Outline application (access for approval) for the erection of 15 dwellings.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application and confirmed that Members had undertaken a site visit that morning to view the site and assess 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.  The Principal Planning Officer drew Members attention to an email from the Councils Arboriculture Officer confirming that there were no objections, however the final layout, submitted at reserved matters must take account tree constraints and a tree protection plan and arboricultural method statement would also be required.

Ms Emma Kay, on behalf of Bayston Hill 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:

·         The proposed site was not included as a suitable site as it was outside the development boundary and would fill part of the gap between Bayston Hill and the surrounding settlements;

·         There was no local requirement for this type of housing;

·         The local doctors surgery and school were already oversubscribed; and

·         The commitments made in the Design and Access Statement could not be verified as the application was only for outline planning permission.

Ms Amy Henson, the agent on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with the Council’s scheme for public speaking at Planning Committees, during which the following points were raised:

·         The proposed site was a designated community hub in the SAMDev Plan;

·         The proposed site benefited from excellent highway and infrastructure links and was a logical infill site;

·         The visual impact of the development would be minimal;

·         Ecological surveys of the site had confirmed that there were no protected species inhabiting the site;

·         Affordable housing would integrate well into the community;

·         Refuse vehicles were able to access the site more than adequately; and

·         The development would provide much needed housing in a sustainable settlement.

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 T Clarke, as the local Ward Councillor, made a statement, took no part in the debate and did not vote. During his statement the following points were raised:

·         The type of housing was of no value to Bayston Hill as a community;

·         The application was contrary to the Bayston Hill Parish Plan and SAMDev;

·         The saved Shrewsbury and Atcham Policy clearly showed the development boundary and this site was not within the development boundary; and

·         The quality of the existing cul-de-sac would be spoilt and it would have a huge impact on those already living in a very well designed area.

In response to the comments made by the speakers, the Principle Planning Officer reminded Members that the housing mix and layout were indicative only at this stage.

The majority of Members felt that the proposed development offered affordable housing in a sustainable location.

RESOLVED:

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

·  A Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure on-site affordable housing and a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing; and

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