Committee and Date Item

Central Planning Committee

14th December 2012 7 Public

Development Management Report Responsible Officer: Stuart Thomas email: stuart.thomas@.gov.uk Tel: 01743 252665 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 12/01913/FUL Parish: Proposal: Application under Section 73A of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 for the use of land and buildings for Class B1, B2 and/or B8 uses and for haulage depot Site Address: Industrial Estate SY5 0EQ Applicant: Swains SSAPS Case Officer: Nanette Brown email: [email protected] Grid Ref: 338469 - 305970

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 100049049. 2011 For reference purposes only. No further copies may be made. Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

Recommendation: Grant Permission subject to the conditions sets out in Appendix 1. Recommended Reason for Approval This proposal provides the opportunity to support rural enterprise and diversification of the economy that will provide continued and future local employment opportunities. It is considered that the proposal will not result in any significant and detrimental impact on residential amenities of nearby neighbours, and that the traffic movements generated by the development will be accommodated on the local road network without detriment to highway safety. As such the proposal is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of the saved Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan policy EM3, the Shropshire Core Strategy Policies CS5 and CS13, and those of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

REPORT

1.0 THEPROPOSAL 1.1 This application seeks planning permission to allow all of the 22 buildings/units and the associated open areas on site to be used for class B1, B2 and/or B8 uses and also for the operation of a haulage depot. The site includes buildings of various sizes and also open spaces that provide parking, manoeuvring and service spaces.

1.2 The applicant also seeks the authority to consider granting the consent in such terms as to make future changes of use of the buildings on the site from one of the permitted Use Classes to another without the need to seek further consent from the Council. That would allow, say, a Unit that is currently in B1 use to change to a B2 or B8 use, a building currently in B2 use to become a B1 or B8 use, or a building in B8 use to become a B1 or B2, withoutthe need to seek individual planning permissions.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 The site is located to the south west of Pontesbury and to the north east of Minsterley, situated directly south of the settlement of Malehurst. Access to the site is gained off the local road network from the road leading from the A488 to Malehurst and . 2.2 The site itself comprises of a mixture of mostly modern style buildings (in terms of sizes and materials) and open areas used for parking and turning. Part of the open areas of the site and buildings are also used for the applicant’s haulage business. The boundaries of the site are largely marked by planting and fencing. The front of the site facing onto the road comprises of a concreted parking area and buildings (Units1& 1a). A second part of the site (Top Yard), to its south western end is not included within this application.

2.3 The closest residential property to the site is Hills View, a detached property located to the north of the site on the opposite side of the road. The driveway and entrance to the Hills View lies almost opposite the northern corner of the application site.

2.4 The second closest residential property is The Gatehouse, located on Malehurst Bank, immediately adjacent to the turning off the A488 for the lane that runs past the application site. The Gatehouse is situated at a higher position than the application site and so views of the site can be taken down into it from The Gatehouse. Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

2.5 Site History – Recent planning permissions and certificates of lawful use granted on the site include:

SA/07/1209/F – Erection of replacement commercial building for B1, B2 and B8 use – Granted 10 October 2007 (Unit 1a)

10/02171/CPE - The use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 17 for use within Use Classes B1 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the buildings shown on the plan and numbered 2,13a, 14 for use falling within Use Classes B2 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the buildings shown on the plan and numbered 7 and 8 for use falling within Use Classes B8 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 15 for the purpose of heavy goods vehicle repair garage (Sui Generis), use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 1A falling within Use Classes B1, B2 and B8 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010 which are to be carried on in complete accordance with conditions attached to planning permission SA/07/1209/F granted on the 10th October 2007 – Approved 11 November 2011

3.0 REASON FOR DELGATED DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION 3.1 Under the adopted scheme of delegation this application is in the view of the Group Manager in consultation with the committee chairman or vice chairman of a complex nature that should be determined by the relevant planning committee.

4.0 Community Representations

4.1 -ConsulteeComments

4.1.1 SC Highways – Objection The site is served via an approach from the A488 which is substandard in width and alignment to cater for the type and volume of vehicles likely to be generated by the current industrial estate. In addition the junction of the approach road with the A488 is substandard in terms of its geometry and visibility splay in the south- westerly direction. The effect of the junction layout is that large vehicles turning at this junction are required to manoeuvre within the whole of the A488 carriageway width. Having regard to the limited visibility at the A488 junction and restriction in forward visibility for vehicles approaching the junction from a south-westerly direction, due to the vertical alignment of the A488, there are inherent highway safety concerns. Having said that the accident record at this junction does not indicate the junction as being an accident problem. Representations against the application state however that there have been a number of near misses.

Given the highway deficiencies set out above, the highway authority would not wish to see a material increase in the type and number of vehicles generated to the site. Moreover the highway authority would be minded to recommend refusal in strong terms if this proved to be the case. However as we are all aware, this is not a straight forward situation due to the chequered historic background of this site. Whilst the latest Certificate of Lawfulness Application (CLUED) now clarifies the

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012 use of buildings 1A, 2, 7, 8, 13A, 14, 15 and 17 under a specific use class, this still leaves 14 units without a recognised use class. However it would appear that those other 17 buildings have been used for a multitude of industrial/business/commercial activities, although it cannot be established that any of the uses within the 17 units have taken place in excess of 10 years. In addition there is no clarity regarding the use, permitted or otherwise, of the outside hard standing areas. If there are no restrictions/planning controls over the outside area use of the site, these can have a significant influence over the types and numbers of vehicles likely to be generated by different industrial activities.

Based upon the letter submitted by the applicant’s agent dated 18th September, its conclusion in effect contends that the level of permission now being sought reflects what has been happening on the site for many years and as such permission should not be withheld. The highway authority’s concern however, based upon the applicant’s agent contention, is that there would potentially be no control of the site and that the site buildings and outside hard standing areas would have an open B1, B2 and B8 use class. In the absence of legal guidance I question that the ‘fall back’ position is so compelling to force the Council to accept/agree to unrestricted B1, B2 and B8 use of the site. Such an unrestricted use of the units outside of those granted under the CLUED application, together with the potential use of the outside hard standing areas, could allow buildings to be combined to allow industrial activities which could generate significant traffic movements.

Given the above I am not in a position to support this application.

4.1.2 SC Public Protection – No objections In principle, express no objection to this application as the site is already undertaking Class B1, B2, B8 uses and haulage and brings the unclassified units into line with the units currently operating under the Certificate of Lawfulness. However, permission is granted recommend the following condition to restrict use of the site to more conventional opening hours as per other Industrial sites of this nature:

No machinery, plant, deliveries and dispatches shall arrive, depart or operate outside of the following times: a) 7.00am and 7.00pm on Monday - Friday; b) 8.00am and 6.00pm on Saturdays; c) Not at anytime on Sundays and Bank Holidays Except vehicles returning to their Operating Centre.

4.1.3 Pontesbury Parish Council – Support A well-established site providing much needed local employment. However, there are safety concerns regarding inappropriate access onto main road which need addressing. Support application for flexible use provided it does not lead to a significant increase in large vehicles using the site.

4.2 -PublicComments Several objections have been received from three addresses and are summarised as follows: Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012 Consideration needs to be given to the increased weight and length of modern lorries, increasing numbers are visiting the estate with restricted access to a narrow country lane onto a fast and busy road located on the crest of a hill; creating a dangerous and potentially fatal situation on the road; previous checks on vehicle speeds on the A488 have been conservative; local roads are a training ground for local ‘rally drivers’; all the buildings have undergone a complete re-skinning with changes to Unit 1 in recent times; the historic uses of land results in land which is known to be contaminated; there are 3 residential units on site in part time use allegedly used by drivers to sleep in during breaks but suspected also in use as their abodes; the supporting documents are incorrect; the request for all week working results in a loss of amenity to neighbours and to the workforce, more likely to encounter danger; also result in unfair commercial advantage with a cost to other local businesses whose hours have been restricted with good reason; the permission should not allow to deviate from the changes allowed by the use classes order to move between the use class categories; parking of vehicles on the concrete apron outside the main gates obscures vision to traffic on the access lane; lots of trees and shrubs have previously been removed from the site; traffic and vehicle movements to and from the site have significantly increased in the last 11 years since Nitrovit utilised the site; Unit 1 is operated on unsocial hours and with a level of noise and pollutants that affect residential amenity; in particular to the closest neighbour less than 20 metres away, unit 1 did not have a previous B2 use and the spray booth it now contains should be located further back into the site, well away from any neighbours; recent and existing users of the units have resulted in much larger heavy commercial traffic involving big machines using the inadequate highway access and work in unsocial hours, beyond 6pm and working on Saturdays and Sundays and bank holidays; the stated levels of available parking spaces on site is not substantiated; the surface water on the site does not run into a soak away but is discharged to an existing water course; badgers are located to the south west of the development, adjacent to the Top Yard open storage area; believe fertilizers were never produced at the site, but were stored and distributed; this planning application only covers half the total site and the use of the remaining half should also be taken into account, particularly in relation to vehicle movements and highway safety; far less numbers of people actually work at the site than is stated; similar hours of operation controls should be applied to those of Unit 1a to protect residential amenity; traffic movements include at least 600 movements per day during working hours and a survey of movements for today’s traffic flows should be undertaken; vehicle movements and machinery used within the site late in the evenings after 9pm and early morning, before 7.30am are regularly heard by neighbours; there is sufficient land at Pontesbury and Minsterley for local employment uses with better highway connections; the submitted transport assessment is over 3 years old and taken at a time of year when many would be on holiday; many units were not then being utilised on site; do not agree that the site does not create the number of traffic movements likely to cause serious traffic problems.

