Twc/2014/1080

TWC/2014/1080 Land south and west of Tibberton Motor Repairs, Mill Lane, Tibberton, Newport, Shropshire Outline application for residential development (up to 22 Houses) and construction of a modified vehicular access, with associated highways and drainage infrastructure and other accommodation works with all other matters reserved

APPLICANT RECEIVED Seabridge Developments Limited, Adrian Seabridge 02/12/2014

PARISH WARD Tibberton and Cherrington Edgmond

OFFICER Vincent Maher

INFORMATION RECEIVED SINCE PREPARATION OF REPORT

Application number TWC/2014/1080 Site addressLand south and west of Tibberton Motor Repairs, Mill Lane, Tibberton, Newport, Shropshire ProposalOutline application for residential development (up to 22 Houses) and construction of a modified vehicular access, with associated highways and drainage infrastructure and other accommodation works with all other matters reserved Recommendation Outline Grant

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT This is an update to the Planning Committee following the announcement that a five years’ housing land supply exists for the Borough following the receipt and publication f “Telford and Wrekin Objectively Assessed Need Report” (Peter Brett Associates, March 2015). The consequences of having a five year housing supply are a new material consideration which requires officers to ask the Members to revisit applications which have resolutions to grant subject to signing of a S106 agreement, and to review the original decision in light of the change in the council’s housing land supply figure.

Members’ attention is also drawn to the introduction of certain provisions of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 which now restrict the pooling of s106 contributions. Section 106 agreements should seek to refer to specific infrastructure projects in order to help the Council use the restricted number of contributions to best effect.

The original report to the Planning Committee is attached to this report.

BACKGROUND The Planning Committee resolved at its meeting of 25 February 2015 to grant outline planning permission for a development of up to 22 houses subject to the developer entering into a s106 legal agreement.

NEW CONSULTATION RESPONSES Officers have consulted the applicant and all other interested parties on the relevance of the Peter Brett Associates report. All new comments received have been summarised below:

Applicant: • The only reason why the case is being reported to the Committee is to report the relevance of the five year housing land supply. It is not an opportunity to re-run previously considered issues. • The application must be considered in the context of the NPPF and the Core Strategy. Tibberton is one of three key settlements identified in Policy CS7. • Policy H10 of the Wrekin Local Plan is of no weight in the light of the more recent Core Strategy. • The site differs considerably from the 60 dwelling scheme at Tibberton that was subject to a recent appeal (TWC/2014/0236). This proposal is more modest, partly on brownfield land and does not adjoin a listed building. It is not prominent in the wider landscape. It will make a positive contribution by bringing forth economic, social and environmental benefits. • The absence or presence of a five year housing land supply has no bearing on this application. The Peter Brett Associates report cannot be used unilaterally to redefine the adopted housing supply and it has not been independently scrutinised and tested. It is one of a number of documents that will go before the inspector at the Local Plan Examination in Public. It cannot be attributed any weight in determining this application. • The inspector at a recent appeal suggested the Council only had 2.54 years’ housing supply and therefore para 49 of the NPPF applies and the Council’s housing supply development plan policies must be regarded as out of date. • The scheme has considerable merits and should be supported. It will promote a good sustainable form of development on an appropriate partially brownfield site within a key settlement. It will not create demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance. It accords with the development plan and other material considerations weigh in favour of it. • The Committee minutes from February 2015 record that the application was considered to comply with relevant national and local planning policies.

Tibberton and Cherrington Parish Council: • Reiterate their previous strong objection to the proposal. • Flood information given to the previous meeting of the Planning Committee was based on very limited data. Actual levels could be much higher. The former National Rivers Authority used to do routine maintenance of the River Meese. This seems to have been discontinued by the Environment Agency. This will adversely affect flood levels over time as minor obstructions accumulate. These factors should be borne in mind when the decision on the future of this site is made. Development in the flood plain of a river should be avoided. Environment Agency (EA) • Reiterate previous comments (no objection subject to conditions).

The EA has also given the following additional advice following the release of the five year housing land supply report. • The NPPF requires local authorities to steer new development to areas at the lowest probability of flooding by applying a Sequential Test. Development should not be permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development in areas with a lower probability of flooding. Only where there are no reasonably available sites in Flood Zones 1 or 2 should the suitability of sites in Flood Zone 3 be considered, taking into account the flood risk vulnerability of land uses and applying the Exception Test. • The site is partially located within Flood Zone 2 and 3 based on the EA’s flood map. Further detailed assessment undertaken to inform the Flood Risk Assessment confirms that all built development, including housing, are located outside the 100 year flood outline plus climate change. • Bearing in mind the scale and nature of the proposed development located within Flood Zones 2 and 3, which is considered non-major development in accordance with the Development Management Procedure Order (2010), the EA suggests the developer conduct a Sequential Test and invites the Council to consider this.

Officers have written to the applicant to prepare a response to the Environment Agency letter and have also written to the Environment Agency to seek a response on the Parish Council’s letter of objection. The applicant has also written a further letter to the Environment Agency.

Any further responses on flooding matters will be reported to the Committee.

Local residents: At the time of writing, seven residents have written in objecting to the proposal. Three have stated that the five year housing land supply announcement means the development is not needed. One resident wishes to draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that the site was not identified on the Proposed Housing and Employment Sites consultation document.

Other comments raised have reiterated objections to the proposal in relation to highway impact; the ecological value of the site; flood risk and the difficulties of getting home insurance; safety issues associated with new housing adjoining the River Meese; impacts on listed buildings in the village including the bridge over the River Meese and the parish church.

Other comments The Council’s highways, drainage and arboricultural services have responded to the consultation. Comments have also been received from the Shropshire Fire Service and Shropshire Archaeology Service. These do not raise any new matters.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Officers have reviewed the proposal and their advice to the Planning Committee in the light of this five year housing land supply statement and the fresh comments received.

The applicant has stated that the Committee should not review previously considered issues. However, the consequences of having a five year housing supply are a new material consideration which requires officers to ask the Members to revisit this application. The Committee is also entitled to review its original decision in light of the changes in the Councils land supply figure.

The analysis of the comments received below covers the five year housing land supply position, the other comments received and the restriction in the pooling of s106 contributions which came into place in April 2015.

Five year housing land supply The context of a lack of a five year housing land supply featured within the Planning Committee report. Specifically, it was identified that an inability to demonstrate 5 year housing land supply meant policies CS1 (Homes) which identify dwelling requirements for Telford, Newport and the rural area, and CS7 (Rural Area) which seek to direct housing into certain locations in line with the strategy, were not considered to be up-to-date. This meant that applications could not be refused on the grounds of housing supply alone and there would be a strong presumption in favour of sustainable development, taking account of paragraph 14 of the NPPF, where applications would be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significant and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the NPPF as a whole.

The applicant’s contention that the Council’s housing supply development plan policies are out of date and therefore not relevant is not accepted. The council considers that with a published housing land supply figure and being able to apply its housing supply policies, in accordance with policy CS7, Tibberton remains one of the three key settlements in the rural area where new housing is expected to be focussed. It is therefore pertinent to consider whether a scheme with up to 22 dwellings would be consistent with Policy CS7.

In the context of CS7 and the NPPF which includes an objective to boost significantly the supply of housing, it is considered that saved Wrekin Local Plan policy H10 which involves a restriction on residential development within villages to “one or two dwellings on a suitable infill plot…” no longer presents a defendable position.

Policy CS7 needs to be read alongside Policy CS1 that the rural area is expected to accommodate 170 new homes. The rural area has exceeded this level of provision since the adoption of the Core Strategy in 2007 and a further 22 homes would further exceed this development plan target. However, that in itself does not present sufficient justification for refusal and other factors which are referred to in the original Planning Committee report, which recommended a grant of planning permission, need to be taken into account.

Finally, the Committee is reminded that it has to consider all of its development plan policies in the light of the NPPF. This both requires Councils to boost housing supply notwithstanding development plan policy and to support planning proposals which maintain and enhance villages. Officers recommend that it should be approved.

Other matters

A further update on flood risk matters will be reported to the Committee.

A decision is expected soon on a planning appeal at 12 Tibberton (TWC/2014/0236). This will be reported too if it is issued before the date of the Planning Committee in the event that it raises matters to do with the Council’s five year housing land supply.

Pooling of s106 contributions

The original application was presented to the Committee with the following heads of terms: • The provision of 40% on site affordable housing; • A contribution of up to £115,146 towards primary and secondary education; • A payment of up to £41,800 for local transport infrastructure; • A payment of up to £13,200 towards the enhancement of local play and recreational space locally; • A payment of £5,000 for financial management and monitoring of the legal agreement.

The council no longer has the flexibility to pool s106 contributions to the same extent that it could before April 2015. A revised recommendation is set out below which specifies in detail where contributions should be applied. Officers are satisfied that contributions towards these projects are necessary and appropriate having regard to the requirements of the CIL 2010 Regulations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

(a) That DELEGATED AUTHORITY be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the following:

The applicant entering into a section 106 legal agreement with the Local Planning Authority (terms to be agreed by the Development Management Service Delivery Manager) relation to:

• The provision of 40% on site affordable housing; • A contribution of £5,233.91 per dwelling towards an extension of Tibberton Primary School and sports facilities provision at Burton Borough Secondary school (up to a total of £115,146); • A payment of £250 per dwelling as a contribution towards a traffic and speed management scheme on the B5062 within the vicinity of Back Lane/B5062 Junction (up to a total of £5,500) ; • A payment of £1650 per dwelling towards a highway safety improvement scheme on the B5062 and Cherrington Road junction (up to a total of £36.300); • A payment of up to £600 per dwelling to be applied towards off site play and recreation at Tibberton Playing Fields (up to a total of £13,200); • A payment of £5,000 for financial management and monitoring of the legal agreement.

(b) and the following conditions to be attached:

1. A01 Time limit outline 2. A02 Time limit – reserved matters 3. A03 Time limit – submission of reserved matters 4. B002 Standard outline some matters reserved (delete access). 5. B011 Samples of materials 6. B039 Visibility splay 2.4m x 43m 7. B042 Parking and turning 8. B049 Custom highway – implementation of pedestrian safety scheme forming part of highways assessment 9. B057 Contamination 10. B061 Surface water 11. B083 Noise attenuation from nearby workshop 12. B121 Landscaping 13. B130 Tree root protection 14. B145 Lighting plan 15. B149 Custom ecology – bird boxes 16. B150 Site Environmental Management Plan 17. B159 Custom archaeology 18. B Custom 1 Finished floor levels set no lower than 58.7m AOD 19. B Custom 2 No new structures or raising of ground levels on land below 58.1m AOD or within 8 metres of the River Meese or boundary of the site. 20. B Custom 3 Foul/ surface water drainage 21. B Custom 4 Access to attenuation and control features outside flood envelope for maintenance and inspection 22. C038 In accordance with deposited plans

Informatives: I106 – Section 106 agreements I32 – Fire Authority ICustom – Ecology informatives (nesting birds, storage of materials, trenches) ICustom – Environment Agency (proximity to River Meese, flooding from Knighton Reservoir, foul drainage, surface water drainage, pollution prevention) I40 – Conditions I41 – Reason for grant of permission RANPPF - Approval – National Planning Policy Framework

TWC/2014/1080 Land south and west of Tibberton Motor Repairs, Mill Lane, Tibberton, Newport, Shropshire

Outline application for residential development (up to 22 Houses) and construction of a modified vehicular access, with associated highways and drainage infrastructure and other accommodation works with all other matters reserved

APPLICANT RECEIVED Seabridge Developments Limited, Adrian Seabridge 02/12/2014

PARISH WARD Tibberton and Cherrington Edgmond OFFICER Vincent Maher

OBJECTIONS RECEIVED: Yes

MAIN ISSUES: principle of developing site for housing; scale of development proposed; design considerations; relationship between the development site and adjoining properties; highways; drainage and flooding; impact on other infrastructure; other matters including comparison with planning application at 12 Tibberton (TWC/2014/0236)

PROPOSAL: This is an outline planning application for a housing development of up to 22 houses on a site of 1.18ha. All matters are reserved with the exception of access.

An illustrative layout has been submitted as part of the application. This shows a mix of houses comprising eight x two bedroom houses and 14 x four/five bedroom houses ranging from 75 to 212 square metres. This illustrative layout shows that all houses and estate roads would be built back from a line identified as a “flood zone line”. A pumping station is shown on the submitted plans. The gross density of the site (including the flood zone line) would be around 18.6 homes per hectare, lower than a suburban layout. A site section plan has also been submitted to demonstrate the likely relationship between the new development and the recently built house just south of the application boundary. Vehicle visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m have been identified on the illustrative layout. To achieve this it will be necessary to remove some of the front boundary wall and hedgerow on the site.

In addition to the submitted plans, the following documents have been provided as part of the application:

 Design and access statement;  A planning statement;  A landscape and visual assessment;  An arboricultural report;  A highways assessment; and  A flood risk assessment including a site drainage strategy. The applicant has also submitted an acoustic report to consider the relationship between the application site and the adjacent car workshop to assess how the two uses could co-exist in proximity to one another.

SITE CONTEXT: The application site (1.18 ha) is located on the northern edge of Tibberton west of Marbren House and between three houses on Mill Lane and the River Meese which

marks the borough boundary with Shropshire. The site enjoys easy access to the core of the village albeit by a road which does not have a separate pavement.

The site is a largely open and flat area of land which has a small car workshop at the northern end of the site and lies lower than the houses on Mill Lane. There is limited tree cover on the site and this is concentrated around the corners of the site. The site is in particular overlooked by the new house built on the garden associated with 39 Mill Lane, known as “The Croft” constructed just beyond the southern boundary of the site (approved by the Planning Committee in February 2013 TWC/2012/0808). It is understood that in the past some of the eastern part of the site was used as a paper mill and had a number of greenhouses and buildings associated with a commercial use. On this basis, it is fair to characterise parts of the site as brownfield land that have been previously developed.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY W83/0014 – Erection of two greenhouses. Granted W91/1124 – Removal of agricultural occupancy condition on planning permission 74/0358 (Marbren House). Refused TWC/2011/0795 – Removal of agricultural occupancy condition on Marbren House. Granted

PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT National Planning Policy Framework (the NPPF) – the NPPF is not the development plan for Telford and Wrekin but is a material consideration in this case because all of the borough’s development plan policies have to be viewed in the light of this more recent guidance.

Saved Wrekin Local Plan policies UD2 Design Criteria UD3 Urban Design Assessments UD4 Landscape Design H6 Windfall sites in Telford and Wrekin H9 Location of new housing H10 Scale of new development H23 Affordable housing H24 Affordable housing in the rural area T22 Planning Obligations OL12 Open land and landscape – contributions from new development OL13 Maintenance of Open Space LR4 Outdoor recreational Open Space LR6 Developer contributions to outdoor recreation open space provision within new residential developments

LDF Core Strategy policies CS1 Homes CS7 Rural Area CS9 Accessibility and Social Inclusion CS11 Open Space CS12 Natural Environment CS13 Environmental Resources

CS14 Cultural, Historic and Built Environment CS15 Urban Design

Some residents (see below) have written in to say they were told by a council officer that the site is in a Green Corridor. There is no such development plan status affecting the site. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES:

STANDARD CONSULTEES: Tibberton & Cherrington Parish Council: Object  Would increase size of village by 10%. Tibberton is a small settlement with limited services.  Density out of character with area.  Site infrastructure not suited to accommodate development including schools, mobile phone and broadband coverage.  Highways and pedestrian safety risks. Nearby listed bridge to the north over River Meese may not handle increased volume of traffic.  Flood risk. Area has flooded before. Existing residents have difficulty with insurance.  Application would be a major intrusion in to the Green Corridor separating Telford & Wrekin and Shropshire Councils.  Development in Green Corridor. Harm to wildlife and site contamination.  Plans showing site access unclear. Errors on plan.  House on south west corner on a right of way.

Affordable housing: Comment Require 40% provision with 80% for rent and 20% shared ownership. Detailed advice provided on standards for new housing and how it should be marketed.

Arboriculture: Comment Not all trees on site surveyed. If permission approved, recommend conditions for landscaping confirming new species and tree protection for existing trees.

Drainage: No objection Request imposition of conditions

Ecology: Comment Site comprises area of semi improved grassland and buildings with some hardstanding areas. No recorded great crested newts. A Habitats Regulation Assessment has been completed showing no likely significant effect on the Aqualate Mere Midland Meres and Mosses Ramsar Phase 2.

Recommend conditions to control protected species survey, requirement for artificial nesting/ roosting boxes and a lighting plan and ecological informatives.

Education - No objection Request £115,146 for primary and secondary education provision.

Highways: Comment No objection subject to conditions regarding surface water disposal, sightlines and implementation of the access arrangement/ pedestrian safety scheme on Mill Lane identified in the Highways Assessment. Also want S106 contributions of £1900 per dwelling towards a traffic and speed management scheme on B5062 within vicinity of Back Lane and a highway safety improvement scheme on B5062/ Cherrington Road junction. Recommend informative about need for S278 agreement for off-site highway improvements.

Parks and Open Space: Comment £600 contribution per dwelling to enhance off site play area. Recommend condition for landscape management for land adjoining River Meese.

Archaeology: Comment Tibberton Mill - Post-medieval watermill in existence since at least 1800 and in use for part of its life as paper mill. Mill closed in 1913 and site was redeveloped as nursery in mid 20th century. Archaeological remains likely to survive below ground. Recommend an archaeological survey condition.

Shropshire Fire Service – No comment

Environment Agency – No objection Majority of the site in Flood Zone 1 with low probability of flooding but part of the site is in Flood Zones 2 and 3. Suggest conditions to impose minimum finished floor levels and no new infrastructure within land in Flood Zones 2 and/or 3. Recommend other informatives around flood risk, construction close to River Meese, foul and surface water drainage and pollution prevention.

Shropshire Council: No comments received.

LOCAL REPRESENATIONS: 19 residents have written in to object raising the following issues:

 Standard of application – contents are indicative only.  Scale/ density of development unacceptable, too high. Housing unnecessary. Many new homes for sale.  Would result in an unacceptable expansion of village with no jobs.  Traffic impacts – Mill Lane is hazardous and risk greater because of extra vehicle movements. Some residents have referred to recent accidents. Listed bridge over River Meese could not cope. S106 contributions will not address this.  Access onto Mill Lane restricted because of existing verge.  Flood risk – area has flooded.  Infrastructure poor – drainage, water pressure, broadband, mobile phone. Tibberton Primary School and other nearby schools full/ oversubscribed.  Unacceptable development on a Green Corridor.  The Croft forms a natural and sympathetic end to development at this exit/ entry to the village. Site outside village boundary.

 Potential contamination risks because site originally used as a mill producing paper from used rags.  Disruption during construction phase.  Impact on wildlife – site is a “greenbelt” area.  Right of way crosses south west corner of the site.

Two residents have stated that the advertisement sign has not been displayed near the site. Officers have investigated and found that the original sign was removed. Officers have placed a second sign up.

One resident has asked the Planning Committee to visit the site before a decision is made.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The main issues in this case are:

 The principle of developing the site for housing;  Scale of development proposed;  Design considerations including the quality of accommodation;  Relationship between the development site and adjoining properties;  Highways;  Drainage and flooding;  Impact on other infrastructure;  Other matters including a comparison with planning application reference TWC/2014/0236 (land adjacent to 12 Tibberton)

Principle of developing the site for housing The site is located in a rural area of the borough and on the fringes of Tibberton. Outside of urban areas, Local Plan Policy H9 states that new development will be permitted within 12 rural settlements including Tibberton and not elsewhere. The development plan does not specifically identify a clear boundary to Tibberton. Core Strategy Policy CS7 states that development should be limited to meet the needs of the area but focused on Tibberton, High Ercall and Waters Upton. This is a broader definition than that set out in the Local Plan.

