsbury Academy was due to close soon and would have a detrimental impact on traffic in the area as children would be transported to the Sundorne site; and

·         The infrastructure was unable to cope with any more traffic in the area.

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

In the ensuing debate Members raised concerns about the impact of the development on the highways network and stated that the traffic surveys had not taken new development in the area into consideration. Additionally Members were concerned in relation to the Public Open Space shortfall and considered that this should be in line with the adopted policy.

In response to comments, the Area Planning Manager assured Members that Highways Development Control were satisfied with the traffic assessments undertaken by the developer and considered the surveys to be robust. He added that Highways Development Control were aware of previous approvals in the area and had taken these into account when assessing the proposal. Responding to comments in relation to the proposed open space not being in accordance with the adopted policy, the Area Planning Manager reminded Members that the application was in outline only and could be amended at the reserved matters stage.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by the speakers the majority of Members expressed their objection to the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reason:

The proposed development would involve the use of protected employment land for residential development and would therefore be contrary to adopted development plan policies namely CS13 and CS14 (Core Strategy) and MD4 and MD9 (SAMDev). It was acknowledged that the proposal would involve development of a brownfield site and would deliver some benefits in terms of securing the applicants long term  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

Outline application for residential development for up to 2No. dwellings with retention of access.

Councillor Ted Clarke as local ward Councillor vacated the Chair and Councillor Nat Green as Vice-Chairman presided as Chairman for this item. 

Councillors Tony Parsons and Jane Mackenzie (local ward Councillors) left the table during consideration of this item, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

In line with his declaration at Minute 57 Councillor David Vasmer left the table during consideration of this item, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Area Planning Manager introduced the outline application for residential development for up to 2 dwellings with retention of access and confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit to assess the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area that morning.

Members’ attention was drawn to the Schedule of Additional Letters which included representations from a third party, the Case Officer, Councillor David Vasmer and the agent for the applicant.

A statement in objection to the proposal from Jill Ashurst, local resident was read out to the Committee by the Solicitor.

Caroline Higgins, on behalf of Bayston Hill Parish Council spoke against 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 Ted Clarke addressed the Committee as the local ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, a number of points were raised including the following:

·         He explained that Betley Lane was un-adopted, undrained, unsurfaced and not suitable for the 22 residents it currently served;

·         The maintenance of the lane was funded by the residents of Betley Lane and the proposed development would further impact on existing residents; and

·         He noted that access for larger vehicles was difficult and urged the Committee to refuse the application due to the inappropriate access.

During the ensuing debate, Members considered the access to be unsuitable stating that access for emergency vehicles was a particular concern especially in light of the un-adopted status of the lane and therefore the Council’s inability to impose parking restrictions to improve the situation.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by the speakers Members unanimously expressed their objection to the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reason:

The access to the proposed development via a narrow un-adopted lane was considered to be unsuitable given the restrictions arising from existing properties using it for access and parking. In particular there is concern that adequate access for emergency vehicles cannot be ensured if required and the Council was unable to secure improvements by imposing parking restrictions given the un-adopted status of the lane. Accordingly the proposal was considered to be contrary to the aims and requirements of adopted development plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Erection of replacement dwelling; installation of package treatment plant

The Area Planning Manager introduced the application for the erection of replacement dwelling; installation of package treatment plant and confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit to assess the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area that morning. Members’ attention was drawn to the Schedule of Additional Letters which included representations from the agent for the applicant.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1), Councillor Ed Potter addressed the Committee as the local ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The site was in an isolated location and would not have a direct negative impact on the local area;

·         The proposal would replace a redundant cottage that had been extended and had not been in use for many years;

·         The proposed development was of a high quality modern design; and

·         The scale of the proposal was in keeping with other properties in the hamlet of Monday Town.  

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

In the ensuing debate, Members commented on the high quality design of the development and considered that as the accommodation was predominately on one level it would require a larger footprint than the existing property. Additionally Members noted the sloping nature of the site and the ridge line of the proposed dwelling being lower than that of the existing property.

In response to queries, the Area Planning Manager assured Members that the existing garage had been taken into account when calculating the footprint of the replacement dwelling and even allowing for the garage the footprint was materially larger than the existing property. 

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal and noted the comments of all the speakers the majority of Members expressed the view that the application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED:

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

The Committee acknowledged that the size of the replacement dwelling was not in accordance with the Council’s adopted policy but considered that in the particular circumstances of this proposal due to the sloping nature of the site and the ridge line of the proposed dwelling being lower than that of the existing property the development was acceptable. Additionally Members welcomed the modern design and accessible accommodation that the proposal offered and referred to the use of good design as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Subject to:

That Planning Officers be granted delegated powers to attach appropriate conditions and the removal of Permitted Development Rights.

Approval of Reserved Matters (access, appearance, layout, scale, landscaping) pursuant to Outline application 13/05065/OUT for the erection of dwelling including re-aligned agricultural access and removal of agricultural shed.

Councillor Ed Potter as local member left the table during consideration of this item, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Area Planning Manager introduced the application for the approval of reserved matters (access, appearance, layout, scale, landscaping) pursuant to outline application 13/05065/OUT for the erection of a dwelling including re-aligned agricultural access and removal of agricultural shed.

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal, Members unanimously expressed the view that the application be approved as per the Officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED:

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

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the Central area as at 25^th October 2018 be noted.

To note that the next meeting of the Central Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Thursday, 22^nd November 2018 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

RESOLVED:

That it be noted that the next meeting of the Central Planning Committee be held at 2.00 p.m. on Thursday, 22^nd November 2018 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND.