To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tudor Bebb (Substitute: Councillor Tim Barker), Jane MacKenzie and David Roberts.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 18 September 2014.

Contact Linda Jeavons on 01743 252738.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 18 September 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

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

There were no public questions, statements 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 applications to be considered at this meeting, Councillors Andrew Bannerman and Peter Nutting stated that they were members of the Planning Committee of Shrewsbury Town Council. They indicated that their views on any proposals when considered by the Town Council had been based on the information presented at that time and they would now be considering all proposals afresh with an open mind and the information as it stood at this time.

With reference to planning application 14/00335/OUT, Councillor Tim Barker stated that he had advised and supported the Parish Council in opposing this application.  He would make a statement and withdraw from the table and take no part in the consideration of, or voting on, this application.

With reference to planning application 14/00246/OUT, Councillor Miles Kenny stated that he had attended pre-meetings in respect of this application but remained open-minded.

13/04757/OUT Application for Outline Planning Permission (access for approval) for residential development and associated works Development Land Opposite The Crescent Nesscliffe, Shrewsbury, Shropshire.

The Principal Planner introduced the application.

RESOLVED:

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

·         An amendment to Condition No. 2 to limit the submission of the Reserved Matters application to a period of two years after approval of this Outline;

·         The additional Conditions recommended previously; and

·         A Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure affordable housing.

Outline application for 296 mixed residential dwellings (landscaping reserved) and employment/commercial use (all matters reserved) to include; offices; showroom; A3/A4 (restaurant/pub); C1 (hotel); public open space, structural landscaping, associated infrastructure; vehicular accesses and all associated infrastructure.

The Area Planning and Building Control Manager 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, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout, elevations and access.   He suggested that, if Members were minded to approve, additional conditions be added to give Officers delegated authority to agree with the applicant the amount of hedgerow to be removed and to vary conditions subject to them not being substantially different to those stated in the report.

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting, and which detailed an amended recommendation and further comments from the Planning Officer and agent.

Mr D Kilby, a local resident and representing SWRA, SPFA and Bicton Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – applications should take into account the economic, social and environmental factors and reflect community needs.

·         There would be a shortage of school places by 2015 and this proposal would exacerbate this;

·         In places there would be no footpath and insufficient space for two vehicles to pass;

·         No Health Impact Assessment, Needs Assessment or Environment Assessment had been submitted;

·         Trees would be lost;

·         Strong and sustainable development should respect the character of the countryside, so would contrary to planning policy;

·         Oxon Touring Park might close in the future as a result of this development;

·         Would create congestion;

·         Inadequate open space provision; and

·         Contrary to the NPPF - A collective and collaborative approach should be undertaken to planning.

Councillor P Adams, a local Councillor, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Due to an unsatisfactory consultation exercise, he requested deferral of the application so that everyone could have a chance to put forward their preferences; and

·         The number of accesses onto Shepherd Lane would be excessive and to reduce the number of accesses he suggested that houses along this Lane should be as the initial proposal.

Ms K Else, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Would be a sustainable and would provide housing and employment growth;

·         Detailed discussions had taken place with Planning, Highways and Drainage Officers prior to submission;

·         Proposal took into consideration the proposed link road;

·         The layout had been designed to take account of the restrictions along Shepherds Lane and would provide a betterment;

·         Would provide open public space; and

·         Would not be contrary to the NPPF, national guidance or local planning policies.

In response to comments, the Area Planning and Building Control Manager explained that notwithstanding the quality of consultation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Outline application (access, layout and scale) for the erection of 47 dwellings (7 affordable), school hall, car parking area and enlarged school playing field for existing school, allotments, village green and informal open space (amended description).

The Principal Planner 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, he drew Members’ attention to the location and layout.

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting which detailed comments from Shropshire Council’s Archaeologist. 

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

·         Would not be sustainable;

·         Would lose agricultural land;

·         Not included in Site Allocations and Management Development (SAMDev) Plan.  Other sites had been identified. Local views should be taken into account;

·         Would alter the character of Condover;

·         The cumulative impact of this application and other new developments in the area would lead to a substantial increase in traffic;

·         Pedestrians/cyclists already at risk from current traffic levels;

·         The lane regularly floods and access cut-off as a result;

·         Sewerage already struggles to cope with storm water; and

·         Contrary to the NPPF.

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

·         Development would be outside village boundary;

·         Some of the land was classified as Grade 2;

·         Alternative sites should be considered if Greater Crested Newts present;

·         High archaeological potential so would be contrary to the NPPF;

·         This was a Greenfield site; and

·         The cumulative impact of this and other applications would be detrimental to the area.