The NPPF directs councils to boost significantly the supply of new housing. It further requires councils to demonstrate a five year plus 20% housing supply. The NPPF states at Paragraph 47 that relevant policies around housing supply (such as Core Strategy Policy CS7) cannot be considered up-to-date in the absence of a five year supply of deliverable sites. Paragraph 55 recommends that new development in rural areas should be located in areas where it will enhance local services. In the context of the hierarchy of settlements within the rural parts of the borough, both Council policy in the form of the Core Strategy and national policy anticipate a different role for Tibberton over time. It is especially appropriate to consider land that is partly previously developed to take pressure off agricultural land in the open countryside.

Scale and mix of development proposed The submitted plans anticipate a development of around 18 dwellings per hectare. This is lower than a typical suburban set up and generally acknowledges the densities across the village. It is submitted that this is an acceptable scale of development in principle.

The proposal would provide a mix of house options (from two to five bedrooms) and in doing so, would provide housing options for different households wishing to live in the area or wishing to downsize and a mix of affordable and market housing including options for local people on low incomes. This mix accords with good planning principles set out in the NPPF and Local Plan Policy H23.

Design considerations including quality of accommodation The indicative plans submitted shows spacious accommodation in a lower density waterside environment capable of being serviced for refuse collection. Matters such as the choice of materials and landscaping are reserved and conditions to control such matters and to protect the limited tree cover on site could be imposed to comply with Local Plan Policies UD2 and UD4.

Relationship between the application site and nearby properties The most sensitive relationships to consider are those between the application property and Marbren House to the east and the new house just south of the site. Based on the information shown on the illustrative layout, the likely distances between the closest dwelling and the windows at Marbren House is about 21m and from The Croft some 23m. The applicant has indicated in a site section how the house closest to The Croft could be built without the residents of that property being unreasonably overlooked.

A car repair yard would remain just outside the application site boundaries. The Council’s records show there have been no nuisance complaints about the business, the operator of the adjoining site has stated that the site operates Monday to Friday only and closes at 5pm. The applicant has shown how the use of acoustic fencing and the reorientation of some of the houses shown on the illustrative plan could overcome this potential concern. A noise attenuation condition is proposed to address this matter.

Highways The Council’s highways officer has not objected to the scheme subject to conditions and the contribution of funds towards a local highway safety project. A “Grampian” condition has been proposed recommending that the offsite pedestrian safety measures submitted with the highways assessment are implemented before the development is first occupied. This would provide a pedestrian refuge on Mill Lane (refer attached plan).

Flood risk and drainage Both the Environment Agency and the Council’s drainage expert are satisfied with the information submitted and confirm that the proposal would not be built in a floodplain. Appropriate conditions are recommended by both bodies to ensure that new houses would not be at risk from flooding.

Officers have passed the photographs supplied by residents purporting to show the River Meese in flood to an Environment Agency representative to review. The representative confirms the application site would not be affected.

Impact on other infrastructure All of the accommodation proposed is of two or more bedroom houses and it is assumed that the development will provide family accommodation. Accordingly, the development is likely to have a number of impacts on local infrastructure, most notably on the demand for play provision and education as well as the local highway network. The developer has agreed to heads of terms for a S106 agreement that would provide for the following contributions:

 The provision of 40% on site affordable housing;  A contribution of up to £115,146 towards primary and secondary education;  A payment of up to £41,800 for local transport infrastructure; and  A payment of up to £13,200 towards the enhancement of local play and recreational space locally; and  A financial management and monitoring contribution of £5,000.