5.0 THEMAINISSUES Principle of development Highways Impact on Residential Amenity

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 Saved Policy EM3 of the Borough Local Plan allows the provision of small scale Class B development subject to the development being located within or immediately adjoining a settlement. Although the site is not within or adjacent to a settlement the site is only located 1 km away from Minsterley and Pontesbury and several of the buildings on site have already secured Lawful Development Certificates establishing them as having a mixture of business uses that provide local rural employment opportunities. Having regard to the existing uses of the site, the continued use for the class B uses proposed are considered to be acceptable in principle.

6.1.2 Policy CS13 aims to support rural enterprise and diversification of the economy where proposals meet the requirements of policy CS5. Policy CS5 requires that new development is strictly controlled in accordance with national policies to protect the countryside and green belt. The policy also seeks development that improves the sustainability of rural communities by bringing local economic and community benefits where they relate to the retention and appropriate expansion of existing established businesses.

6.1.3 This site has an established historic commercial use with a variety of uses operated on the site that span several decades. The current complex of varying sizes of buildings are being operated by a variety of businesses, mostly local employers, and this application has been submitted in order to request it to be allowed for the site to be used in as flexible way as possible for class B1, B2 and/or B8 uses and for a haulage depot. The applicants request for flexibility to move between the proposed use classes has been made in order for the site to allow local businesses to locate on the business park and expand into any of the available units as easily as possible. The existing business park and the uses proposed would seek to ensure future local employment opportunities that would support the local economy but how this is controlled needs careful consideration to ensure that the amenities of nearby residents and also highway safety are protected.

.6.2 Highways 6.2.1 Concerns and objections regarding highway safety have been raised by the three objectors to the application. The points raised include concerns over the large size and weight of vehicles already using site access and junction of the approach road with the A488, and the potential for these to increase in the future and also the total number of vehicle movements that already exist and that could also increase as a result from any permission granted by this application. One objector has also requested that a Civil Engineer submit his concerns relating to the submitted information. The engineer has raised concerns that the stated existing vehicle movements may not be accurate and that the junction of the A488 with the approach road to the site is not suited for articulated vehicles either in use today or for larger vehicles that are likely to be used in the foreseeable future. Pontesbury Parish Council supports the application for a flexible use of the site provided that it does not lead to a significant increase in large vehicles using the site.

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

6.2.2 Shropshire Council Highways Development Control Team have confirmed that the junction of the approach road and the A488 is substandard for the type and volume of vehicles likely to be generated by the current industrial estate, although the accident record at this junction does not indicate the junction as being an accident problem. They have also stated that they would not wish to see a material increase in the type and number of vehicles generated to the site and as highway authority would be minded to recommend refusal if this proved to be the case.

6.2.3 This site is one that has evolved over a long period of time and has had several different users and uses of the site which have varied in terms of size of operations and intensity. It is against this historic backdrop that this application needs to be assessed and the planning histroy of the site should be given significant weight in the decision making process. Currently there are no planning controls over the number and size of vehicles visiting the site and out of the 22 units one unit (No.1a) has a planning permission for use as a B1, B2 or B8 use and 7 other units have a Certificate of Lawful Use for uses that include, B1, B2 and B8 uses. The majority of the remaining uses are being operated informally and this application seeks to in part regularise this position.