Mr S Taylor, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Officers were recommending approval;

·         In accordance with the NPPF and CS4;

·         Would provide a range of dwellings including affordable housing, open space, allotments and additional school facilties;

·         New school facilities supported by School Governors;

·         No technical objections from drainage, archaeology and highways;

·         Proposal submitted following consultation with Planning Officers; and

·         Would be sustainable.

In accordance with his declaration at Minute No. 54 and 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 Tim Barker, 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:

·         Following extensive consultation in the area, other sites for development had been identified in the SAMDev process;

·         Drainage, surface water flows and archaeology issues;

·         No prospect of employment in the area, so residents would have to commute to work;

·         School was full;

·         The development had some elements of sustainability, however, the aspects of unsustainability far outweighed the positives; and

·         Cumulative impact of this and other developments would be detrimental to the area and social  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

Outline application for residential development to include means of access.

With reference to Minute No. 45, the Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and access.

Members had undertaken a site visit on a previous occasion and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area. 

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting which detailed comments from the agent, Parish Council and the Planning Officer. 

In accordance with Council Procedure Rules (Part 4, Paragraph 6.1) Councillor Claire Wild, as local Member, participated in the discussion and spoke against the proposal but did not vote. During which she raised the following points:

·         She reiterated her concerns made at the previous meeting regarding highway safety and access;

·         Further development would follow; and

·         If minded to approve, she requested that two additional Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS’s) be provided to ensure that there would be two on the approach to the mini roundabout when travelling from Shrewsbury and two on the approach to the zebra crossing when travelling from Cressage; and

·         Any subsequent application for reserved matters be considered by this Committee.

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:

·         A S106 Legal Agreement to secure the relevant affordable housing at the time of the Reserved Matters application and to secure the proposed highway improvements and a commuted sum for the future maintenance of the proposed vehicle activated signs;

·         In the interests of public and highway safety, two additional Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS’s) be provided to ensure that there will be two on the approach to the mini roundabout when travelling from Shrewsbury and two on the approach to the zebra crossing when travelling from Cressage;

·         The publically adoptable road on the NW side of the site as shown on the Indicative Site Plan being retained as such in the Reserved Matters application to enable future road link options;

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

·         Any subsequent application for reserved matters being considered by this Committee.

Erection of two storey extension and bell tower to facilitate use of school building as children's nursery; change of use of agricultural land to play area; formation of vehicular access and parking area (part retrospective).

The Area Planning and Building Control Manager 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.  Members also viewed the site from the neighbouring property.  With reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout, elevations and access.  

Members noted the additional information as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting, and which detailed further comments from an objector and a supporter.  Members also noted that a request had recently been forwarded to English Heritage requesting that consideration be given to designating the Old School House as a Listed Building.

Mrs J Allen, a local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Longden Road already suffered from a high volume of traffic and the additional traffic resulting from this proposal would further exacerbate this;

·         Insufficient parking provision on site would result in an increase in on-street parking;

·         The access would be widened within inches of a public bench;

·         The proposed extension would be very close to her boundary and would impact on her privacy;

·         Trees had already been removed; and

·         Would suffer from exhaust, light and noise pollution and all the associated health risks.

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

·         Originally a small school with relatively low traffic flow;

·         The phone box had been designated as a public facility but had been removed by the applicant;

·         Would impact on the ability of residents to access their properties;

·         Would increase flow of traffic through village;

·         Impact on privacy;

·         The entrance required the use of common land; and

·         Many trees had already been removed.

Mrs J Phillips, the applicant, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         Already ran a successful nursery in Bayston Hill;

·         The proposal constituted an investment in facilities and staff; and

·         Sustainable, would provide long-term employment and would return the building to its intended use.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rules (Part 4, Paragraph 6.1) Councillor Roger Evans, as local Member, participated in the discussion and spoke against the proposal but did not vote. During which he raised the following points:

·         This nursery would be situated in a totally different environment to that of the nursery in Bayston Hill;

·         Site entrance would be situated on a slope, which would be very dangerous in icy weather; and

·         This was already a very busy road and further traffic would impact on highway safety and would create congestion.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the potential for an increase in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the central area as at 16 October 2014 be noted.

To note that the next meeting of the Central Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Thursday, 13 November 2014 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

RESOLVED:

That it be noted that the next meeting of the Central Planning Committee would be held at 2.00 p.m. on Thursday, 13 November 2014 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND.