Public Document Pack

Shropshire Council Legal and Democratic Services Shirehall Abbey Foregate Shrewsbury SY2 6ND

Date: Monday, 1 June 2015

Committee: North Planning Committee

Date: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 Time: 2.00 pm Venue: Shrewsbury/Oswestry Room, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY2 6ND

You are requested to attend the above meeting. The Agenda is attached

Claire Porter Head of Legal and Democratic Services (Monitoring Officer)

Members of the Committee Substitute Members of the Committee Arthur Walpole (Chairman) Nicholas Bardsley Paul Wynn (Vice Chairman) Karen Calder Joyce Barrow Steve Charmley John Cadwallader Peter Cherrington Gerald Dakin Andrew Davies Steve Davenport Ann Hartley Pauline Dee Simon Jones Vince Hunt Brian Williams David Lloyd Thomas Biggins David Minnery Roger Hughes Peggy Mullock VACANCY

Your Committee Officer is:

Shelley Davies Committee Officer Tel: 01743 252719 Email: [email protected]

AGENDA

1 Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence.

2 Minutes (Pages 1 - 10)

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 12 th May 2015 and 14 th May 2015, attached, marked 2.

Contact Emily Marshall on 01743 252726.

3 Public Question Time

To receive any questions, statements or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.

4 Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

Members are reminded that they must not participate in the discussion or voting on any matter in which they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and should leave the room prior to the commencement of the debate.

5 Land Off Drayton Road, Hodnet, Market Drayton, TF9 3NF (14/03403/OUT) (Pages 11 - 30)

Outline application for the erection of 14 dwellings (to include access and footpath link to Wollerton).

6 Long Lane Farm, Long Lane, Marchamley, Shropshire, SY4 5LB (14/05739/FUL) (Pages 31 - 44)

Erection of a detached dwelling.

7 Spar Convenience Store, Forge Lane, Newtown, Baschurch (14/05767/VAR) (Pages 45 - 56)

Variation of condition No.23 (opening hours) attached to planning permission 11/04795/FUL dated 14.03.12 to amend Sunday opening hours to between 8:00 hours - 22.00 hours.

8 Development Land Adj 5 Bridgewater Street, Whitchurch, Shropshire (14/05685/FUL) (Pages 57 - 76)

Development Land Adj 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch Shropshire.

9 Proposed Residential Development West Of Darlee Cottage, Brownhill, Ruyton XI Towns, Shropshire (14/04168/OUT) (Pages 77 - 90)

Outline application for the erection of 2 no. dwellings to include means of access.

10 Proposed Residential Development West Of Cottage Lane, St Martins, Shropshire (15/00566/REM) (Pages 91 - 100)

Approval of reserved matters (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to permission 14/01390/OUT for the erection of eight dwellings and two bungalows.

11 Hunky Dory, Tern View, Market Drayton, Shropshire, TF9 1DU (15/01386/COU) (Pages 101 - 106)

Application under Section 73a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the change of use of swimming pool for the provision of swimming lessons (retrospective).

12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva, Whitchurch, SY13 4DT (14/04555/FUL) (Pages 107 - 114)

Proposed orangery link extension and internal alterations to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall.

13 Grove Barn, Ash Parva, Whitchurch, SY13 4DT (14/05253/LBC) (Pages 115 - 122)

Erection of orangery link extension to an existing barn conversion, to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall and incorporating the removal of 1 no. window and brickwork below to create access affecting a Grade II Listed Building.

14 Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel, Oswestr,y Shropshire, SY10 8NB (15/00452/EIA) (Pages 123 - 142)

Construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping.

15 Appeals and Appeal Decisions (Pages 143 - 184)

16 Date of the Next Meeting

To note that the next meeting of the North Planning Committee will be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday 7 th July 2015, in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall, Shrewsbury.

This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 2

Committee and Date

North Planning Committee

th 9 June 2015

NORTH PLANNING COMMITTEE

Minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2015 In the Shrewsbury/Oswestry Room, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY2 6ND 2.00 - 4.35 pm

Responsible Officer: Emily Marshall Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 252726

Present Councillor Arthur Walpole (Chairman) Councillors Paul Wynn (Vice Chairman), Joyce Barrow, John Cadwallader, Gerald Dakin, Steve Davenport, Pauline Dee, Vince Hunt, David Lloyd, David Minnery and Peggy Mullock

147 Apologies for Absence

There were no apologies for absence received.

148 Minutes

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the North Planning Committee held on 17 th March 2015 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

149 Public Question Time

There were no public questions, statements or petitions received.

150 Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

Members were reminded that they must not participate in the discussion or voting on any matter in which they had a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and should leave the room prior to the commencement of the debate.

Councillor Paul Wynn declared his interest is Planning Applications 15/00329/FUL, Proposed Café at Hadley Farm, Wrexham Road, Whitchurch, Shropshire and 15/00352/VAR as the applicant for both applications. Councillor Wynn stated that he would leave the room during consideration of these applications.

Page 1 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

151 Development Land South Of Aspen Grange, Weston Rhyn, Oswestry, Shropshire - (14/01654/OUT)

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the outline application for residential development (All Matters Reserved). The Principal Planning Officer explained that the application had been considered by the Committee on 17 th March 2015, at which Members had been minded to refuse the application on the grounds that part of the application was not within the SAMDev and foul drainage infrastructure issues could not be mitigated by conditions. The Planning Officer’s report recommended approval of the application, as the proposed conditions were appropriate and relevant.

Members’ attention was drawn to the Schedule of Additional Letters which contained additional information from Welsh Water, submitted by the Agent.

Mr Alan Woodrow, on behalf of local residents spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr Robert Davies, Agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Lloyd, as local ward councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, the following points were raised:

• He recognised the extent of new building in Weston Rhyn; • The concerns of local residents in relation to the onsite processing and storage of foul drainage were understandable; and • He was encouraged that the applicant was taking a wider perspective than had previously been the case.

In accordance with Rule 6.1 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in Part 4 of Shropshire Council’s Constitution, Councillor Robert Macey addressed the Committee as the local ward Councillor, during which a number of points were raised including the following:

• The proposals for dealing with foul water drainage were not a long term permanent solution and the objection from Welsh Water remained and for these reasons he could not support the application.

Having carefully considered the additional information and the points raised by the speakers, the majority of Members present, whilst acknowledging the potential benefits the development could bring to the community, stated that their concerns in relation to the overloading of the foul drainage infrastructure remained and for these reasons considered the application to be contrary to Core Strategy Policies CS6 and CS8.

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 112 Page 2 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

RESOLVED: That planning permission be refused against the Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons:

Having considered the potential benefits to the community, including boosting the Council’s Housing supply and generating CIL funds, the Committee were concerned that the foul drainage infrastructure would be overloaded and that at the time of the decision it was not clear on the information available and in the absence of more detailed studies, that the mitigation schemes proposed by the agent would be sufficient or appropriate to ensure that the scheme would to overcome the foul drainage issues and therefore that the proposals were contrary to Core Strategy Policies CS6 and CS8.

152 Residential Development Land West of Baytree Close, St Martins - (14/04980/FUL)

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of 3 new dwellings, formation of vehicular access off Baytree Close and associated parking (revised scheme), and confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit that morning to assess the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Steve Davenport, as local ward councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, the following points were raised:

• He felt that the application was overdevelopment of the site; and • A noise attainment survey should be considered;

Having considered the submitted plans for the development, the Committee felt that the proposed development was acceptable, but that additional conditions in relation to noise attenuation measures would be reasonable and appropriate to protect the amenity of future residents of the properties.

RESOLVED: That delegated powers be given to the Area Planning Manager to grant approval, subject to the applicants entering into a Section 106 Agreement to secure affordable housing and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the Planning Officers report and an additional condition in relation to the provision of appropriate integrated attenuation measures in the dwellings to safeguard the amenities of the future residents of the properties - wording to be agreed by the Planning Officer.

153 Development Land South Of Magna Dene, Ash Magna, Whitchurch, Shropshire - (14/05017/OUT)

The Planning Officer (Technical Specialist) introduced the outline application (access for approval) for the erection of one dwelling and confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit that morning to assess the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area. Members’

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 113 Page 3 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

attention was drawn to the information contained within the Schedule of Additional letters.

Mr Roger Thornhill, on behalf of local residents spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor Shiela Martinson, on behalf of Whitchurch Rural Parish Council spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr Nigel Thorns, Agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Gerald Dakin, as local ward councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, the following points were raised:

• Granting planning permission would create a precedent; • There was no benefit to the local community; and • The access arrangements were poor.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by the speakers, the majority of agreed that the proposals would provide limited benefits to the local community whilst also being outside the development boundary and inconsistent with the linear nature of the village.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be refused against the Officer’s recommendation for the following reason:

Having considered the limited benefits to the community of Ash Magna, the Committee were concerned that the proposed development was not plan led, was outside the existing and emerging plan boundary and was inconsistent with the otherwise linear nature of the village.

154 Barn Brookside Caravan Park, Kinnerley, Oswestry, Shropshire - (15/00725/FUL)

(The Chairman, as the local ward Councillor for this application vacated the Chair and the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Paul Wynn presided for this item.)

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application for the erection of a single storey front extension and confirmed that the Committee had undertaken a site visit that morning to assess the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 114 Page 4 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor Arthur Walpole, as local ward councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, the following points were raised:

• Kinnerley Parish Council were not concerned by the proposals; • The whole appearance of the site was extremely well done; • The family were a well-established and integral part of the community; and • Asked the Committee to consider the application sympathetically.

Having considered the submitted plans, the Committee felt that the proposed development was acceptable, contrary to the Officers recommendation, subject to appropriate standard conditions to include the external construction materials to match and the removal of permitted development rights.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted, against the Officer’s recommendation, subject to Standard Conditions, to include external construction materials to match and the removal of permitted development rights to further extend the property.

155 Ifton Heath C P School, Overton Road, Ifton Heath, St Martins, Shropshire - (15/00537/FUL)

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for change of use of part of former school site to provide temporary residential site for single travelling showpeople family for a period of up to one year. The Committee were informed that the agent had confirmed that equipment would not be stored at the application site from during peak season, from Easter until the end of summer. It was therefore recommended that Condition 5 be amended to reflect this.

Councillor Sue Schofield, on behalf of St Martins Parish Council spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

• He was concerned that there had not been adequate consultation with the Parish Council; • He recommended that the Committee grant planning approval for six months with a further report on whether alternative sites had been sought; and • Assurance was needed that the site would be secured for the future.

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 115 Page 5 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

The Committee were supportive of the proposals, but felt that it would be appropriate to include a caveat to require any extension of the temporary planning permission to be considered by the North Planning Committee.

RESOLVED: That temporary planning permission be granted, in accordance with the Officer’s recommendations, subject to the conditions set out in appendix 1 of the Officer’s report and an amended Condition 5, to include the storage of any of the travelling show equipment at the site.

The Committee requested that any application for an extension of the temporary planning permission be considered by the North Planning Committee.

156 Proposed Cafe At Hadley Farm, Wrexham Road, Whitchurch, Shropshire - (15/00329/FUL)

In accordance with his declaration at Minute 150 Councillor Paul Wynn left the meeting during consideration of this application.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of a replacement café.

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal, the Committee unanimously expressed their support for the Officers’ recommendation.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted, in accordance with the Officer’s recommendations and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1, of the Officer’s report.

157 Hadley Farm, Wrexham Road, Hadley , Whitchurch, SY13 3AB - (15/00352/VAR)

In accordance with his declaration at Minute 150 Councillor Paul Wynn left the meeting during consideration of this application.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for a Variation of Condition No. 2 (approved plans) attached to planning permission reference 14/00344/COU dated 5 th June 2014 to revise the layout of the caravan park.

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal, the Committee unanimously expressed their support for the Officers’ recommendation.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted, in accordance with the Officer’s recommendations and subject to conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report and amended as follows: condition 3 be deleted and conditions 4 – 8 of planning application 14/00344/COU to be restated in full.

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 116 Page 6 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 12 May 2015

Councillor Paul Wynn rejoined the meeting at this point.

158 Appeals and Appeal Decisions

RESOLVED: That the Schedule of Appeals and Appeal Decisions for the northern area be noted.

159 Date of the Next Meeting

It was noted that the next meeting of the North Planning Committee would be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 9 th June, in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

Signed (Chairman)

Date:

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 117 Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 8

Committee and Date

North Planning Committee

th 9 June 2015

NORTH PLANNING COMMITTEE

Minutes of the meeting held on 14 May 2015 In the Council Chamber, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND

Responsible Officer : Emily Marshall Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 252726

Present Councillor Arthur Walpole (Chairman) Councillors Paul Wynn (Vice Chairman), Joyce Barrow, John Cadwallader, Steve Davenport, Pauline Dee, Vince Hunt, David Lloyd, David Minnery and Peggy Mullock

1 Election of Chairman

It was proposed, duly seconded and

RESOLVED: That Councillor A. Walpole be elected Chairman for the ensuing year.

2 Apologies

An apology for absence was received from Councillor G.Dakin.

3 Appointment of Vice-Chairman

It was proposed, duly seconded and

RESOLVED: That Councillor P. Wynn be elected Vice-Chairman for the ensuing year.

4 Date of Next Meeting

It was noted that the next meeting of the North Planning Committee would be held at 2.00 pm on Tuesday 9 th June 2015, in the Shrewsbury Room, Shirehall.

Signed (Chairman)

Date: Page 9 Minutes of the North Planning Committee held on 14 May 2015

Contact: Emily Marshall on 01743 252726 2 Page 10 Agenda Item 5

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 5

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/03403/OUT Parish: Hodnet

Proposal : Outline application for the erection of 14 dwellings (to include access and footpath link to Wollerton)

Site Address : Land Off Drayton Road Hodnet Market Drayton TF9 3NF

Applicant : Mrs Phillips, Clewes, Wood

Case Officer : Richard Denison email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 361456 - 328812

Page 11 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

Recommendation:- Grant Permission subject to the applicants entering into a section 106 agreement to secure affordable housing and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 This is an outline application for the erection of 14 dwellings, with all matters reserved except for access. The application also includes the provision for a footpath link between the villages of Hodnet and Wollerton.

1.2 A detailed indicative layout plan has been submitted indicated 9 detached dwellings, 4 semi detached dwellings and the replacement of the Dutch barn with a dwelling of a similar footprint. The access is provided in a central point along the frontage with the provision of a pavement and footpath link towards Wollerton.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 The proposed development site currently forms part of the open countryside and lies immediately adjacent to the north-eastern boundary of Hodnet. Wollerton lies approximately 1.5 kilometres to the north-east and Market Drayton 8 kilometres to the north-east. The county town of Shrewsbury lies approximately 18 kilometres to the south-west.

2.2 To the north-east and the south-east of the development site is open countryside. To the north-west is Drayton Road and associated residential development. To the south-west is residential development of Hodnet and a health centre. The A53 trunk road lies approximately a kilometre to the east.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF A PPLICATION 3.1 The Parish Council have submitted a view contrary to officers based on material planning reasons which cannot reasonably be overcome by negotiation or the imposition of planning conditions. The Principal Planning Officer in consultation with the committee chairman agrees that the Parish Council has raised material planning issues and that the application should be determined by committee.

4.0 COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Consultee Comments

4.1.1 Shropshire Council, Affordable Housi ng - No objection subject to a Section 106 Agreement.

4.1.2 Shropshire Council, Trees - Raises no objection in principle to the application however a landscaping scheme should be submitted as part of a full application to address the lack of trees on the site, creating long term environmental benefits.

4.1.3 Shropshire Council, Drainage - Raises no objection in principle to the application. The drainage details, plan and calculations could be conditioned and submitted for approval at the reserved matters stage if outline planning permission were to be granted. For full details of a viable drainage plan see the drainage consultee

Page 12

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

comment.

4.1.4 Shropshire Council, Archaeology - No objection. The proposed development site is adjacent to the north-eastern boundary of the Hodnet Conservation Area. The applicant’s Heritage Statement, by King Partnership, is considered to be satisfactory. It is therefore advised that no further archaeological mitigation is required in relation to the proposed development. . 4.1.5 Shropsh ire Council, Highway Authority - Raises no objection to the granting of outline consent subject to condition.

4.1.6 Shropshire Council, Public Protection - Raises no objection subject to conditions relating to the adequate provision for electronic cars and the hours of construction.

4.1.7 Shropshire Council, Ecology - No objection subject to condition.

4.1.8 Hodnet Parish Council objects to the application for the following reasons:

• The site is located away from the centre of the village with no footpath leading to the settlement from the site, it is outside the Hodnet Development Boundary as identified in SAMDev and it was rejected in the Shropshire Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. • Hodnet is in the process of accepting a 25% increase in its housing stock and needs time to adjust to these social pressures. • There are alternative sites within Development Boundary that have been identified for housing and are more suitable. • Development would be prominent within the landscape approaching from Market Drayton. • Application is considered premature in relation to the status of the SAMDev Plan given the current 5 year land supply figures.

4.2 Public Comments

4.2.1 There have been 31 public comments of objection and 3 public comments of support. The grounds for objection are as follows:

• Too many houses have been proposed and the application is unbalanced. It conflicts with the character of the conservation area and the village as a whole. • The village does not need more houses. • Many other housing developments have been approved in the locality. • Hodnet is in danger of becoming a town. • The applicant clearly intends far more residential development than is included in this application. • There are more appropriate locations for housing development. In particular, ‘infill’ should be sought wherever possible. • There is not enough provision for affordable homes. • Drayton road would not cope with the increase in traffic. • Pedestrian access from the site to the village is dangerous. • Development should not encroach onto the greenbelt. The proposed

Page 13

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

development site is outside the village boundary. • The proposed development’s effect on the landscape and visual impact has not been fully assessed. Some of the proposed development site is Grade 2 agricultural land. • The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on wildlife. • The development would have a detrimental affect on the aesthetics enjoyed by people entering the village. • Local amenity, such as the clinic and the primary school, will not be able to cope with the influx in residents. • The application contravenes both the Shropshire Core Strategy and the NPPF. • The applicant should have made more effort to engage the community.

The grounds for support are as follows:

• The application is for a balanced, moderate development in a logical location. • The impact on the conservation area has been greatly exaggerated by objectors. In particular, the visual impact on the road entering the village has been greatly exaggerated. • The proposed footpath would be a major benefit. • Local shops / pubs need the additional trade. • Linking Wollerton and Hodnet is a fantastic idea for the sustainability of both settlements. • Hodnet is already largely a commuter village. To object on the grounds that people will not work locally is silly because Hodnet offers virtually no employment. • Existing buildings on the development site of heritage value would be retained. • The proposed access is suitable with good visibility and the village could cope with the additional traffic. Even if every dwelling had 2 cars, this would only generate an additional 28 cars using the roads. The village could absorb this easily.

4.2.2 A planning statement has been received from Mid West Planning Limited, on behalf of a local resident, which formally objects to the application. The content on the statement is summarised below:

• The proposed development site is part of the open countryside, outside of the development boundary and immediately adjacent to the Hodnet Conservation Area. It is comprised of predominantly Grade 3 agricultural land with approximately 15% being Grade 2 agricultural land. • It is not clear whether the impact on the conservation area has been fully addressed. • The proposal’s effect on the landscape and visual impact has not been fully assessed. • There is little justification for the development of good quality agricultural land. • There are alternative sites available in Hodnet which, if used, would constitute the redevelopment of brownfield land as prioritised by the Shropshire Core Strategy.

Page 14

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

• The development site was put forward as a potential housing land site as part of SAMDev but was rejected as not being a ‘preferred option’ for housing land at Hodnet due to the potential impact on the conservation area and for being prominent in the landscape from the Wollerton approach to the village. • There have been sites identified in Hodnet which have the potential for supplying 76 houses. This negates the need for development on the proposed site. • The proposal does not fall under any of the ‘exception’ criteria. It is not for an essential worker, it does not secure the future of a heritage asset and it is not for the conversion of an existing building in the countryside. • The village has identified needs including small, affordable housing. The proposal does not include provision for any on-site affordable houses and the proposed housing density suggests that the housing will be relatively expensive (compared to local people’s income). The application is in contravention of CS11 of the Shropshire Core Strategy. • The proposal was made on the basis that development would be allowed due to the fact that the Shropshire Core Strategy was out of date because the council could not demonstrate the availability of a five year housing land supply. The situation has changed because Shropshire Council has very recently demonstrated a 5.47 year housing land supply, bringing the Shropshire Core Strategy housing policies back into consideration. • There was no community consultation.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

• Policy & Principle of Development • Assessment of Sustainability • Design, Scale and Character • Loss of Open Space • Impact on Residential Amenity • Highways • Impact on Trees • Ecology • Drainage • Flooding • Affordable Housing • Community Infrastructure Levy

6.0 OFFICER APPRAIS AL

6.1 Policy & Principle of Development

6.1.1 The site is situated within Hodnet and is outside the development boundary on the proposals map of the North Shropshire District Council adopted Local Plan. Hodnet is coming forward as a Community Hub within the emerging SAMDev with a housing guideline of around 80 additional dwellings over the period to 2026. This will be delivered through the development of the allocated sites together with development by infilling, groups of houses and conversions which may be acceptable on suitable sites within the development boundary identified on the Policies Map. However, the proposed site would also be outside of the development

Page 15

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

boundary. The site would therefore be classed as ‘Open Countryside’ under CS5 and therefore open market residential development of the site would be contrary to current adopted and emerging policy and the application has been advertised as a departure. However, paragraph 216 of the NPPF states that decision-takers should give weight to the relevant policies in emerging plans according to:

• The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); • The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and • The degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).

6.1.3 There have been no objections relating to Hodnet submitted to the Planning Inspector, although objection has been received to this planning application from the Parish Council and local residents who consider that the housing target for Hodnet has already been met and that the site will be outside of the proposed village boundary. Hodnet has been promoted as a community hub to provide development of approximately 80 dwellings over the period to 2026. This will be delivered through the development of the allocated sites together with development by infilling, groups of houses and conversions which may be acceptable on suitable sites within the development boundary identified on the Policies Map. The allocations will together provide a coordinated residential development of 50 homes which have been taken forward from the North Shropshire Local Plan (2000 to 2011) to provide redevelopment opportunity for two derelict sites in the centre of the village to be accessed through an area of low density greenfield development off Station Road. A detailed full application was resolved to be approved in October 2013 for 44 dwellings on the allocated sites, although has been subject to a Section 106 legal agreements for the past 19 months (ref. 13/03452/FUL). Since 2013 two dwellings have been approved one on Land at Station Yard (ref. 13/02898/FUL) and one on land adjacent to 60 Station Road (ref. 13/01679/FUL). A further three dwellings have also been resolved to be approved on Land off Webster Lane and is subject to a S106 agreement for an affordable housing contribution (ref. 13/02414/FUL). Assuming the S106 agreements are resolved the number of new residential units in Hodnet will equate to a total of 49 dwellings out of the 80 proposed. The proposed 14 dwellings can be accommodated within the remaining balance and still provide an additional 17 dwellings to be delivered until 2026. The agent has indicated that the site is available for immediate development and a local

Page 16

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

development company (BSP Construction) is interested in buying the site subject to planning permission being granted. The development of the site will occur at the earliest available opportunity and is deliverable.

6.1.4 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that:

‘At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking...For decision-taking this means that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in [the]Framework taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in [the] Framework indicate development should be restricted .’

With regards to housing development paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that:

‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development’ .

and that

‘Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.’

6.1.5 In September 2013 the housing land supply in Shropshire fell below the 5 year requirement. This has now been updated following the submission of the SAMDev Final Plan to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council is now in a position that it has identified sufficient land that addresses the NPPF 5 year housing land supply requirements. However, in calculating the 5 year supply the Council recognises that full weight cannot yet be attributed to the SAMDev Final Plan housing policies as there are significant unresolved objections which will not be resolved until the adoption of the SAMDev.

6.1.6 In this period between examination and adoption sustainable sites for housing, where any adverse impacts do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development, will still have a strong presumption in favour of permission under the NPPF, as the 5 year housing supply is a minimum requirement and the NPPF aim of significantly boosting housing supply remains a material consideration. Officers consider that it would be difficult to defend a refusal for a site which is considered to constitute sustainable development unless the adverse impacts of granting consent would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits (as outlined in paragraph 14 of the NPPF).

6.1.7 It is acknowledged that the site is outside the development boundary within the adopted North Shropshire Local Plan and would not normally be supported for

Page 17

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

development. However, adopted local plan policies are at risk of being considered “time expired” due to their age and the time which has lapsed since the end date of the plan. Officers therefore advise that it is appropriate to assess this site within the context of the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’.

6.1.8 The principle issue for consideration therefore is whether the development is sustainable or not when considered against the NPPF as a whole. The balance of material considerations is still in favour of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable. The key factor in determining this proposal is therefore assessing whether the proposal would represent sustainable development and whether there would be any significant impact or harm as a result of the proposed development that would outweigh the benefits. This will be considered in the paragraphs below.

6.2 Assessment of Sustainability

6.2.1 Policy CS6, amongst a range of considerations, requires proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic to be located in accessible locations where opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel to be reduced. Policy CS7 states that a sustainable pattern of development requires the maintenance and improvement of integrated, attractive, safe and reliable communication and transport infrastructure and services. Policy CS9 states that development that provides additional dwellings or employment premises will help deliver more sustainable communities by making contributions to local infrastructure in proportion to its scale and the sustainability of its location.

6.2.2 The proposed site will result in residential development being located adjoining Hodnet settlement with existing dwellings being located along the western boundary and to the north on the opposite side of Drayton Road, whilst Abbots Way is located to the south and serves a single dwelling and Berries Farm. The site will have easy access into Hodnet settlement where there are a number of essential day to days services provided (including medical centre, The Bear (Pub, Restaurant and Bed & Breakfast), fire station, Post Office, Village Store (off licence, groceries, DIY and hardware), Social Club, Lyon Memorial Hall (Garden Club, Slimmers World, WI, Parish Council), primary school (Ages 5 to 11), Hodnet Hall Gardens, St Luke’s Church, Shropshire County Council Highways Depot, Hodnet Garage (Filling Station and Car Repair garage), car repairs and Rocking Horse Workshop. These facilities within the village can be accessed on foot by a footpath along Drayton Road or along a village lane along Abbots Way which provides a safe means of pedestrian access. There is also a regular bus service between Shrewsbury and Market Drayton and Telford and Market Drayton. It is therefore considered that the site is situated in a sustainable location with regard to accessibility and proximity to essential day to day services and a range of facilities and employment opportunities without over reliance on the private motor car.

6.2.3 However ‘sustainable development’ isn’t solely about accessibility and proximity to essential services but the NPPF states that it is ‘about positive growth – making economic, environmental and social progress for this and future generations’. In paragraph 7 of the NPPF it states that these three dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of roles:

Page 18

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

• An economic role - contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

• A social role - supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

• An environmental role - contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

Economic Consideration

6.2.2 The proposal will help boost the supply of housing in Shropshire and will provide employment for the construction phase of the development supporting builders and building suppliers. The provision of additional houses will also support local businesses as future occupiers are likely to access and use local services and facilities helping them to remain viable. The provision of more homes will create a stimulus to the economy and address the housing shortage. The proposal will also be liable for a CIL payment which will provide financial contributions towards infrastructure and opportunities identified in the Place Plan. The economic benefits of the proposal should be given weight in the determination of the application.

Social Considerations

6.2.3 The proposal will provide up to 14 houses which will help meet the housing shortage in Shropshire. In addition to boosting the supply of open market housing the proposal will provide affordable housing on site at the prevailing rate at the time of the reserved matters application. The current rate of 15% would provide two dwellings on site, together with an affordable housing financial contribution. Villages need to expand in a controlled manner in order to provide support for and maintain the level of services and facilities available in the village and surrounding area. The NPPF positively encourages the siting of housing in settlements where it will support facilities helping to retain services and enhancing the vitality of rural communities. Providing housing that will support and maintain existing facilities will benefit both the existing and future residents and help meet the needs of present and future generations. It is recognised that increasing the number of dwellings in a settlement without a proportionate increase in the provision of local services risks impacting upon the social integrity of the settlement, however the scale of the development proposed, in context with the scale of the village and the proposed development in the SAMDev, is not considered to be significant and would not have a demonstrable impact on services. Furthermore, the development will be liable for CIL payments which can be used towards local infrastructure and the development also includes

Page 19

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

the provision of a new footpath which will provide the most direct link to Wollerton village and help provide improved access to services.

Environmental Considerations

6.2.4 The site forms part of a grassed field and has no heritage, cultural or ecological designation. The proposed site is located between Drayton Road and Abbots Way with residential development being located to the west. On the approach into the village from Wollerton the development will be viewed directly opposite dwelling on the opposite side of the road and would square off this part of the village. The site can provide an adequate green boundary to the open countryside to the east and will provide an attractive open frontage along the main road. It is considered that the loss of this piece of agricultural land is not significant and the proposal would not result in any adverse ecological or environmental implications and the proposal would provide some ecological enhancements of the site in relation to additional boundary planting. In addition the proposal would help contribute to a low carbon economy as the site is reasonably accessible on foot or by cycle to local services and facilities and by public transport to the array of services, facilities and employment opportunities in Market Drayton.

6.2.5 The balance of material consideration remains one of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable even if they fall outside of the defined development boundaries within existing saved and adopted development plan policies. The proposed site is considered to be in accordance with the sustainable objectives that are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework by providing economic, social and environmental benefits. Accordingly, it is considered that the principle of a residential development in this location is acceptable.

6.3 Design, Scale and Character

6.3.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy requires development to protect and conserve the built environment and be appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design taking into account the local context and character. The development should also safeguard residential and local amenity, ensure sustainable design and construction principles are incorporated within the new development. Policy D7 ‘Parking Standards’ of the North Shropshire Local Plan is still a saved policy and indicates that all development should provide an appropriate level of vehicle parking to avoid on street parking and increasing traffic problems.

6.3.2 Concerns have been raised regarding the prominent view of the site as viewed from Drayton Road. However, the site will be enclosed by two roads and existing residential development to the west. The site frontage sits directly opposite an existing built up frontage which officers consider this development will be viewed against. The site will be visible and the proposed access will provide views into the site. However, it will be read against the existing properties and subject to a strong landscaped field boundary will provide a suitable site for development which fits into the existing village landscape.

6.3.3 This is an outline application with the proposed layout, scale and appearance being reserved for later approval. The proposed site covers 1.8 hectares and it is

Page 20

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

considered that there is adequate land available to provide fourteen residential dwellings with some roadside development to match existing properties along Drayton Road. Adequate space would be provided for a residential scheme for fourteen dwellings and appropriate access, driveways and garden areas. The proposed site will provide adequate boundary landscaping against the open countryside to provide a soft edge to the settlement along the roadside and open countryside.

6.3.4 The proposed site adjoins the Hodnet Conservation Area and there are three listed buildings close to the site. A detailed Heritage Statement has been undertaken which has demonstrated that the proposals will have no impact on the setting, significance or the ability to appreciate the significance of Nos.8 & 18 Drayton Road. With respect to No.15 Drayton Road, it has been shown that the indicative layout will have no impact on the frontage of the building, which is where its main significance lies and where the setting in the conservation area and the group value with 8 & 18 Drayton Road adds to that significance. The proposals will only affect the rear of the building, which is of less significance and where the surroundings are already compromised. Although the proposals could provide for a better appreciation of the building the Senior Conservation Officer has verbally confirmed no objection in principle to the proposed residential use of this site.

6.3.5 The proposed scheme provides a new footpath behind the existing roadside hedge along the edge of Drayton Road to the edge of the applicant’s ownership. This will link into an existing footpath which crosses the fields adjoining Wollerton to provide a continuous and most direct link to Hodnet. The loss of the Squirrel Public House in Wollerton has meant that most of the services and facilities used by the residents of Wollerton are now within Hodnet. The key facilities including the Shop, Church and Public House are accessible along the Drayton Road which is not suitable for pedestrians. The proposed new footpath link will provide improved connection between the settlements and help provide a more sustainable community.

6.3.6 The proposed access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the development would be considered as part of a subsequent reserved matters application.

6.4 Impact on Residential Amenity

6.4.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should safeguard the residential and local amenity. Although this is an outline application with all matters reserved except the access it is considered that the site is significantly large enough to allow adequate separation from any proposed residential development with neighbouring properties. It is considered that residential development on this site can be designed in such a way to prevent any impact on neighbours from causing an overbearing impact, loss of light or resulting in overlooking and loss of privacy. As this is an outline application and does not include the layout for consideration the impact on the traffic numbers would have to be considered as part of the reserved matter application. However, the provision of fourteen dwellings would not result in significant traffic movements which would be detrimental to neighbouring properties.

Page 21

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

6.5 Highways

6.5.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic should be located in accessible locations where there are opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel to be reduced. This policy also indicates that development should be designed to be safe and accessible to all. Policy D7 ‘Parking Standards’ of the North Shropshire Local Plan is still a saved policy and indicates that all development should provide an appropriate level of vehicle parking to avoid on street parking and increasing traffic problems.