6.2.4 It is considered that the historic use of the site and the established lawful use of part of the site should be given significant weight insofaras the use of the access and site is lawful for a number of units on the site. Whilst the permission would allow the continued use of the site for all three classes of use, B1, B2 and B8 any future expansion of development of the site would require further planning application to be sought and therefore some further future control by the Local Planning Authority would be retained. With regard to uses on site such as the haulage use, each business will require additional licenses that will consider the appropriate vehicles for use at the site.

6.3 Impact on Residential Amenity 6.3.1 The main objections relating to amenity from the nearby residents specifically refer to noise and disturbance created by use of the site, particularly at unsociable hours, after 6 & 9 pm in the evenings, before 7.30 am in the mornings, and at weekends and bank holidays. The two closest residential properties to the site are The Gatehouse and Hills View, and in particular the use of Unit 1 is specifically mentioned as a concern by the occupiers of Hills View.

6.3.2 The proposed use classes are largely in line with the uses already being carried out at the site and the granting of planning permission in this instance would allow for some control of the site to be gained by means of appropriately worded conditions. The applicants seek an open permission for B1, B2 and B8 uses that would allow for flexible usage of each unit for any of the specified uses without any need for any additional planning applications. Whilst this would support the current commercial business/industrial park operated by the applicant, the impact of such a use needs to be carefully considered in relation to the existing and future residential amenities of the adjacent and nearby neighbours to the site.

6.3.3 The objectors to the application have suggested that any planning permission granted should include conditions that strictly control the hours of operation and

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012 use of the site and that these should reflect more conventional operating hours that are usually applied to any planning permission for new industrial premises. Indeed the existing planning permission granted in 2007 (ref 07/1209/FUL) for the erection of the replacement commercial building for Unit 1A at Malehurst has an hours limiting condition, that states that no work shall be carried out at the premises between 1800hrs and 0800hrs Monday to Saturday and nor at any time on Sundays, nor on any Public Holidays.

6.3.4 Shropshire Council’s Public Protection Officers have recommended that a condition should be added to any planning permission granted in this instance that reads: No machinery, plant, deliveries and dispatches shall arrive, depart or operate outside of the following times: a) 7.00am and 7.00pm on Monday - Friday; b) 8.00am and 6.00pm on Saturdays; c) Not at anytime on Sundays and Bank Holidays Except vehicles returning to their Operating Centre. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the occupants of nearby residential properties.

6.3.5 In considering this condition officers are of the opinion that it would unreasonably restrict business operations on the site and in essence means that a number of existing operators could not trade within these hours. The key issues is one of HGVS leaving and returning to site which takes places outside these suggested hours. In considering this matter it should be noted that there is an existing A road between Minsterley and Pontesbury which is in continued use serving existing 24/7 industrial units at Minsterley. It is considered by officers that some limited delivery and disptaches from the site would not adversely impact upon the amenities of existing residential properties and accordingly an amended condition is recommended which seeks to restrict machinery or plant operations only. This would reflect in some way the more open usage that currently exists on site but would allow for businesses contained within the units to continue with some limited operation outside of these hours if they needed to, without causing any unacceptable noise and disturbance to local residents. In addition some limited Sunday and Bank Holiday working is considered acceptable and this can be controlled by condition also.

6.3.6 Concerns have also been raised by the use of extraction and air conditioning equipment in Unit 1 that causes additional noise disturbance to the nearest residential occupants at Hill View. Both Unit 1 and Unit 1A are situated at the front of the site adjacent to the approach road and site entrance and therefore closest to Hill View. It is considered that tighter control over such equipment used in these two units should be controlled and this could be achieved by way of appropriately worded conditions that would require details of existing equipment and any future proposed equipment to be submitted for approval by the planning authority.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Whilst the application site is not located within or adjacent to a settlement the site is only located 1 km away from Minsterley and Pontesbury and several of the buildings on site have already secured Lawful Development Certificates establishing them as having a mixture of business uses that provide local rural Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012 employment opportunities. Having regard to the existing uses of the site and the extensive commercial history of the sites use the continued use for the class B uses proposed are considered to be acceptable in principle.

7.2 The historic use of the site and existing vehicle movements to and from the site are also considered to justify the continued use of the site in terms of vehicle movements. Conditions could be included on the permission to limit the hours of operation of machinery and plant on site to more conventional operating hours, that would still allow for quieter use of the site outside of these hours and the return of vehicles to their operating centre without causing any unacceptable noise and disturbance to local residents.

