To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Jane MacKenzie and Pam Moseley (substitute: Jon Tandy).

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 12 March 2015.

Contact Linda Jeavons on 01743 252738.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Central Planning Committee held on 12 March 2015 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 application 14/05742/OUT, Councillor Andrew Bannerman stated that one of the principle persons involved with the application was known to him and he would leave the room prior to consideration of the item.

With reference to planning application 14/05742/OUT, Councillor Vernon Bushell stated that he knew one of the interested parties and he declared a personal interest.

Outline application for residential development, estate roads and public open space (all matters reserved).

The Technical Specialist Planning Officer introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, drew Members’ attention to the location. 

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

Councillor R Brett, representing Bicton Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr C Roberts, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.  In response to questions from Members, the Area Planning Manager provided clarification on the number of dwellings approved in Bicton parish and as part of the Shrewsbury West Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE), and to aid the creation of a safe and accessible development, the Police could be consulted on layout at the Reserved Matters stage.

RESOLVED:

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

·         A Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the relevant affordable housing contribution;

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

·         At the Reserved Matters stage and, in order to create a safe and accessible development in the interests of public safety and protection, the Police be consulted on layout.

Outline application for residential development of 15 No. dwellings (to include access).

The Area Planning Manager introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, drew Members’ attention to the location. 

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 noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting which detailed further comments from a third party and the agent.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Tudor Bebb, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement and withdrew from the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         Horsebridge Road - Concerned about the increase in traffic using what was already a busy road, which was full of potholes and had no footpath running alongside it;

·         More dwellings would exacerbate the problems with the inadequate sewage system;

·         Area was prone to flooding and sewage poured into houses when lane flooded; and

·         Local school was already at full capacity.

Mr D Leeson, representing Minsterley Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr S Jones, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans, noted the comments of all speakers and expressed serious concerns regarding the adequacy of the sewerage system.  In response to comments and concerns, the Area Planning Manager explained that appropriate conditions relating to drainage and flooding would be attached to any permission; and following initial concerns raised by Highways Officers a footpath link which would provide an alternative means of access into the village had now been agreed. 

RESOLVED:

That this application be deferred in order for the applicant to undertake further investigations into the adequacy of the sewerage system.

(At this juncture, Councillor Jon Tandy left the meeting and did not return.)

Outline application (access, layout for approval) for mixed residential development; formation of a vehicular access and associated infrastructure (revised scheme).

In accordance with his declaration at Minute No. 112, Councillor Andrew Bannerman left the room during consideration of this item.

The Area Planning Manager introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, drew Members’ attention to the location and indicative layout.

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

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Roberts, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  He did not return to the meeting.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         The cumulative effect of this proposal and previously granted permissions on a small village with minimal services would not be sustainable.

Mr I Hutchinson, representing Montford Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees. 

Mr S Taylor, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In response to a question from Members, Mr Hutchinson provided clarification on the existing number of houses in Montford Parish and the number of dwellings that had recently been granted permission.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers and the position to date with regard to the emerging Site Allocations and Management Development Plan.  In response to comments, the Area Planning Manager drew Members’ attention to a recent appeal for 35 dwellings which had been dismissed because of the lack of a mechanism to secure the provision of affordable housing.  He reiterated that the Inspector had found that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the economic viability of the local area by taking high grade agricultural land out of production and although the proposal would lead to an economic loss in terms of the site no longer being actively farmed, this would not be significant and would be outweighed by the economic benefits associated with the scheme.  He cautioned against citing backland development as a reason for refusal.

RESOLVED:

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

·         The proposed development, by virtue of its location and scale would, in combination with current valid planning permissions and resolutions to grant permission for Montford Bridge, cumulatively result in development harmful to the rural character of the area and the nature of the settlement; and

·         As such the adverse impacts of granting permission are considered to significantly and demonstrably outweigh any benefits when assessed against the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole, the aims and requirements of the emerging Site Allocation and Management Development Plan and policy MD3 and is therefore not considered to constitute sustainable development.

(At this juncture, Councillor Tudor Bebb left the meeting and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

RESOLVED:

That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the Central area as at 9 April 2015 be noted.

To note that the next meeting of the Central Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Thursday, 21 May 2015 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, 21 May 2015 in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND.