Outline planning application for residential development (including access, all other matters reserved).

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location.  He confirmed that Members had undertaken a site visit the previous day and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.

Mr B Newton, a local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor I Pickles, representing Broseley Town Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

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

In accordance with Council Procedure Rules (Part 4, Paragraph 6.1) Councillor Jean Jones, as local Member, participated in the discussion but did not vote. During her statement, the following points were raised:

·         Permission for a further application on the opposite side of the road had only been granted on the Chairman’s casting vote.  Broseley Town Council and residents had argued then that a breach of the development boundary would lead to further opportunistic applications along what was a narrow windy road;

·         Site Allocations and Management Development Plan (SAMDev) was at an advanced stage and Shropshire Council could demonstrate a five-year land supply;

·         Would have a negative impact on the community;

·         Building in Dark Lane would more than meet the housing requirements in Broseley;

·         Issues of safety already existed outside the primary school.  There was a collision history along this stretch of road.  What safety measures could be provided for £5,000?

·         There was a history of subsidence in the area;

·         Would put additional pressure on the amenities in Broseley;

·         John Wilkinson school already over-subscribed and unable to expand and the second school was filling-up fast;

·         Parking in and around the town caused congestion;

·         Because of funding cuts the youth club was closing; and

·         Proposal would cause permanent damage to the character of a small market town by an opportunistic peripheral development.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers and Officers.  The Principal Planner provided clarification on the position to date regarding SAMDev, reiterated that although Shropshire Council had a five-year land supply the margin was small and even when SAMDev had been adopted sites that were considered to be sustainable would have to be considered, and explained that the Broseley Town Plan could not be afforded the same weight as the Much Wenlock Neighbourhood Plan which had been through the full examination process and had been referred to the Government Inspector.

RESOLVED:

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

·         The Committee acknowledged the that the housing proposed would contribute economically and socially by boosting the housing supply, including open market and affordable housing, and would also provide limited support for the existing services in the town to which weight was given. However it was considered that these factors are outweighed by the following harm: The proposed development would fall outside of the development boundary for Broseley where Core Strategy policy CS5 restricts new housing development to dwellings to house essential countryside workers and to meet identified local affordable housing need. No such need has been demonstrated in this case. In addition the application site, by reason of the openness of the eastern site boundary defined only by a post and wire fence, the topography and the open views in an easterly direction, would not be visually contained and would lead to further urbanisation of this edge to the Town, detracting from its landscape setting. The proposal is therefore contrary to Core Strategy policies CS6 and CS17 and would conflict with the environmental role of sustainability set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. Furthermore weight was given to the fact that the proposed development was not plan led being contrary to both the current saved Bridgnorth District Local Plan, the emerging policies in the Site Allocations and Management of Development DPD and the aspirations of the Broseley Town Plan 2013 – 2026.