DOCSLIB.ORG

Development Management Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development Management Report Committee and date Item South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) 1st December 2009 15 Development Management Report Application Number: 09/02782/FUL Parish: Farlow Grid Ref: 362550 - 278621 Proposal: Erection of a toilet/shower block with drying area; installation of a septic tank Site Address: 2 Silvington Hill Hopton Wafers Bridgnorth Shropshire DY14 0ER Applicant: Mr R. Salter Case Officer: Mr Tom Jeremiah email: [email protected] 1.0 THEPROPOSAL&OVERVIEW 1.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a toilet/shower block with drying area and the installation of a septic tank. 1.2 The purpose of the new outbuilding is to service a proposed new camp site which the applicant intends to open in April 2010 to visitors. An application has not been submitted for a Change of Use of the land to a camp site in this instance as the applicant has applied for ‘Certified Site Status’ from the Camping & Caravan Club which exempts specific sites from requiring planning permission if supported by the club having regard to Section 269 of the Public Health Act 1936. 1.3 The applicant submitted a number of documents with the application submission including a completed Rural Enterprise Grant Form which states that the Camping & Caravan Club have issued the applicant with the certificated site status. In order for the Officer to assess the proposed toilet/shower block, confirmation that the site is able to operate as a camping site without planning permission was sought from the Caravan & Camping Club as no details or copies of the Certificate were provided with the application submission. The Club was able to confirm that a Certificate setting out the sites ‘Certified Status’ had been applied for by the applicant but at the time of writing this report, this had not been issued. It was confirmed by the club however, that the Certified Site Status would be acceptable once the toilet/shower block and associated septic tank were installed and it was their intention to issue the certificate once this was in situ. Page 1 of 8 1.4 The toilet block is proposed to be sited in the south western corner of this 22 acre site some 55 metres to the northwest of the applicant’s dwelling known as 2 Silvington Hill. The septic tank would be located to the west of the block. 1.5 The toilet/shower block would measure approximately 2.2 metres in height (eaves), 6 metres in width with a depth of 3 metres. In all, the ground area covered by the outbuilding would measure 18m². 1.6 The elevations would comprise of softwood cladding (tongue and groove) treated with a dark oak (or similar) preservative. The roof which is a gentle single pitch would comprise of corrugated black bitchumen sheets with translucent (ondulin) panels. 2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 The site is located within the Shropshire Hills Area of outstanding Natural Beauty and within the open countryside. Whilst predominantly rural in nature, there are dwellings sporadically located within the surrounding countryside with the hamlets of Cleeton St Mary located 1200 metres to the west and Hopton Wafers located 2km’s to the south. The site is also adjacent to the Catherton Common Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI). 2.2 The area immediately adjacent to the proposed toilet/shower block is bound by mature vegetation and trees. The boundary adjacent to the access track is partially screened however views into the area where the proposed block is to be sited are possible. This track would be the primary access into the site and is unadopted and unclassified which is substandard and in a poor state of repair. 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Refuse on the grounds of inappropriate development as it fails to preserve or enhance the character of the AONB. The construction of a permanent building on this site is premature given that the site is not yet operating and the Authority has no certainty of the viability of the campsite proposal. 4.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE 4.1 The application is referred to Committee because the officer view is contrary to that of the Parish Council. 5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The application site has had no previous planning history directly associated with it. 5.2 It should be noted that the applicant sought pre-application planning advice from the Authority but given the sites location on the former district boundaries of Bridgnorth and South Shropshire authorities, this pre-application went incorrectly to the Ludlow Office where advice was offered that planning consent was required for the toilet/shower block. Advice was also offered that the proposal was deemed to not be excessive in size and offered advice on what may be appropriate in terms of design and materials. The advice did contain a caveat stating that it was provided without the Officer visiting the site and would not prejudice the outcome should a planning application be submitted. Page 2 of 8 6.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES 6.1 Natural England – No objection to the proposed development subject to the proposal being carried out in strict accordance with the submitted plans. 6.2 Parish Council – Recommend approval with emphasis the applicants promise to paint the building in a ‘dark oak’ or similar. 7.0 PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS 7.1 None received as a result of public and neighbour consultations. 8.0 PLANNING POLICY 8.1 Central Government Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (Replacement to PPG21). 8.2 West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Policies: Policy RR1: Rural Renaissance. 8.3 The Shropshire and Telford & Wrekin Joint Structure Plan: P5: Development Outside Settlements. 8.4 Local Plan: Policy D1: Design & Amenity. Policy S5: Development in the Countryside (read in conjunction with Policy RD6: Holiday, Camping, Caravan and Chalet Sites). Policy B4: Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Policy B5: Development in the Countryside. Policy TM1: Tourism Development. 9.0 THEMAINPLANNINGISSUES 9.1 Nationally designated areas comprising National Parks, the Broads, the New Forest Heritage Area and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), have been confirmed by the Government as having the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape and countryside should therefore be given great weight in planning policies and development control decisions in these areas. 9.2 Planning Policy Statement 7 states that facilities requiring new buildings in the countryside particularly where they are located outside of settlement boundaries may be justified where the required facilities are needed in conjunction with a particular countryside attraction; they meet the criteria set out in para.35 of PPS7; and where there are no suitable buildings or developed sites available for re-use. 9.3 The criteria set out in para.35 states that Local planning authorities should: Plan for and support the provision of general tourist and visitor facilities in appropriate locations where identified needs are not met by existing facilities in rural service centres. Where new or additional facilities are required, these should normally be provided in, or close to, service centres or villages; Page 3 of 8 Allow appropriate facilities needed to enhance visitors’ enjoyment, and/or improve the financial viability, of a particular countryside feature or attraction, providing they will not detract from the attractiveness or importance of the feature, or the surrounding countryside. 9.4 Structure Plan Policy P5 limits new development in the countryside to specific categories, one of which is developments for tourism and recreation. Bridgnorth District Local Plan Policy S5 states that in areas of countryside outside of the Green Belt, permission will not be given for the construction of new buildings unless certain circumstances prevail as set out in the listed criteria. Criterion 4 sets out that development would be acceptable if it is for a tourism development which is appropriate to a countryside area and which conforms to certain Policies including RD6. Policy RD6 sets out that new campsites’ will be resisted in the AONB whilst Policy B4 states that development will not be permitted if it harms the character or setting of the Shropshire Hills AONB. Development within the AONB should conserve and enhance the special qualities of the designated landscape. 9.5 Policy B5 requires that development in the countryside should be designed, located and sited to complement the existing rural character and landscape. Policy TM1 sets out that tourism development will be permitted if of an appropriate scale and type. 9.6 Therefore, the main issue for consideration in this instance is whether the proposed toilet/shower block would be an appropriate development given the sensitivity of the location in which it is proposed to be sited in accordance with adopted policy. Other issues for consideration is the impact upon the character and appearance of the rural location and the impact upon neighbouring amenities if any. 10.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 10.1 Principle of Development 10.1.1 The construction of the toilet/shower block constitutes ‘development’ as defined by the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. As the site is not currently operating as a camp site with planning permission or under license, it does not benefit from Permitted Development Rights. Planning permission is therefore required for the proposed toilet/shower block. 10.1.2 The site is currently undeveloped and described as ‘private meadowland’ by the applicant. Given that the site is undeveloped (Greenfield) and has not operated as a campsite but seeks to commence this operation in 2010, there is no precedent on this site for a tourism facility.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Development Management Report
    South Planning Committee, 15th December 2009, 2 Silvington Hill, Hopton Wafers, Bridgnorth Committee and date Item South Planning Committee [Ludlow] 8 15th December 2009 Development Management Report Application Number: 09/02782/FUL Parish: Farlow Grid 362550 - 278621 Ref: Proposal: Erection of a toilet/shower block with drying area; installation of a septic tank Site Address: 2 Silvington Hill Hopton Wafers Bridgnorth Shropshire DY14 0ER Applicant: Mr R. Salter Case Officer: Mr Richard Fortune email: [email protected] 1.0 THEPROPOSAL&OVERVIEW 1.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a toilet/shower block with drying area and the installation of a septic tank. 1.2 The purpose of the new outbuilding is to service a proposed new camp site which the applicant intends to open in April 2010 to visitors. An application has not been submitted for a Change of Use of the land to a camp site in this instance as the applicant has applied for ‘Certified Site Status’ from the Camping & Caravan Club which exempts specific sites from requiring planning permission if supported by the club having regard to Section 269 of the Public Health Act 1936. 1.3 The applicant submitted a number of documents with the application submission including a completed Rural Enterprise Grant Form which states that the Camping & Caravan Club have issued the applicant with the certificated site status. In order for the Officer to assess the proposed toilet/shower block, confirmation that the site is able to operate as a camping site Contact Rob Mills, Tel 01584 838340 1 South Planning Committee, 15th December 2009, 2 Silvington Hill, Hopton Wafers, Bridgnorth without planning permission was sought from the Caravan & Camping Club as no details or copies of the Certificate were provided with the application submission.
    [Show full text]
  • English Hundred-Names
    l LUNDS UNIVERSITETS ARSSKRIFT. N. F. Avd. 1. Bd 30. Nr 1. ,~ ,j .11 . i ~ .l i THE jl; ENGLISH HUNDRED-NAMES BY oL 0 f S. AND ER SON , LUND PHINTED BY HAKAN DHLSSON I 934 The English Hundred-Names xvn It does not fall within the scope of the present study to enter on the details of the theories advanced; there are points that are still controversial, and some aspects of the question may repay further study. It is hoped that the etymological investigation of the hundred-names undertaken in the following pages will, Introduction. when completed, furnish a starting-point for the discussion of some of the problems connected with the origin of the hundred. 1. Scope and Aim. Terminology Discussed. The following chapters will be devoted to the discussion of some The local divisions known as hundreds though now practi­ aspects of the system as actually in existence, which have some cally obsolete played an important part in judicial administration bearing on the questions discussed in the etymological part, and in the Middle Ages. The hundredal system as a wbole is first to some general remarks on hundred-names and the like as shown in detail in Domesday - with the exception of some embodied in the material now collected. counties and smaller areas -- but is known to have existed about THE HUNDRED. a hundred and fifty years earlier. The hundred is mentioned in the laws of Edmund (940-6),' but no earlier evidence for its The hundred, it is generally admitted, is in theory at least a existence has been found.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation 19: Pre-Submission Draft of the Shropshire Local Plan 2016 to 2038
    Shropshire Council Regulation 19: Pre-Submission Draft of the Shropshire Local Plan 2016 to 2038 December 2020 Regulation 19: Pre-Submission Draft of the Shropshire Local Plan Page 0 1. Contents 2. Introduction ...................................................................................... 6 Shropshire’s Character ................................................................................... 6 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) ................................................ 8 The Shropshire Local Plan 2016 to 2038 ....................................................... 8 Cross Boundary Issues and the Duty to Cooperate ................................... 10 Infrastructure ................................................................................................. 10 Neighbourhood Plans and Community Led Plans ...................................... 10 3. Strategic Policies ........................................................................... 12 SP1. The Shropshire Test ......................................................................... 12 SP2. Strategic Approach ........................................................................... 13 SP3. Climate Change ................................................................................. 22 SP4. Sustainable Development................................................................. 25 SP5. High-Quality Design .......................................................................... 26 SP6. Health and Wellbeing .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Wider Investment Needs ALBRIGHTON
    APPENDIX E: Annual Place Plan Review 2013‐2014 – Summary of Wider Investment Needs Albrighton Potential Funding Infrastructure Level of Delivery Timing of Potential Cost / Wider Developer Notes Requirement Priority Partner(s) Delivery Funds Secured Sources Contributions ALBRIGHTON TOWN AND PARISH HOUSING AND COHESIVE, SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Shropshire Council, Homes and Includes provision to support sustainable Communities independent living for vulnerable people Agency, including: sustainable living at home Registered Homes and Providers, access to work Communities education and training and community Specialist Care Varies from Agency, inclusion Housing for Key Providers, Ongoing scheme to vulnerable people Shropshire Integrated preventative service provision with Voluntary scheme Council a pathway approach to access and retain Sector, capital accommodation. Target groups include: older programme people, young people, people with learning local disabilities, mental health needs, people at communities, risk of homelessness or domestic violence, schools and gypsies and travellers, offenders, substance colleges, misusers etc. West Mercia Police Shropshire Includes: Council, Energy efficiency to reduce carbon Improving and Registered Private emissions and tackle fuel poverty; Scheme adapting existing KEY Providers, 2011-2015 sector Upgrading social housing to meet the housing- includes dependent* Decent Homes standard; and Home owners, funding regeneration Adaptations to meet changing needs, Keep including disabled facilities grants.
    [Show full text]
  • Shropshire Transactions Vol. 85
    Shropshire History and Archaeology Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Historical Society (incorporating the Shropshire Parish Register Society) VOLUME LXXXV edited by D. T. W. Price SHREWSBURY 2010 (ISSUED IN 2011) © Shropshire Archaeological and Historical Society 2011 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of the Shropshire Archaeological and Historical Society. Produced and printed by 4word Ltd., Bristol COUNCIL AND OFFICERS 1 DECEMBER 2011 President SIR NEIL COSSONS, O.B.E., M.A., F.S.A. Vice-Presidents M. UNA REES, B.A., PH.D. B. S. TRINDER, M.A., PH.D., F.S.A. ERNIE JENKS MADGE MORAN, F.S.A. Elected Members NIGEL BAKER, B.A., PH.D., M.I.F.A., F.S.A. MARY F. MCKENZIE, M.A., M.AR.AD. FRANCESCA BUMPUS, M.A., PH.D. PENNY WARD, M.A., M.I.F.A. NEIL CLARKE, B.A. ROGER WHITE, B.A., PH.D., M.I.F.A. ROBERT CROMARTY, B.A. ANDY WIGLEY, B.SC., M.A., P.C.H.E., PH.D. Chairman and Acting Hon. Treasurer JAMES LawsON, M.A., Westcott Farm, Pontesbury, Shrewsbury SY5 0SQ Hon. Secretary and Hon. Publications Secretary G. C. BAUGH, M.A., F.S.A., Glebe House, Vicarage Road, Shrewsbury SY3 9EZ Hon. Gift-Aid Secretary B. SHERRatt, 11 Hayton View, Ludlow SY8 2NU Hon. Membership Secretary W. F. HODGES, Westlegate, Mousecroft Lane, Shrewsbury SY3 9DX Hon. Editor THE REVD. CANON D. T.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2018, West Midlands
    West Midlands Register 2018 HERITAGE AT RISK 2018 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents The Register III Wyre Forest 71 Content and criteria III Criteria for inclusion on the Register V Reducing the risks VII Key statistics XI Publications and guidance XII Key to the entries XIV Entries on the Register by local planning XVI authority Herefordshire, County of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 12 Staffordshire 28 East Staffordshire 28 Lichfield 29 Newcastle-under-Lyme 30 Peak District (NP) 31 South Staffordshire 32 Stafford 32 Staffordshire Moorlands 33 Tamworth 35 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 35 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 37 Warwickshire 39 North Warwickshire 39 Nuneaton and Bedworth 42 Rugby 43 Stratford-on-Avon 44 Warwick 48 West Midlands 51 Birmingham 51 Coventry 56 Dudley 58 West Midlands / Worcestershire 59 Dudley / Bromsgrove 59 West Midlands 60 Sandwell 60 Walsall 60 Wolverhampton, City of 62 Worcestershire 64 Bromsgrove 64 Malvern Hills 65 Redditch 67 Worcester 67 Wychavon 68 II HERITAGE AT RISK 2018 / WEST MIDLANDS LISTED BUILDINGS THE REGISTER Listing is the most commonly encountered type of statutory protection of heritage assets. A listed building Content and criteria (or structure) is one that has been granted protection as being of special architectural or historic interest. The LISTING older and rarer a building is, the more likely it is to be listed. Buildings less than 30 years old are listed only if Definition they are of very high quality and under threat. Listing is All the historic environment matters but there are mandatory: if special interest is believed to be present, some elements which warrant extra protection through then the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and the planning system.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Issue November2015
    The Cleobury Clarion SERVING CLEOBURY COUNTRY NOVEMBER 2015 MAKING THE NEWS Evening, when he was one of arrive there at about 10.55 and Cleobury Mortimer has been three people shortlisted for those who will be laying making the news recently. Its their Dedication To Service. He wreaths will stand down to appointment as the first small was the leading contender from march to the side and await the town to carry the We Don’t Buy Shropshire and while the prayers. At 11.00 the traditional Crime label, plus the signs overall winner’s prize wasn’t two minutes silence will be telling the criminal world that his, he did come home with an observed, the town hushed in this is a SmartWater Town. It’s official certificate to respect. David Taylor will not an easy target for burglars acknowledge his work. sound the