7.3 The existing site provides on balance the opportunity to support rural enterprise and diversification of the economy that will provide continued and future local employment opportunities. As such the proposal is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of the saved Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan policy EM3, the Shropshire Core Strategy Policies CS5 and CS13, and those of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

8. RISK ASSESSMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES APPRAISAL

8.1 Risk Management There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows: As with any planning decision the applicant has a right of appeal if they disagree with the decision and/or the imposition of conditions. Costs can be awarded  irrespective of the mechanism for hearing the appeal - written representations, a hearing or inquiry. The decision is challenged by way of a Judicial Review by a third party. The courts become involved when there is a misinterpretation or misapplication of  policy or some breach of the rules of procedure or the principles of natural justice. However their role is to review the way the authorities reach decisions, rather than to make a decision on the planning issues themselves, although they will interfere where the decision is so unreasonable as to be irrational or perverse. Therefore they are concerned with the legality of the decision, not its planning merits. A challenge by way of Judicial Review must be a) promptly and b) in any event not later than three months after the grounds to make the claim first arose first arose.

Both of these risks need to be balanced against the risk of not proceeding to determine the application. In this scenario there is also a right of appeal against non-determination for application for which costs can also be awarded.

8.2 Human Rights

Article 8 give the right to respect for private and family life and First Protocol Article 1 allows for the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. These have to be balanced against the rights and freedoms of others and the orderly development of the County in the interests of the Community.

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012 First Protocol Article 1 requires that the desires of landowners must be balanced against the impact on residents.

This legislation has been taken into account in arriving at the above recommendation.

8.3 Equalities

The concern of planning law is to regulate the use of land in the interests of the public at large, rather than those of any particular group. Equality will be one of a number of ‘relevant considerations’ that need to be weighed in planning committee members’ minds under section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1970.

9. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are likely financial implications of the decision and/or imposition of conditions is challenged by a planning appeal or judicial review. The costs of defending any decision will be met by the authority and will vary dependant on the scale and nature of the proposal. The financial implications of any decision are not a material planning consideration and should not be "weighed" in planning committee members' mind when reaching a decision.

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

Central Government Guidance: NPPF

West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Policies:

Core Strategy and Saved Policies: EM3: Employment Development in the Rural Area CS5: Countryside & Green Belt CS13: Economic Development, Enterprise and Employment

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: SA/07/1209/F – Erection of replacement commercial building for B1, B2 and B8 use – Granted 10 October 2007 (Unit 1a) 10/02171/CPE - The use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 17 for use within Use Classes B1 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the buildings shown on the plan and numbered 2,13a, 14 for use falling within Use Classes B2 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the buildings shown on the plan and numbered 7 and 8 for use falling within Use Classes B8 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010, use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 15 for the purpose of heavy goods vehicle repair garage (Sui Generis), use of the building shown on the plan and numbered 1A falling within Use Classes B1, B2 and B8 (of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2010 which are to be carried on in complete accordance with conditions attached to planning permission SA/07/1209/F granted on the 10th October 2007 – Approved 11 November 2011 Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

11. Additional Information

List of Background Papers (This MUST be completed for all reports, but does not include items containing exempt or confidential information)

Cabinet Member (Portfolio Holder) Cllr M. Price Local Member Cllr Tudor Bebb Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665 Central Planning Committee: 14th December 2012

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans and drawings.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and details.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMENCES

2. Within three months of the date of this permission full details of any existing extraction or air conditioning equipment located in Units 1 and 1a as identified on the approved plans shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within two months of the date of the approval of the scheme and shall thereafter be retained. Reason: To protect the amenities of occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties.

3. No new extraction or air conditioning equipment shall be installed into Units 1 or 1a as identified on the approved plans without full details having first been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties.

CONDITION(S) THAT ARE RELEVANT FOR THE LIFETIME OF THE DEVELOPMENT

4. No machinery or plant shall operate outside of the following times: a) 07.00 hrs and 1900 hrs on Monday - Friday; b) 0800 hrs and 1800 hrs on Saturdays; c) 10.00 hrs and 16.00 hrs on Sundays and Bank Holidays

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the occupants of nearby residential properties.

Contact Stuart Thomas on 01743 252665