Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of  5no. bungalows with rooms in roof space (Amended description).

The Principal Planner introduced the report and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations.  He further drew Members’ attention to the extant planning permission and the deletion of the phrase “without the written approval of the local planning authority” from Condition No.15.

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

Members noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting.

Mrs E Pugh, a local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Cllr I West, representing Broseley Town Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the 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) Councillor Simon Harris, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement.  He then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During his statement the following comments were made:

·         The proposed development was located on a blind bend with no footpath and an additional ten cars would impact on what was already a bottleneck;

·         Because of the nature of the roads/access, local people do not drive to this area – they walk;

·         The hedgerow was full of wildlife;

·         Water regularly flows everywhere and there are regular power cuts.  This proposal would put an additional strain on both drainage and electricity supply;

·         Would have a detrimental impact on tourism; and

·         He suggested deferral of the application in order that highways and overcrowding issues could be reconsidered.

In the ensuing debate, Members noted the comments of all speakers and considered the submitted plans.  Members noted the extant planning permission but commented on the intensity of this current development and the potential impact on the privacy of existing properties.  In response to questions and comments from Members, the Principal Planning Officer and Area Highways Development Control Manager (South) provided further clarification on the extant planning permission and what had previously been granted and highway safety.

RESOLVED:

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

·         The proposed development, by reason of the close proximity of the dwellings on plots 2, 3 and 5 to site boundaries and their fenestration, would adversely affect the privacy currently enjoyed by the occupants of the dwellings at 27 Woodlands Road; The Willows, King Street; Spring Meadow, King Street; and 81a King Street. The proposal would therefore harm the residential amenity of the occupants of the neighbouring properties, contrary to Shropshire Core Strategy policy CS6 and paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings; and

·         It is acknowledged that the proposed development would be in a sustainable location, contributing to the social and economic roles of sustainable development through the provision of two-bedroomed dwellings within the town. However, the proposal, by reason of the intensity of the development subdividing the site into five residential plots, would not reflect the character of development along this section of Woodlands Road or that to be found in the Conservation Area that immediately adjoins the site. Consequently, the proposal would not promote or reinforce local distinctiveness and would neither preserve nor enhance the setting of the Broseley Conservation Area. The proposal therefore would not satisfy the environmental role of sustainable development set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and would be contrary to Shropshire Core Strategy polices CS6 and CS17, and Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan policies MD2, MD13 and S4.1:1.