6.5.2 The proposed development provides a new vehicular access in a central position along the roadside frontage on Drayton Road. The access will provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 83.1 metres in a south western direction and 2.4 metres by 76.5 metres in a north eastern direction. The existing roadside boundary hedge will be set back with a new grass verge and footpath being provided along the entire frontage. Concerns have been raised from local residents indicating that the Drayton Road is not suitable for additional traffic. However, this road used to be the main road from Shrewsbury to Market Drayton until the bypass was built and has experienced a significant reduction in traffic. The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the new access which will provide a safe means of access for vehicles and the road network is capable of accommodating the slight increase.

6.5.3 Concerns have also been raised from local residents regarding the existing footpath along Drayton Road which they consider is dangerous. The proposed footpath along the frontage will allow residents to cross the road and utilise an existing footpath which links directly into the village. The section of road directly opposite the site and leading into the village is restricted to 30mph which is considered acceptable to allow residents to walk along without causing any safety concerns to pedestrians.

6.5.4 The proposed layout indicates the provision of double garages for the detached dwellings with a driveway for a minimum of two additional car spaces, whilst the two semi detached properties will provide a driveway for two vehicles. The proposed parking layout would accord with the parking standards as indicated in North Shropshire Local Plan.

6.5.5 The Highway Authority raises no objection to the granting of outline consent subject to conditions regarding engineering details of the new access including the footpath, internal road layout, parking and turning areas to ensure the formation and construction of a satisfactory access and parking facilities in the interests of highway safety.

6.6 Impact on Trees

6.6.1 Policy CS17 ‘Environmental Networks’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should protect and enhance the local natural environment. The proposed development would not result in the impact of any significant trees, although the roadside hedgerow will be removed and replaced with a mixed native hedgerow. The proposed indicative layout does provide a green frontage and

Page 22

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

adequate space for additional planting to enhance this site. The reserved matters application should include a detailed landscaping scheme for the site to provide for a long term environmental improvement.

6.7 Ecology

6.7.1 Policy CS17 ‘Environmental Networks’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development will identify, protect, expand and connect Shropshire’s environmental assets to create a multifunctional network and natural and historic resources. This will be achieved by ensuring that all development protects and enhances the diversity, high quality and local character of the natural environmental and does not adversely affect the ecological value of the assets, their immediate surroundings or their connecting corridors. This is reiterated in national planning guidance in policy 11 ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment’ of the National Planning Policy Framework. This indicates that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains where possible.

6.7.2 Concerns have been raised from local residents that the development will have a detrimental impact on wildlife. A detailed Phase 1 Environmental Survey has been undertaken which identified six ponds within 500 metres of the application site which comprises of an area of grass land used for grazing. The ponds were all given Habitat Suitability Index scores, which ranged from below average to poor suitability for Great Crested Newts. The nearest historic Great Crested Newt record is over 1km away and considering the quality of the ponds, the distance from the site and the roads and buildings in between, no further survey or mitigation is considered necessary.

6.7.3 It has been indicated that three structures (a brick built boffy, garage and Dutch barn) were examined for potential for bat roosts. The buildings are in a poor condition and have unlined roofs with open roof voids. It is considered that they do not provide a suitable habitat for bats, although five swallow nests were present. The Planning Ecologist has indicated that Under Regulation 61 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010) the proposed works will not have a likely significant effect on any internationally designated site and therefore an appropriate assessment is not required.

6.8 Drainage

6.8.1 Policy CS18 ‘Sustainable Water Management’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should integrate measures of sustainable water management to reduce flood risk, avoid an adverse impact on water quality and quantity and provide opportunities to enhance biodiversity. The application indicates that foul water drainage will be directed to the existing foul mains which is the preferred option and allows the foul water to be dealt with in an effective and sustainable manner. The application indicates that surface water will be disposed of via soakaways and the Drainage Engineer has indicated that percolation test and soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365. No concerns have been raised regarding the suitability of the local ground conditions and therefore it is recommend that both the foul and surface water drainage are

Page 23

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

conditioned accordingly for details to be submitted as part of the reserved matters application.

6.9 Flooding

6.9.1 Policy CS18 ‘Sustainable Water Management’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should integrate measures for sustainable water management to reduce flood risk and development sites within flood risk areas should be developed in accordance with national planning guidance contained in Policy 10 ‘Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change’ of the National Planning Policy Framework. The Flood and Water Management Team have indicated that the northern part of the site is at risk of surface water flooding. However, this area of land is proposed to remain as an open area of land and would not form part of a residential curtilage. The proposed site lies within a Flood Zone 1 Area (Low Probability of Flood Risk) as indicated by the Environment Agency and there will be no detrimental impact upon any future occupiers of the development through flood risk and the development of the site will not result in the loss of flood storage capacity. The proposed site is at a slightly higher level than the Drayton Road which appears not to have any water drainage ditches which may result in the surface water flooding.

6.10 Affordable Housing

6.10.1 Policy CS11 ‘Type and Affordability of Housing’ of the Core Strategy indicates that all new open market housing development should make an appropriate contribution to the provision of local needs affordable housing having regard to the current prevailing target rate as set out in the Shropshire Viability Index. The existing target rate for Hodnet is currently 15% and would equate to the provision of a 2 on site affordable dwellings and a financial contribution being provided. Concerns have been raised that the development will not provide an adequate number of affordable dwellings. However, the contribution will comply with the requirements of the Supplementary Planning Document on the Type and Affordability of Housing and will be set at the prevailing percentage target rate at the date of a full application or the Reserved Matters application.

6.11 Community Infrastructure Levy

6.11.1 Policy CS9 ‘Infrastructure Contributions’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development that provides additional dwellings or residential extensions over 100 square metres should help deliver more sustainable communities by making contributions to the local infrastructure. The arrangements for the use of the levy funds are detailed in the Local Development Framework Implementation Plan. The levy rates are set out in the CIL Charing Schedule and in this particular case will relate to £80 per square metre of new residential development. The levy charge would become active when the development commenced if planning permission was granted with 15% being required 60 days after commencement, 25% after 270 days and the remaining 60% after 365 days later.

6.12 Archaeology

6.12.1 The proposed development site is located adjacent to the north eastern boundary of

Page 24

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

the Hodnet Conservation Area. There site lies outside the historic core of the settlement and the Shropshire Historic Environment Record contains no records for any known archaeological features or deposits within its boundaries. The Tithe Award map for Hodnet Parish of 1840 and the historic editions of the Ordnance Survey map indicate that it has been used for agricultural purposes since at least the early-mid 19th century.

6.12.2 The applicant has submitted a Heritage Statement by King Partnership. It is advised that this provides a satisfactory level of information about the archaeological interest of the proposed development in relation to Paragraph 128 of the NPPF. Taking account of the information held on the Historic Environment Record and contained within the Heritage Statement, the proposed development site is deemed to have negligible low archaeological interest. It is therefore advised that no further archaeological mitigation is required in relation to the proposed development.

6.14 Other Matters

6.14.1 Concerns have been raised that the applicant did not engage with the community prior to the application being submitted. However, this application was not subject to any pre-application enquiry in which the applicant would have been advised to consult with local residents and the Parish Council. The application was advertised by neighbour letters, a site notice and press notice and allowed residents a minimum of 21 days to comment on the application.

7.0 CON CLUSION

7.1 The proposed development is considered to represent sustainable development in a sustainable location having regard to the three dimensions of sustainable development and is therefore acceptable in principle. It is not considered that there would be any significant adverse impacts of the proposal that would outweigh the benefits. The proposed layout, scale and appearance of the scheme is considered acceptable and will reflect the historic appearance and character of this rural village and will not have any significant adverse impact on residential amenity and would not result in significant or demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the locality. The proposal would not result in the loss of any significant trees, and have no adverse highway or ecological implications subject to conditions being imposed and landscape details will be determined as part of an application for reserved matters. The on site affordable housing provision and any balance of AHC will be secured by a S106 agreement. It is therefore considered that the proposal accords with Shropshire LDF policies CS6, CS11, and CS17 and the aims and provisions of the NPPF.

7.2 In arriving at this decision the Council has used its best endeavours to work with the applicants in a positive and proactive manner to secure an appropriate outcome as required in the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187. The Council being of the opinion that the detrimental impacts associated with the proposed development outweigh any public benefits in relationship to the proposal.

8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES APPRAISAL

8.1 Risk Management

Page 25

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:

• 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 six weeks 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.

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.

9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

9.1 There are likely financial implications of the decision and/or imposition of conditions if 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. Local financial considerations are capable of being taken into account when determining this planning application – in so far as they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for the decision

Page 26

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

maker.

10.0 BACKGROUND

10.1 Relevant Planning Policies

Policies material to the determination of the Application. In determining this application the Local Planning Authority gave consideration to the following policies:-

National Planning Policy Framework: 6 : Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes 7 : Requiring Good Design 8 : Promoting Healthy Communities 10 : Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change 11 : Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment 12 : Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment

Shropshire Council Core Strategy (February 2011): CS2 : Shrewsbury Development Strategy CS5 : Countryside and Green Belt S6 : Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS11 : Type and Affordability of Housing CS17 : Environmental Networks CS18 : Sustainable Water Management Supplementary Planning Document - Type and Affordability of Housing

10.2 Relevant Planning History

There is no relevant planning history.

11.0 ADDITIO NAL INFORMATION

List of Background Papers - Planning Application reference 14/03403/OUT

Cabinet Member (Portfolio Holder) - Cllr M. Price

Local Member - Cllr Karen Calder

Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Page 27

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. Approval of the details of the siting, design and external appearance of the development and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: The application is an outline application under the provisions of Article 4 of the Development Management Procedure Order 2010 and no particulars have been submitted with respect to the matters reserved in this permission.

2. Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority before the expiration of twelve months from the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

3. The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

4. The following information shall be submitted to the local planning authority concurrently with the first submission of reserved matters:

- The number of units - The means of enclosure of the site - The levels of the site - The means of access for disabled people - Surface and Foul Water drainage of the site - The finished floor levels

Reason: To ensure the development is of an appropriate standard.

5. 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

6. Prior to the commencement of development full engineering details of the means of access to the site including minimum visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 83.1 metres in the southerly direction and 2.4 metres by 76.5 metres in the northerly direction, kerbed

Page 28

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 5 - Drayton Road, Hodnet

footway along the Drayton Road frontage, internal road layout, parking and turning areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; the access, internal road layout, parking and turning areas shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development hereby permitted is first occupied.

Reason: To ensure the formation and construction of a satisfactory access and parking facilities in the interests of highway safety.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION/PRIOR TO THE OCCUPATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

7. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling on site details of the proposed footpath link as indicated on drawing no. W14/2328/SK01 Rev.A dated 25/11/14 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be completed prior to the occupation of any dwelling on site and thereafter retained.

Reason: To provide improved pedestrian link between Wollerton and Hodnet.

