Outline planning application for the erection of two detached dwellings (all matters reserved).

Councillor P Nutting left the room in accordance with his declaration in Minute No. 151 above and did not return to the meeting.

With reference to Minute No. 143, the Planning Officer introduced the application and explained that this application had been deferred at the previous meeting in order that the implications of the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) released on the 6 March 2014 could be assessed prior to any decision being made.  With reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location and indicative layout of the site and confirmed that the application site had been put forward by the landowner for inclusion in the SAMDev process but had been deemed to be unacceptable.  He confirmed that the Highways Agency had raised no objections.

Members had undertaken a site visit prior to the previous meeting and had assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area. 

Mr P Smith, 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:

·         He expressed his disillusionment with the planning process and urged refusal of the application; and

·         How can planning applications outside development boundaries be approved.

Councillor E Marvin, 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:

·         This would be the third application to be considered in Dorrington, which undermined their design statement and credibility;

·         This site was originally considered by the Parish Council but rejected on the advice of Planning Officers on the grounds that visibility would be limited;

·         This application undermined the Parish Council, Shropshire Council and localism;

·         The land was agricultural land and would be lost for ever;

·         To grand permission would open up the flood gates for futher applications;

·         The proposal would not be in line with the wishes of the residents who had requested a mix of dwellings;

·         Two other sites had been identified;

·         Would create a ribboning effect; and

·         Urged refusal on the grounds of difficult access, topography, loss of agricultural land and it had not been supported by Condover Parish Council.

Councillor T Barker, the local Ward 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:

·         If there was such a need for housing the sites put forward in the SAMDev process would have been put forward for planning approval;

·         This was an exploratory application;

·         It would be an unsustainable development and would extend the village in such a visible way that would be detrimental to the area; and

·         This was grade 3 agricultural land.

In the ensuing debate, some Members expressed concerns with regard to the route/track passing through the estate to the Sewage Treatment Plan; poor visibility off the access onto the A49; the screening boundaries between the dwellings would be too close and would consequently impact on the ability to maintain the boundary treatments in the future; the site was in open countryside and visible from some distance away; it would be contrary to SAMDev and the Parish Plan; it was grade 3 agricultural land; and would not be sustainable. 

In response to the comments, the Planning Officer referred Members to the comments made by Severn Trent regarding the number of traffic movements on the application for Falkland Road and confirmed that the boundaries and boundary treatments would be approved at a later date.

RESOLVED:

That, subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure an affordable housing contribution, the conditions as set out in Appendix 2 to the report and subject to no new material considerations being raised as a result of the proposal being advertised as a Departure, the Area Planning Manager be given delegated authority to grant planning permission in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.