The heads of terms of this agreement are consistent with Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. The need for a contribution towards local educational facilities reflects the link between a major development comprising solely large family houses and its impact on local school rolls. A contribution towards local transport infrastructure reflects the features of the site and the additional traffic impact generated by the development. The negotiation of contributions is consistent with Local Plan T22 and would be expected to be applied towards projects identified in the highway officer’s comments. The contribution towards enhancing off site play and recreation is justified because of the paucity of play space on the site and its negotiation is consistent with the NPPF and Local Plan Policies OL13, LR4 and LR6. The provision of affordable housing is a basic principle for all major schemes supported by local and national planning policy. In all respects, the sums sought are fairly and reasonably related to the scheme.

Other matters raised and conclusions A final material consideration in this case is the need to evaluate this application against the outline scheme of up to 60 dwellings on land adjacent to 12 Tibberton TWC/2014/0236 which the Planning Committee refused in July 2014. The current proposal is manifestly different to that site in three obvious ways. First, it is partly previously developed land and therefore merits more positive consideration for housing in principle. Secondly, it does not have the same landscape sensitivity as 12 Tibberton. It is not adjacent to a listed building nor is it as exposed in the open countryside as identified in the developer’s landscape and visual assessment. Thirdly, the current scheme is much smaller. Many residents have objected to this proposal stating that Tibberton does not have the infrastructure to accommodate population growth. The Committee originally refused planning permission on 12 Tibberton on this point but agreed at its 4 February 2015 meeting not to progress this point in connection with the appeal submitted on that site. It would not be reasonable therefore to refuse the current application on infrastructure grounds either.

Officers have carefully reviewed all submissions received in connection with this application. The fact that other sites have been approved or are for sale does not justify withholding planning permission. It is not clear if there is a right of way on the site. If there is, the final layout of the site will have to incorporate this and it may be necessary to reduce overall the amount of housing on this site. This is an appropriate response given that the application is in outline form only.

Overall, the scheme will make a modest contribution towards meeting future housing land supply in a settlement where development plan policy seeks to concentrate rural growth subject to the provision of S106 funding to mitigate off site impacts associated with this scheme.

A suite of conditions is proposed following discussion with officers and on the advice of external bodies (Shropshire Archaeology Service and the Environment Agency) which is largely self-explanatory. Mindful of the fact that part of the site was once used as a mill, a contaminated land research condition is proposed too.

RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the conclusions above, two recommendations are proposed.

(a) That DELEGATED AUTHORITY be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the following:

The applicant entering into a section 106 legal agreement with the Local Planning Authority (terms to be agreed by the Development Management Service Delivery Manager) relation to:

 The provision of 40% on site affordable housing;  A contribution of up to £115,146 towards primary and secondary education;  A payment of up to £41,800 for local transport infrastructure;  A payment of up to £13,200 towards the enhancement of local play and recreational space locally;  A payment of £5,000 for financial management and monitoring of the legal agreement.

(b) and the following conditions to be attached:

11. B083 Noise attenuation from nearby workshop 12. B121 Landscaping 13. B130 Tree root protection 14. B145 Lighting plan 15. B149 Custom ecology – bird boxes 16. B150 Site Environmental Management Plan 17. B159 Custom archaeology 18. B Custom 1 Finished floor levels set no lower than 58.7m AOD 19. B Custom 2 No new structures or raising of ground levels on land below 58.1m AOD or within 8 metres of the River Meese or boundary of the site. 20. B Custom 3 Foul/ surface water drainage 21. B Custom 4 Access to attenuation and control features outside flood envelope for maintenance and inspection 22. C038 In accordance with deposited plans

(c) In the event that a legal agreement is not signed by 2 April 2015, that the Planning Committee refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development will have an unacceptable impact on the provision of local infrastructure, most notably the provision of affordable housing, education facilities and public open space contrary to Policies H23, OL13, LR4 and LR6 of the Wrekin Local Plan, Policy CS10 of the Telford & Wrekin Core Strategy and government policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. 2. The proposed development will have an unacceptable impact on the surrounding highway network contrary to Policy T22 of the Wrekin Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.