Page 29

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 30 Agenda Item 6

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 6

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/05739/FUL Parish: Hodnet

Proposal : Erection of a detached dwelling

Site Address : Long Lane Farm Long Lane Marchamley Shropshire SY4 5LB

Applicant : Mrs M Howell

Case Officer : Richard Denison email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 359963 - 329659

Page 31 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

Recommendation:- Refuse for the following reason:

1. The proposed development is located within an area of defined as open countryside for planning policy purposes and accordingly would lead to sporadic and unsustainable development that would undermine the "rural rebalance" approach to development. Accordingly the proposal fails to comply with adopted policies CS4, CS5, CS6, and CS17 of the Core Strategy; and Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (in particular paragraph 55) as the development would be detached from Marchamely settlement, would result in a residential encroachment into the open countryside and would put a reliance on the motor car to access day to day local services.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL

1.1 This is a full application for the erection of a single detached dwelling utilising the existing access serving Long Lane Farmhouse. The proposed dwelling will provide an entrance hall, kitchen, utility, wet room, office, sitting room and conservatory on ground floor, together with two bedrooms (one with en-suite), study and bathroom at first floor.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION

2.1 The proposed site forms part of the curtilage associated with Long Lane Farmhouse which is located adjoining Long Lane to the north east of Marchamley. The lane runs along the northern boundary whilst open fields are located to the east, south and west and on the opposite side of the road to the north. The nearest residential property is Glenmoor which is approximately 170 metres away.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITT EE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION

3.1 The Parish Council have submitted a view contrary to officers based on material planning reasons which cannot reasonably be overcome by negotiation or the imposition of planning conditions. The Local Ward Member in consultation with the Planning Officer has indicated that the development would not have an adverse impact on the settlement and consider that the three tests of economic, social and environment impact can be met. It is indicated that the Parish Council have joined up the villages of Marchamley and Hodnet with a 2km public footpath and the local ward member supports the Parish Council view. The Principal Planning Officer in consultation with the committee chairman agrees that the Parish Council has raised material planning issues and that the application should be determined by committee.

4.0 COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Consultee Comments

4.1.1 Shropshire Council, Affordable Housing - The affordable housing contribution

Page 32

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

proforma accompanying the application indicates the correct level of contribution and/or on site affordable housing provision and therefore satisfies the provisions of the SPD Type and Affordability of Housing

4.1.2 Shropshire Council, Drainage - The drainage details, plan and calculations can be conditioned if planning permission is recommended for approval.

The application form states that the surface water drainage from the proposed development is to be disposed of via soakaways. However, no details and sizing of the proposed soakaways have been provided. Percolation tests and soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365. Full details, calculations, dimensions and location plan of the percolation tests and the proposed soakaways should be submitted for approval.

Surface water should pass through a silt trap or catchpit prior to entering the soakaway to reduce sediment build up within the soakaway. This is to ensure that soakaways, for the disposal of surface water drainage, are suitable for the development site and to ensure their design is to a robust standard to minimise the risk of surface water flooding.

Full details, location and sizing of the existing septic tank and the drainage fields should be provided including previously carried out percolation tests to ensure that it can cater for the additional usage. Information should be submitted together with the FDA1 Form. British Water 'Flows and Loads: 4' should be used to determine the number of persons for the proposed development i.e. for a 2 bedroom dwelling, the population equivalent should be 5 and the sizing of the septic tank and drainage fields should be designed to cater for a minimum of 5 persons plus the number of persons in the existing dwellings and in accordance with the Building Regulations H2 Paragraph 1.18. This is to ensure that the foul water drainage system complies with the Building Regulations H2.

The applicant should consider employing measures such as the provision of water butts, rainwater harvesting system and grey water recycling system.

4.1.3 Shropshire Council, Planning Ecologist - No objection is raised. Mitigation has been proposed for badgers and hedgehogs. Lighting should be designed to minimise the effect it may have on foraging and commuting bats. Bat and bird boxes should be installed as a biodiversity enhancement.

4.1.4 Hodnet Parish Council supports this application.

4.2 Public Comments

4.2.1 Two letters of support have been received raising the following:-

• The proposed dwelling will provide accommodation to allow the existing dwelling to be occupied by family members to provide support. • The material and design is high quality. • The scale is in keeping with the area.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

Page 33

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

• Policy & Principle of Development • Assessment of Sustainability • Design, Scale and Character • Impact on Residential Amenity • Highways • Ecology • Drainage • Affordable Housing

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL

6.1 Policy & Principle of Development

6.1.1 The site is situated out side of the main built up area of Marchamley settlement and is outside the development boundary on the proposals map of the NSDC adopted Local Plan, although Marchamley is being promoted as a community cluster with Peplow and Wollerton within the emerging SAMDev. The site is currently classed as ‘Open Countryside’ as indicated under the NSDC local plan and therefore open market residential development of the site would be contrary to current adopted and emerging policy and the application has been advertised as a departure. However, paragraph 216 of the NPPF states that decision-takers should give weight to the relevant policies in emerging plans according to:

6.1.2 The emerging ‘Site Allocations and Management of Development’ Plan (SAMDev) has been submitted to the Planning Inspector for consideration following a Public Enquiry in December 2014 and has not yet been adopted and does not yet hold full weight. Paragraph 216 of the NPPF indicates that the ‘weight’ that can be attached to relevant policies in emerging plans such as the SAMDev depends on the stage of preparation, extent of unresolved objections, and degree of consistency with the NPPF. The Council’s view is that the SAMDev Plan has reached a point, being settlement and site specific and having undergone very substantial public consultation, where weight can be attached but, pending adoption, this needs to be considered with care alongside the other material considerations. There have been no objections relating to Marchamley submitted to the Planning Inspector. The settlements of Marchamley, Peplow and Wollerton are indicated to provide limited future housing growth of approximately 15 dwellings over the period to 2026. This will be delivered through limited infilling, conversions and groups of houses on suitable sites within the development boundaries for the villages of Marchamley and Wollerton and through infilling, conversions and small groups of houses on suitable sites within the village of Peplow. The proposed site is clearly not within the

Page 34

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

development boundary for Marchamley and is divorced from the settlement by open countryside and fields.

6.1.3 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that:

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in [the]Framework taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in [the] Framework indicate development should be restricted .’

With regards to housing development paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that:

‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development’ .

and that

‘Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.’

6.1.4 In September 2013 the housing land supply in Shropshire fell below the 5 year requirement. This has now been updated following the submission of the SAMDev Final Plan to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council is now in a position that it has identified sufficient land that addresses the NPPF 5 year housing land supply requirements. However, in calculating the 5 year supply the Council recognises that full weight cannot yet be attributed to the SAMDev Final Plan housing policies as there are significant unresolved objections which will not be resolved until the final adoption of the SAMDev.

6.1.5 In this intervening period between submission and adoption sustainable sites for housing where any adverse impacts do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development will still have a strong presumption in favour of permission under the NPPF, as the 5 year housing supply is a minimum requirement and the NPPF aim of significantly boosting housing supply remains a material consideration. Officers consider that it would be difficult to defend a refusal for a site which is considered to constitute sustainable development unless the adverse impacts of granting consent would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits (as outlined in paragraph 14 of the NPPF).

6.1.6 It is acknowledged that the site is outside the development boundary within the adopted North Shropshire Local Plan and would not normally be supported for development. However, adopted local plan policies are at risk of being considered

Page 35

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

“time expired” due to their age and the time which has lapsed since the end date of the plan. Officers therefore advise that it is appropriate to assess this site within the context of the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’.

6.1.7 The principle issue for consideration therefore is whether the development is sustainable or not when considered against the NPPF as a whole. The balance of material considerations is still in favour of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable. The key factor in determining this proposal is therefore assessing whether the proposal would represent sustainable development and whether there would be any significant impact or harm as a result of the proposed development that would outweigh the benefits. This will be considered in the paragraphs below.

6.2 Assessment of Sustainability

6.2.2 The proposed site will result in residential development being located outside of the village boundary for Marchamley with open countryside to the north, east and south, whilst the applicants existing property adjoins the western boundary of the site. Access from the site to the edge of the settlement is along a narrow country lane with no pedestrian footpath. Marchamley has limited services and only provides a Working Mens Club. Hodnet is approximately 2km from the site (along a newly created footpath) and provides a number of essential day to day services. However, having regard to the distance this would result in an over reliance on the private motor car.

Page 36

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

Economic Consideration

6.2.4 The proposal will help boost the supply of housing in Shropshire and will provide employment for the construction phase of the development supporting builders and building suppliers. The provision of an additional house will also support local businesses as future occupiers are likely to access and use local services and facilities helping them to remain viable. The provision of more homes will create a stimulus to the economy and address the housing shortage. The proposal will also be liable for a CIL payment which will provide financial contributions towards infrastructure and opportunities identified in the Place Plan.

Social Considerations

6.2.5 The proposal will provide a single dwelling which will help meet the housing shortage in Shropshire. In addition to boosting the supply of open market housing the proposal will provide an affordable housing contribution of £13,500. Villages need to expand in a controlled manner in order to provide support for and maintain the level of services and facilities available in the village and surrounding area. The NPPF positively encourages the siting of housing in settlements where it will support facilities helping to retain services and enhancing the vitality of rural communities. Providing housing that will support and maintain existing facilities will benefit both the existing and future residents and help meet the needs of present and future generations. It is recognised that increasing the number of dwellings over and above the proposed allocation in a settlement without a proportionate increase in the provision of local services risks impacting upon the social integrity of the settlement. The cluster of Marchamley, Peplow and Wollerton is only proposed to provide 15 additional dwellings over the SAMDev plan period. Allowing additional dwellings outside of the settlement boundaries will result in an increase in residential development contrary to the local communities’ aspiration for development.

Environmental Considerations

6.2.6 The site forms part of the curtilage associated to the existing agricultural building and has no important heritage, cultural or ecological designation. However, it is considered that the development on this land would result in the permanent loss of countryside which is considered important in this rural site outside of any built up roadside frontage. The proposal would not result in any adverse ecological or environmental implications and the proposal would provide some ecological enhancements of the site in relation to additional boundary planting. However, the proposal would not help to contribute to a low carbon economy as the site is not easily accessible on foot to local services and facilities Notwithstanding the

Page 37

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

distances involved between the site and services, the surrounding road network is narrow and unlit with no footpaths. As such it is unattractive as a walking route for residents in terms of meeting day to day needs. Nor is it suitable as a walking route for all sections of the community. Officers consider that residents of the development would use the private motor vehicle to access the facilities and services they need.

6.2.7 The balance of material consideration remains one of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable even if they fall outside of the defined development boundaries within existing saved and adopted development plan policies. However, the proposed site would result in residential development being located in isolated countryside away from any sustainable settlement. Paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework indicates that local authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. The proposed dwelling is not required for an essential rural worker, does not relate to the reuse of a heritage asset or redundant building, whilst the proposed building will not be of an exceptional quality or innovate nature of outstanding design and therefore would not be in accordance with the sustainable objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework. Accordingly, it is considered that the principle of a residential development in this location is not acceptable.

6.3 Design, Scale and Character

6.3.2 The application site forms part of the side garden to Long Lane Farmhouse located close to the built up edge of Marchamley settlement. The proposed site covers an area of 1.5 hectares and runs parallel to the country lane. The proposed subdivision of the existing curtilage will provide two similar sized plots which will be comparable to some of the large plots in Marchamley settlement.

6.3.3 The proposed dwelling will be constructed from an oak frame with a mixture of traditional brick and lime wash render walls and slate roof. The dwelling will be positioned in line with the existing property and set back from the road side behind an existing boundary hedgerow and tree screening. The dwelling will have an eaves height of 4.5 metres and ridge height of 8 metres with a 50 degree roof slope which will match the existing property. The property will include a number of sustainable features including a ground source heat pump, grey water recycling, triple glazing and integral solar panels. The proposed design, scale and appearance of the dwelling will reflect the existing rural character of the area and would not impact on the adjoining property.

