Erection of fourteen 'close care' single storey dwellings under use class C2 (nursing/residential care); estate roads and parking areas.

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 Michael Wood, as the local Ward Councillor, left the room and took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and suggested that, in the event of the Committee resolving to grant planning permission, that a consent be subject to a Section 106 Agreement to ensure that the accommodation remains in association with the use of Bradeney House.  He confirmed Members had undertaken a site visit that morning 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, design, drainage and tree constraint plan. 

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

Mr J Goulding, 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:

·         Did not object in principle to the proposal and acknowledged the need and high quality care homes in the area;

·         The access, especially to the left of the development, would be dangerous;

·         Because of the lay of the land, the proposed screening would not protect the privacy of the neighbouring properties;

·         Would have a detrimental impact on wildlife;

·         The scale and design would have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the area;

·         Would prefer a reduction in the number of dwellings proposed; and

·         Neighbours had not been consulted by the applicant.  The current proposal was unacceptable and he urged refusal to encourage the applicant to undertake consultation and put together a proposal that would work for all.

Mr C Huntley, 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:

·         Access had been designed and taken into account appropriate highway standards;

·         Both the local MP and Parish Council had been consulted;

·         Design and materials should be appropriate and in keeping with the Green Belt designation;

·         The arrangement of the dwellings had been done so as to stimulate interaction between residents;

·         This type of care was much needed and was supported by the Head of Care Services;

·         There would be no overlooking of neighbouring properties;and

·         The proposal would provide employment.

In the ensuing debate Members considered the submitted plans and had noted the comments of all speakers and it was unanimously

RESOLVED:

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

·         A Section 106 Legal Agreement to ensure the proposed dwellings would remain in association with the use of Bradeney House;

·         To ensure a satisfactory access is maintained at all times and in the interests of highway safety, Condition No. 10 be amended to ensure the provision and maintenance of a visibility splay in a south-westerly direction from the altered access; and

·         The conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.