Last Post and then any more. The Awards Evening was the Reveille to mark the end of the A cooperation between the idea of Police and Crime silence. The names of the fallen Parish Council and West Mercia Commissioner Bill Longmore, will be read and to hear the Police has seen free packs of who does seem to be making local names, some of whom lost SmartWater delivered to over his mark despite having a number of men, is a truly 900 houses as we go to press. At treatment for cancer. One of the moving experience. parish clerk Matt Sheehan’s grants for the SmartWater gifts The laying of wreaths by suggestion, there’s been a break came from Mr Longmore’s representatives of many local for the local volunteers and fund.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2019, Midlands
    Midlands Register 2019 HERITAGE AT RISK 2019 / MIDLANDS Contents The Register IV Bassetlaw 73 Broxtowe 77 Content and criteria IV Gedling 78 Key Statistics VI Mansfield 79 Newark and Sherwood 79 Key to the Entries VII Rushcliffe 82 Entries on the Register by local planning IX Rutland (UA) 84 authority Herefordshire, County of (UA) 84 Derby, City of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 95 Derbyshire 2 Amber Valley 2 Staffordshire 111 Bolsover 4 East Staffordshire 111 Chesterfield 5 Lichfield 111 Derbyshire Dales 5 Newcastle-under-Lyme 113 Erewash 7 South Staffordshire 114 High Peak 8 Stafford 115 North East Derbyshire 9 Staffordshire Moorlands 116 Peak District (NP) 10 Tamworth 117 South Derbyshire 10 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 118 Leicester, City of (UA) 13 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 120 Leicestershire 16 Warwickshire 122 Charnwood 16 North Warwickshire 122 Harborough 18 Nuneaton and Bedworth 125 Hinckley and Bosworth 20 Rugby 125 Melton 21 Stratford-on-Avon 127 North West Leicestershire 25 Warwick 131 Lincolnshire 26 West Midlands 133 Boston 26 Birmingham 133 East Lindsey 28 Coventry 138 Lincoln 36 Dudley 141 North Kesteven 38 Sandwell 143 South Holland 41 Walsall 143 South Kesteven 43 Wolverhampton, City of 145 West Lindsey 48 Worcestershire 147 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 53 Bromsgrove 147 North Lincolnshire (UA) 55 Malvern Hills 148 Northamptonshire 59 Redditch 151 Worcester 151 Corby 59 Wychavon 152 Daventry 59 Wyre Forest 155 East Northamptonshire 62 Kettering 64 Northampton 65 South Northamptonshire 65 Wellingborough 69 Nottingham, City of (UA) 69 Nottinghamshire 72 Ashfield 72 II HERITAGE AT RISK 2019 / MIDLANDS THE REGISTER Many structures fall into the ‘not applicable’ category, The Heritage at Risk Register includes historic for example: ruins, walls, gates, headstones or boundary buildings and sites at risk of being lost through stones.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1. Pre-Submission Draft Local Plan
    Shropshire Pre-Submission Draft Local Plan 2016 to 2038 July 2020 1. Contents 2. Introduction ..................................................................................... 6 Shropshire’s Character ................................................................................... 6 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) ................................................ 8 The Shropshire Local Plan 2016 to 2038 ....................................................... 8 Cross Boundary Issues and the Duty to Cooperate ..................................... 9 Infrastructure ................................................................................................. 10 Neighbourhood Plans and Community Led Plans ...................................... 10 3. Strategic Policies .......................................................................... 11 SP1. The Shropshire Test ......................................................................... 11 SP2. Strategic Approach ........................................................................... 12 SP3. Climate Change ................................................................................. 20 SP4. Sustainable Development................................................................. 22 SP5. High-Quality Design .......................................................................... 23 SP6. Managing Housing Development ..................................................... 25 SP7. Managing Development in Community Hubs ................................. 27 SP8. Managing