Page 38

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

6.4 Impact on Residential Amenity

6.4.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should safeguard the residential and local amenity. There are no neighbouring properties adjoining the site with the exception of the applicant existing dwelling. This will be located approximately 13 metres away to the west and will be separated by an existing shed and driveway. The proposed property will have a blank gable elevation which will facing this direction to prevent any overlooking or loss of privacy. Having regard to the distance and orientation away together with the scale the proposed dwelling will not result in any overbearing impact or loss of light. The slight increase in the number of traffic movements arising from the dwelling will be minimal and would not result in any significant increase in noise and disturbance.

6.5 Highways

6.5.2 The proposed dwelling will use the existing access serving the farmhouse which provides adequate visibility in both directions onto the unclassified road. The existing driveway will provide a large parking area directly in front of the new dwelling which will provide adequate visitor and manoeuvring space. A new vehicular access will be formed involving the widening of an existing pedestrian access to provide two off street car parking spaces for the existing farm house. Although having regard that the road is unclassified this access would be classified as permitted development. The proposed use of the existing access will not result in any highway safety issue, whilst adequate off street car parking and manoeuvring space will be provided.

6.6 Ecology

6.6.1 Policy CS17 ‘Environmental Networks’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development will identify, protect, expand and connect Shropshire’s environmental assets to create a multifunctional network and natural and historic resources. This will be achieved by ensuring that all development protects and enhances the diversity, high quality and local character of the natural environmental and does not adversely affect the ecological value of the assets, their immediate surroundings or their connecting corridors. This is reiterated in national planning guidance in policy 11 ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment’ of the National Planning Policy Framework. This indicates that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains where possible.

Page 39

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

9.6.2 A detailed Ecological Constraints Assessment and Bat & Nesting Bird Assessment have been carried out. It has indicated that the site is part of a well maintained domestic garden which includes a mown lawn and ornamental shrubs. The ecology report has indicated that the proposed development will not impact on badgers. There are no mapped ponds within 250 metres of the site and considering the scale and nature of the proposed development it is not envisaged that Great Crested Newt will be impacted upon. The boundary trees may be used by birds for foraging and it is recommended that any removal of vegetation should be undertaken outside the nesting season. The habitat of the site is of low ecological value and the Council Planning Ecologist has raised no objection subject to safeguarding conditions and informatives.

6.7 Drainage

6.7.1 Policy CS18 ‘Sustainable Water Management’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should integrate measures of sustainable water management to reduce flood risk, avoid an adverse impact on water quality and quantity and provide opportunities to enhance biodiversity. The application indicates that foul water drainage will be directed to the existing septic tank which is considered acceptable in this rural isolated location. The application indicates that surface water will be disposed of via soakaways and the Drainage Engineer has indicated that percolation test and soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 265. No concerns have been raised regarding the suitability of the local ground conditions and site is not located in a flood zone and therefore it is recommend that both the foul and surface water drainage are conditioned accordingly for details to be submitted and approved prior to the commencement of works on site.

6.8 Affordable Housing

6.8.1 Policy CS11 ‘Type and Affordability of Housing’ of the Core Strategy indicates that all new open market housing development should make an appropriate contribution to the provision of local needs affordable housing having regard to the current prevailing target rate as set out in the Shropshire Viability Index. The existing target rate for Marchamley is currently 15% and would equate to a financial contribution of £13,500 being provided.

6.8.2 Officers note the recent Ministerial statement and amendments to the National Planning Practice Guidance as a material consideration in determining a planning application. However, following a subsequent decision by the Cabinet of the Council, the Council continues to give full weight to Policy CS11 of the adopted Core Strategy and Type and Affordability of Housing SPD and continues to seek on site provision of affordable housing and/or developer contributions to the provision of affordable housing in relation to all sites (please see the public statement of the Council ‘as published on the website 30/01/15).

6.8.3 Given the above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted only subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement to secure the provision of affordable housing in accordance with the terms of the policy. Non compliance with the requirements of adopted Core Strategy Policy CS11 would mean that the

Page 40

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

proposal would be in clear conflict with the aims and requirements of the Development Plan and should therefore be refused, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise.

7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 Applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The proposed development is located within an area of defined as open countryside for planning policy purposes and accordingly would lead to sporadic and unsustainable development that would undermine the "rural rebalance" approach to development.

7.2 It is considered that the harm that will be caused to the intrinsic value of the open countryside from the development would be significant and demonstrable so as to outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole and further specific policies within the framework indicate that this type of development should be restricted. It is recognised that there will be benefits delivered by the scheme albeit there are limited and are insufficient to outweigh the conflict with the aims of the NPPF. The development will result in a significant reliance on a car to access local facilities.

7.3 The proposal scheme cannot be regarded as being ‘sustainable development’ as envisaged by the Framework. Other more sustainable locations have been identified within the village which will be more in keeping with the pattern of development in this area.

7.4 Accordingly the proposal is considered contrary to relevant saved policies within the North Shropshire Local Plan, adopted polices within the Shropshire Core Strategy and Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES APPRAISAL

8.1 Risk Management

There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:

Page 41

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

8.2 Human Rights

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

9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

10.0 BACKGROUND

10.1 Relevant Planning Policies

Policies material to the determination of the Application. In determining this application the Local Planning Authority gave consideration to the following policies:-

Page 42

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 6 – Long Lane Farm, Marchamley

Shropshire Council Core Strategy (February 2011): CS5 : Countryside and Green Belt S6 : Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS11 : Type and Affordability of Housing CS17 : Environmental Networks CS18 : Sustainable Water Management Supplementary Planning Document - Type and Affordability of Housing

10.2 Relevant Planning History

There is no relevant planning history.

11.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

List of Background Papers - Planning Application reference 14/05739/FUL

Cabinet Member (Portfolio Holder) - Cllr M. Price

Local Member - Cllr Karen Calder

Page 43

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 44 Agenda Item 7

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 7

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619 Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/05767/VAR Parish: Baschurch Proposal : Variation of condition No.23 (opening hours) attached to planning permission 11/04795/FUL dated 14.03.12 to amend Sunday opening hours to between 8:00 hours - 22.00 hours Site Address : Spar Convenience Store Forge Lane Newtown Baschurch Applicant : Case Officer : Richard Denison email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 342567 - 321878

Plan shown over the page.

Page 45 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

Recommendation:- Grant Permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL

1.1 This is a variation of conditions application to the Spar convenience store in Baschurch to allow an extension to the opening hours on Sunday. The proposed extension of hours will allow the convenience store to be open from 08:00hrs to 22:00hrs on Sunday.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION

2.1 The existing Spar store is located on a former commercial site which was previously used as a coach depot and car sales. A vehicle repair garage is located directly to the north with four new dwellings positioned to the east to the rear of the Spar store with access along a private driveway which also serves the car park for the Spar. Newton Farm House is located along the southern boundary with two detached dwellings directly facing the site on the opposite side of the Newton Road to the west. The frontage of the site is located within Baschurch Conservation Area.

Page 46

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION

3.1 The Parish Council have submitted a view contrary to officers based on material planning reasons which cannot reasonably be overcome by negotiation or the imposition of planning conditions. The local ward member respects the view of Public Protection, although the assessment was not undertaken on Sunday and from experience traffic along Shrewsbury Road on a Sunday is significantly reduced so that noise from the car park would be more noticeable. The Principal Planning Officer in consultation with the committee chairman agrees that the Parish Council has raised material planning issues and that the application should be determined by committee.

4.0 COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Consultee Comments

4.1.1 Shropshire Council, Historic Environment Team (Conservation) - A formal response has been raised raising no comments.

4.1.2 Shropshire Council, Public Protection - The noise report highlights that there is a significant difference in noise between the current opening hours and the current situation outside of the current opening hours which have been proposed as opening hours in this application in Tables Two and Three. It is important to note that the noise level difference noted in these tables is not the expected noise difference from the proposed change in opening hours.

Although an increase in noise at certain residential premises has been suggested by the noise assessment, having witnessed on site the general character of noise from vehicles visiting the SPAR and those passing on the Shrewsbury Road it is not considered that the noise from vehicles in the car park will have a significant detrimental impact on nearby residential receptors. Noise from vehicles in the car park at all residential receptors to the front of the SPAR was noticeably less than that produced by the traffic on the Shrewsbury Road. In a 30 minute spell on site I witnessed 11 cars enter and exit the car park. One of these over revved when it left the site to the extent which I would have expected it to be perceived at nearby residential dwellings. It is appreciated that vehicle numbers on the Shrewsbury Road may be less on Sundays than that witnessed on site. However, road traffic noise will still be the dominant noise source in the area. As the noise created by cars visiting the SPAR at the proposed opening hours is the same as the dominant noise source it is unlikely that any extra vehicles visiting the SPAR would have a significant impact on the area.

Furthermore vehicles are in the car park for around 20 seconds with the engine on. As a result the amount of time any noise will be on site in the extended hours period will be small, again suggesting no significant detrimental impact which would result in refusal of this application. Only two car doors were noted to be shut forcefully causing a noise which may be heard as a distinct noise above background at residential properties.

It should also be noted that not all visits to the SPAR will be by motorised vehicle.

Page 47

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

While on site 15% of visits were on foot or by push bike which resulted in no significant noise.

In conclusion it is not expected there to be a significant detrimental impact which would result in refusal of the proposed additional opening hours where no mitigation is suggested. It is suggested that no noise mitigation is required in order to allow the additional opening hours. It is noted that there is space to provide mitigation in future if required although it is not recommend necessary in this case.

4.1.3 Baschurch Parish Council object to the application on the same grounds as the previous objection relating to the opening hours and in view of the comments made by the Inspector at the appeal.

4.2 Public Comments

4.2.1 Eighteen letters of objections have been received raising the following concerns:-

• Existing congestion and unauthorised parking along the road. • Staff use the loading bay and delivery vehicles have to park on the roadside. • The village is quiet on Sundays and extended hours will cause increase in noise and disturbance. • Adequate alcohol sales within the village after the supermarket closes. • HGV’s reverse into the site stopping traffic in both directions. • Noise from car doors slamming and vehicles accelerating away from the store. • Increase in litter. • Concerns raised regarding accuracy of Noise Impact Assessment. • Previous appeal to extended hours was refused. • No site notice erected.

4.2.2 The letter has been received from a local resident indicating that the Parish Council are supporting residential development in Baschurch, but do not appear to be providing increased facilities. Residents rely on the village convenience store and concerns are raised that the store closes to early on Sundays.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

• History & Background • Impact of current proposal on Residential Amenity • Highways • Crime and Disorder • Other Matters

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL

6.1 History & Background

6.1.1 Planning permission was granted in March 2012 for the erection of a single storey convenience store with associated car parking and formation of a new vehicular and pedestrian access following the demolition of the existing bungalow (application reference 11/04795/FUL). The submitted application indicated opening times of

Page 48

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

07:00hrs to 22:00hrs on Monday to Saturday and 10:00hrs to 16:00hrs on Sunday. These hours were proposed as a condition by officers and approved by members at committee. A late representation was received from the agent confirming that the end user (Spar) had requested amended opening hours of 07:00hrs to 23:00hrs Monday to Sunday. Additional comments were received from the Public Protection Officer raising no objection, although indicated that large delivery vehicles can cause a noise disturbance and therefore Sunday deliveries should be discouraged. This was discussed by members at committee who were of the opinion that it would not be appropriate to amend the opening hours without seeking the views of the local residents and the Parish Council.

6.1.2 A variation of conditions application was submitted to seek an extension to the opening hours which followed consultation with local residents and the Parish Council (application reference 12/01149/VAR). The variation of the opening hours was requested by the applicant as the end user considered that the approved hours are unduly restrictive and would seriously undermine the viability of the store. The store is required to offer a comparable service to that offered by other convenience stores. The agent indicated that the amended hours of opening on Sunday would enable the convenience store to serve the local residents of Baschurch with their morning Sunday newspapers and breakfast goods. Furthermore it is indicated that 16:00hrs onwards on a Sunday is one of the busiest trading times for a convenience store as the supermarkets close at 16:00hrs and the convenience store offers a local service to residents for last minute provisions for the week ahead.

6.1.3 The application was supported by officers, although members refused the application at committee as it was considered that the variation of hours were considered unsociable and inappropriate within a predominantly residential area and would be detrimental to the health and wellbeing of local residents by virtue of noise from customers, lighting and vehicle movements late at night and early on Sunday mornings.

6.1.4 This application was subject to an appeal in which the inspector indicated that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth as indicated in paragraph 19 of the National Planning Policy Framework, whilst paragraph 17 seeks to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. The inspector indicated that there is a balance between economic interests including local employment and sustainability with residential amenity.

6.1.5 The inspector indicated that it was reasonable to assume, given the local context, that traffic during the evening would diminish progressively, and extraneous traffic is likely to become correspondingly more noticeable. In terms of Sundays it was indicated that early morning traffic can be expected to be generally lighter than on other days of the week with local residents having a greater expectation of peace and quiet. Similarly the evening time on Sunday is likely to be valued for increasing comparative tranquillity.

6.1.6 The inspector indicated that although Nos. 32 and 34 Newtown are set back from the road, behind tall hedges (at that time), the additional level of activity during the proposed extended opening hours as a whole would increase the degree of general noise and disturbance experienced by these residents by a significant margin. In

Page 49

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

addition the inspector indicated that Newtown Farmhouse has side facing windows which look over the proposed car park only a driveways width away and the noise and disturbance and headlight glare would be a material consideration.

6.1.7 In conclusion the inspector indicated that the extended opening hours would be unduly harmful to the living conditions of nearby local residents arising from general noise and disturbance.

6.2 Impact o f current proposal o n residential amenity

6.2.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should safeguard the residential and local amenity. Concerns have been raised by local residents indicating that the extended hours will lead to an increase in noise and disturbance especially from car doors slamming and vehicles accelerating away from the store. Concern is also raised regarding the accuracy of the Noise Impact Assessment and that the previous appeal to extend the hours was refused.

6.2.2 The planning inspector who considered the appeal for the previous extension of hours application indicated that although there had been widespread opposition to the appeal, the main impacts of the proposal were against the nearest dwellings, Nos. 32 and 34 Newton directly opposite the site and Newtown Farmhouse directly adjacent to the southern boundary of the store and its car park. This appeal considered an extension of hours to allow the store to be open an additional hour from 22:00hrs to 23:00hrs (Monday to Saturday), together with an extension to the opening hours for Sunday from 10:00hrs - 16:00hrs to 07:00hrs - 23:00hrs. As indicated above the planning inspector considered that this increase in hours would be unduly harmful to the living conditions of nearby local residents.

6.2.3 The appeal was not supported by a noise impact assessment and this current application does not seek any extension to the hours previously approved for Monday to Saturday. A detailed Noise Impact Assessment has been undertaken with this application which has indicated that there is no change to the mechanical services provided by plant equipment or deliveries, with the only potential noise impact from the increase in trading hours on Sunday (2 hours in the morning and 6 hours in the evening). Existing noise levels have been surveyed at locations representative of the nearest residential properties to the store. The survey concentrated on the earliest and latest existing trading hours whilst the store was open as well as the proposed extension of hours when the store ceased trading. The results and observations taken from the noise assessment indicate that the noise impact associated with extending the store’s trading hours to 08:00-22:00 on Sundays would be low, providing no significant effect and was recommend that no mitigation measures are considered necessary in relation to the extended hours.

The Public Protection Team are aware of the neighbour concerns and have visited 6.2.4 the site to ensure that there were no site specific acoustic issues that would influence any information submitted with the Noise Impact Assessment. The noise report highlights that there is a significant difference in noise between the current opening hours and the current situation outside of the current opening hours which have been proposed as opening hours in this application in Tables Two and Three. It is important to note that the noise level difference noted in these tables is not the

Page 50

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

expected noise difference from the proposed change in opening hours.

Although an increase in noise at certain residential premises has been suggested 6.2.5 by the noise assessment, having witnessed on site the general character of noise from vehicles visiting the SPAR and those passing on the Shrewsbury Road it is not considered that the noise from vehicles in the car park will have a significant detrimental impact on nearby residential receptors. Noise from vehicles in the car park at all residential receptors to the front of the SPAR was noticeably less than that produced by the traffic on the Shrewsbury Road. It is appreciated that vehicle numbers on the Shrewsbury Road may be less on Sundays, however road traffic noise will still be the dominant noise source in the area. As the noise created by cars visiting the SPAR at the proposed opening hours is the same as the dominant noise source it is unlikely that any extra vehicles visiting the SPAR would have a significant impact on the area.

Furthermore vehicles are in the car park for around 20 seconds with the engine on. 6.2.6 As a result the amount of time any noise will be on site in the extended hours period will be small, again suggesting no significant detrimental impact which would result in refusal of this application. Only two car doors were noted to be shut forcefully causing a noise which may be heard as a distinct noise above background at residential properties. It should also be noted that not all visits to the SPAR will be by motorised vehicle. While on site 15% of visits were on foot or by push bike which resulted in no significant noise.

It is considered that there will not be any significant detrimental impact from noise to 6.2.7 proposed additional opening hours and no mitigation is necessary.

6.3 Highways

6.3.1 Concerns have been raised form local residents regarding the existing congestion and unauthorised parking along the roadside, together with staff parking in the loading bay and delivery vehicles having to park on the roadside. Concerns have also been raised regarding HGV’s reversing into the site stopping traffic in both directions.

6.3.2 Detailed discussions were undertaken prior to the application for the convenience store being approved in relation to HGV deliveries and customer car parking. The layout of the site was designed to provide a delivery bay which should remain unobstructed and was indicated purely for servicing purposes. HGV’s would pull into the car park and reverse into the bay for unloading. This would then enable HGV’s to leave the site in a forward gear with clear visibility onto the road. The site manager has been informed of the arrangement for keeping the loading bay clear and to advise the HGV drivers of the manoeuvring procedure.

6.3.3 The customer car park provides 16 spaces, together with cycle stands and was considered acceptable for the size of the store and within the parking standard as indicated in Policy D7 of the North Shropshire Local Plan. Unfortunately, it appears that some customers are parking on the roadside which is acceptable subject to them not parking on the double yellow lines around the junction. Should customers be parking on the yellow lines then they would be causing a highway offence.

Page 51

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

6.3.4 It is considered that the proposed store would provide adequate off street car parking for the proposed extension of hours on Sunday and with close management of the staff car parking and HGV deliveries by the store manager then the store should not result in any highway safety issues.

6.4 Crime and Disorder

6.4.1 Policy 8 ‘Promoting Health Communities’ of the National Planning Policy Framework indicates that development should provide safe and accessible environment where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion. This is reiterated in policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy which indicates that proposals are expected to be designed to reduce opportunities for criminal activity and antisocial behaviour.

6.4.2 Concerns have been raised regarding the increase in opening hours will lead to antisocial behaviour and increase in alcohol sales. However, the design of the building prevents the possibility of creating an area for people to gather and the sale of alcohol is strictly controlled under UK legislation and the proposed operators of the store are a responsible trader. The building is fitted with CCTV cameras to prevent any antisocial behaviour or criminal damage.

6.5 Other Matters

6.5.1 Concern has been raised that no site notice has been erected, although it was confirmed that the notice was displayed on the 26 th January 2015 allowing members of the public to comment within 21 days. The application has also been advertised in the Shropshire Star and residential properties adjoining and directly opposite the site was consulted with a formal letter.

6.5.2 Concerns have also been raised regarding an increase in litter, although the convenience store provides a litter bin at the store for customer waste and there are designated commercial waste bins. It is in the interest of the store to keep the premises and car park clear of rubbish. Unfortunately, any litter caused by customers who leave the premises is not a matter that the Spar store can be held responsible for.

7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The proposed increase in opening hours would not result in any significant detrimental impact from noise or disturbance which local residents would reasonable expect.

8.0 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

Page 52

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

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 6 weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose first arose.

8.2 Human Rights

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

9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

10.0 BACKGROUND

10.1 Relevant Planning Policies

Page 53

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

Policies material to the determination of the Application. In determining this application the Local Planning Authority gave consideration to the following policies:-

National Planning Policy Framework: Core Planning Principles (paragraph 17) 1 : Building a Strong, Competitive Economy (paragraph 19)

Shropshire Council Core Strategy (February 2011): CS6 : Sustainable Design and Development Principles

North Shropshire Local Plan (December 2005): D7 : Parking Standards

10.2 Relevant Planning History

12/01149/VAR - Variation of condition no.23 (opening hours) attached to planning permission 11/04795/FUL to allow the premises to open between 07:00 hours to 23:00 hours Monday to Sunday and reduction in the delivery times for HGV to 07:00 hours to 18:00 hours Monday to Saturday (Amended Description). Refused 1 st June 2012. Appeal Dismissed 15 th November 2012.

11/04795/FUL - Erection of a single storey convenience store with associated car parking; formation of new vehicular and pedestrian access; demolition of existing bungalow. Granted 14 th March 2012.

11.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

List of Background Papers - Planning Application reference 14/05767/VAR

Cabinet Member (Portfolio Holder) - Cllr M. Price

Local Member - Cllr Nick Bardsley

Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Page 54

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 7 – Spar Store, Baschurch

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

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

1. The premises shall only be used as a local convenience store and for no other purpose including any other purpose in Class A1; of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification.

Reason: In order to restrict the use of the premises in the interest of the amenities of the area.

2. The premises shall not be open for customers outside of the following hours:-

07:00 hours - 22:00 hours (Mondays to Saturday) 08:00 hours - 22:00 hours (Sunday)

No deliveries to the store should arrive outside of the following hours:-

07:00 hours - 22:00 hours (Mondays to Saturday)

Reason: In order to maintain the amenities of the area.

3. The proposed delivery bay as indicated on drawing no. 1121-PL-05 Rev.A under application reference 11/04795/FUL shall be kept clear at all times other than loading and unloading of delivery vehicles.

Reason: To allow adequate off street parking provision for delivery vehicles.