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2010 / West Midlands
    HERITAGE AT RISK 2010 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents HERITAGE AT RISK 3 Reducing the risks 6 Publications and guidance 9 THE REGISTER 11 Content and assessment criteria 11 Key to the entries 13 Herefordshire, County of (UA) 16 Shropshire (UA) 25 Staffordshire 39 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 49 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 51 Warwickshire 52 West Midlands 62 Worcestershire 69 Since it was launched in 1998 our Buildings at Risk Register has been extremely successful in coordinating action to save some of the nation’s most important structures from decay and destruction. As a result, scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens, registered battlefields, protected wreck sites and conservation areas have all been added to what is now called the Heritage at Risk Register. This year, we undertook a pioneering 15% sample survey of England’s 14,500 listed places of worship to help us understand the condition of the thousands of designated churches, chapels, synagogues, mosques and temples and other faith buildings that are the spiritual focus for our communities.They face many different kinds of challenges and we need to help congregations ensure their future. As the effects of the financial crisis become apparent, While these schemes can tackle building repair, many of ensuring a sustainable future for England’s heritage the changes that put conservation areas at risk relate to will be challenging. It is nevertheless clear that success planning activities. As a result of public spending cuts, the will depend on a close partnership between public Region is seeing a decline in the provision of specialist sector organisations, charities, communities and owners.
    [Show full text]
  • Craven Arms Market Town Profile
    Craven Arms Market Town Profile Winter 2017/18 1 INFORMATION, INTELLI GENCE & INSIGHT Contents Section Page Introduction 3 Local Politics 5 Demographics 7 Economy 14 Tourism & Leisure 31 Health 33 Housing 37 Education 42 Transport & Infrastructure 45 Community Safety 46 Additional Information 48 2 INFORMATION, INTELLI GENCE & INSIGHT Phone: 0345 678 9000 Email: [email protected] Market Town Profile Craven Arms Craven Arms is a small market town situated in the South Shropshire hills on the A49. It is located south of Church Stretton and north of Ludlow. Craven Arms developed as a small rural settlement and is a relatively new town (for Shropshire), being only a small village "Newton" on a map of 1695. The arrival of the railway line led to the growth of the town in the 19th century. The Craven Arms Hotel which is located at the Junction of the A49 and B4368 was built around 1800 to provide accommodation to travellers. As the town grew it adopted the name of the hotel for the town. Area Quick Statistics 3147 hectares 1,284 households 3,000 people 0.9 people per hectare 1353 dwellings 44 is the average age This town profile has been produced by the Information, Intelligence and Insight team of Shropshire Council. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, Shropshire Council cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. 3 INFORMATION, INTELLI GENCE & INSIGHT Craven Arms Town Council Area Key Assets The information in this market town is predominantly focussed on the town council area of Craven Arms.
    [Show full text]
  • Authority Monitoring Report (AMR)
    Shropshire Council Authority Monitoring Report (AMR) Base Date: 31st March 2020 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Context .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Plan Making .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Creating Sustainable Places ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Meeting Housing Needs ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]