Page 55

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 56 Agenda Item 8

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 8

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/05685/FUL Parish: Whitchurch Urban

Proposal : Erection of ten dwellings; formation of access and associated drainage works

Site Address : Development Land Adj 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch Shropshire

Applicant : Saxonby (Affordable Housing) Limited

Case Officer : Karen Townend email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 354396 - 341293

Page 57 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

Recommendation:- that delegated powers be given to the Area Planning Manager to Grant Permission subject to the resolution of the outstanding ecology issues and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

REPORT 1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 The application is for full planning permission for the erection of 10 affordable dwellings. It is proposed to erect a single block of 4 apartments and two sets of three terrace houses. All the buildings are to be two storey and will all be two bed units. Access is proposed off Bridgewater Street utilising an existing access which is separate from the main vehicular access into Tesco and the bus station. Negotiations have been on-going during the consideration of the application with regard to the number of parking spaces to be provided. The final plan proposed by the agent is for 10 parking spaces, providing 1 per unit.

1.2 As a full planning application full plans have been received, which have been amended during consideration of the application. A Design and Access Statement and an Ecology report have also been submitted in support of the application.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESC RIPTION 2.1 The site is approximately 0.44 acres it is located adjacent to Tesco food store car park, the town bus station and within the identified town centre, partly within the Whitchurch Conservation Area and also within the development boundary for the town. It is bounded by the access to the car park and the car park to the east and north and housing to the south and west. Vehicular access to the site is to the side of no.5 Bridgewater Street but pedestrian access is available off the access to Tesco and the applicants Design and Access Statement advises that part of the site was previously used as a garage and parking. As such the application site is considered to be previously developed, or brownfield, land.

2.2 Planning permission was previously granted under reference 13/02030/FUL for two semi detached dwellings on the site. The development was considered to be acceptable and in context with the surrounding built form, not unacceptably affecting the amenities of existing properties and provide sufficient space for manoeuvring of vehicles. An application for three terrace houses was refused prior to the consent for two properties on the grounds that it would result in cramped development with substandard accommodation and amenity space and inappropriate parking provision. The current application includes the land which was subject to both of these previous applications but also an additional area of land and as such provides a greater site area for the additional dwellings as proposed.

3. 0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION 3.1 The application site is partly Council owned land and furthermore the Town Council view is contrary to officers recommendation. As such, although the provision of affordable housing is a statutory function and therefore can be

Page 58

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

considered under delegated powers the objection from the Town Council also triggers potential referral.

The proposal has been discussed with the Chair and Vice Chair of the planning committee who agree that the proposal should be considered by members.

4.0 COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIONS 4.1 Consultee Comments 4.1.1 Whitchurch Town Council – oppose this planning application on the following reasons:- • Over developed site. • Concern over the trees on the site and have they TPO’s in place • Access is dangerous. • Process not served as the applicant states ownership unknown and yet spoken to the land owner. The applicant has not advertised in the paper to ascertain the land owner. • loss of green space (trees) • possible bat roast • traffic issues

4.1.2 Affordable Housing – There is a need for affordable housing in this area. Is happy for all 10 properties to be rented but would have preferred a mix of property sizes and would like to know whether this was a request from the Registered Provider as not all Registered Providers will take 2 bed apartments.

Following receipt of confirmation from the Housing Association that they are happy to have the 2 bed apartments raises no objections.

4.1.3 Conservation –The proposed application site is within the Whitchurch Conservation Area, thus the design of any dwellings should enhance the setting of the Conservation Area paras 134 and 137 of the NPPF and Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Advised that whilst there is no fundamental objection in principle to development on this land as it could serve to enhance the Conservation Area, it was considered that the design, as submitted, fell short of any expectation to seek to enhance the Conservation Area.

The overall design does not appear to have any particular relevance or reference to the vernacular detailing and proportion of the traditional domestic buildings which are to the west and south of the site. Although the design and access statement suggests that the proposal does, no design rationale or philosophy forms part of the submission to evidence this. The scale of the gabled entrance to units 1-4 is quite different to that indicated on the site plan and the design and access statement. On the submitted elevation it is considered overbearing and out of scale with the rest of the block, however, as the appropriateness of the overall design is questioned there is little point in discussing this further.

Units 5-10 are also considered to have the same lack of relevance or reference to the local vernacular etc as per unit 1-4. The dwellings are bland and could be

Page 59

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

found anywhere in the country.

On the whole it is considered that the proposed dwellings lack any interest in their design and use of materials and therefore are not considered to fulfil the requirements of the NPPF regarding an environmental role as they do not enhance the setting of the Whitchurch Conservation Area and it is also considered that the design does not comply with the requirements of CS6 and CS17.

An objection is raised on the design of the proposed dwellings and therefore amendments to the designs should be sought, otherwise permission should be refused as the development does not comply with the requirements of the above policies.

4.1.4 Archaeology – The proposed development site lies partially within and immediately adjacent to the historic core of Whitchurch as defined by the Central Marches Historic Towns Survey; between areas thought to be occupied by the Roman civilian settlement (HER PRN 05917) and the Sedgford Roman cremation cemetery (HER PRN 00910); partially within a group of tenement plots of likely medieval date (HER PRN 05938), and on the edge of a group of tenement plots of presumed postmedieval date (HER PRN 05944). Consequently, there is a possibility that archaeological remains relating to the Roman, medieval and postmedieval development of the town may be present on the proposed development site. On the basis of current evidence, it is therefore deemed to have moderate- high archaeological potential.

An archaeological Desk Based Assessment has now been provided by the applicant in relation to Paragraph 128 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This confirms the above summary of the archaeological interest of the proposed development site and recommends that a phased programme of archaeological work is undertaken comprising an initial evaluation consisting of trial trenching in the northern part of the site and further mitigation is appropriate thereafter.

Given the recommendations contained in the Desk Based Assessment, and when also taking into account the current tree cover on the proposed development site, it is advised in relation to paragraph 141 of the NPPF that a phased programme of archaeological work be made a condition of any planning permission. This should comprise an initial trial trenching exercise, followed by further mitigation as appropriate.

4.1.5 Highways – Initially advised that notwithstanding the previous highway advice given in respect of 13/02030/FUL, the highway authority have concerns regarding the scale of the development now proposed and resulting traffic movements. The site access onto Bridgewater Street is located immediately adjacent to the junction which serves the Tesco store and public car park. Whilst the existing access is shown to be improved, it does not allow the simultaneous movement of vehicles and this raises additional concerns regarding the associated turning movements at the site access and those taking place at the Tesco junction. Given the scale of the development now proposed there are likely to be driver confusion created by the complex turning movements taking place due to the close proximity of the 2 junction locations.

Page 60

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

Following reduction of the number of parking spaces to 10 advised that the highway authority maintains its position in terms of the access issues highlighted previously although recognises that the reduction in parking level would result in a reduction in associated traffic movements at the site access onto Bridgewater Street. As set out in our recent correspondence and indeed argued by the Transport Consultant acting on behalf of the developer, the site is in a sustainable location with access to local services and amenities, bus station and within walking distance of the railway station. As such the highway authority accept that the trip generation from the development is likely to be reflected by its town centre location.

In summary, whilst the highway authority cannot be supportive of this application, we recognise the potential desire to provide affordable housing in Whitchurch. The highway authority accept therefore that the is a balance between the merits of affordable housing provision set against the highway deficiencies previously highlighted.

4.1.6 Ecology – Requested the additional bat survey recommended by the applicants ecologist prior to determination.

Bats Greenscape (2014) consider that the mature ivy covered trees on site have potential to contain bat roosts and to support bat foraging and commuting and therefore recommend Phase 2 surveys to determine this. The submitted plans appear to show removal of all the mature trees on site.

It is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established before the planning permission is granted, otherwise all relevant material considerations may not have been addressed in making the decision (Government Circular 06/2005).

Once this additional information is received I can make further recommendations.

Nesting birds The trees and undergrowth are likely to support nesting birds. A condition and informative are recommended to provide 5 artificial nests prior to occupation of the dwellings.

Environmental Networks The Shropshire Core Strategy contains in Policy CS17: Environmental Network provision for mapping and subsequently protecting, maintaining, enhancing and restoring Environmental Networks in the county in line with the recommendations of both The Lawton Review and the National Planning Policy Framework.

The northern, tree covered section of this proposed development site is within the Environmental Network and as such the proposed scheme must clearly demonstrate how the development will ‘promote the preservation, restoration and re-creation of priority habitats and ecological networks’ as required by paragraph 117 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 61

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

In this case a landscape scheme which retained a proportion of the existing trees and substantial replacement planting for those to be removed would be appropriate.

Under Regulation 61 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010), the proposed works will not have a likely significant effect on any internationally designated site. An Appropriate Assessment is not required.

4.1.7 Trees – Having visited the site and read the submitted tree report has no objection to the proposal which involves the removal of all the trees on site.

The trees are a group of self-sown Sycamores arising from previously disturbed land. They have merit as a screening group but are poor as individual specimens. Without management their long term prospects are poor as they crowd each other out for space. They do not meet the criteria for a Tree Preservation Order.

4.1.8 Drainage – The drainage details, plan and calculations could be conditioned and submitted for approval. Confirmed that the requirement for a Flood Risk Assessment can also be conditioned.

4.2 Public Comments 4.2.1 3 letters of representation have been received raising the following concerns: • Dangerous access too close to Tesco access • Narrow with limited visibility which would be further reduced on bin collection days • Loss of green, wooded, space • Impact from noise and loss of privacy • Lights from cars will impact on existing dwellings • Potential disruption during construction, requested restriction on hours • Need to retain right of access to neighbouring property • Affect on wildlife • Loss of trees

4.2.2 West Mercia Constabulary has also commented, not formally objecting, but advising that there are opportunities to design out crime and/ or the fear of crime.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES • Policy & principle of development • Is the site sustainable? • Economic considerations • Social considerations • Environmental considerations • Layout, scale and design • Impact on residential amenity • Highways, access, parking and rights of way • Ecology and trees • Drainage

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Policy & principle of development

Page 62

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

6.1.1 Under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, all planning applications must be determined in accordance with the adopted development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Since the adoption of the Councils Core Strategy the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has been published and is a material consideration that needs to be given weight in the determination of planning applications. The NPPF advises that proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF constitutes guidance for local planning authorities as a material consideration to be given significant weight in determining applications.

6.1.2 The NPPF sets out the presumption in favour of sustainable development as a golden thread running through plan-making and decision-taking (para. 14), so it applies, as a material planning consideration, in any event. The NPPF specifically aims to ‘boost significantly the supply of housing’, with the requirement for authorities to have a housing land supply of 5 years to achieve this. Therefore, the fact (and degree) that a proposed development helps to boost housing supply is a significant material consideration. These considerations have to be weighed alongside the provisions of the Development Plan, including those relating to housing supply.

6.1.3 The application site is within the development boundary for Whitchurch as shown in both the saved North Shropshire Local Plan and also within the forthcoming SAMDev plan for the town. Furthermore part of the site has planning consent for housing development of a pair of semi-detached houses. The site is also considered to be previously developed land and therefore there is a strong presumption in favour of redevelopment of the site. The key issues with the proposal is whether the density, layout and design are appropriate, the potential impact on the amenities of existing residents and the access, parking and highway safety matters. These matters are all considered in detail in the following sections of the report.

6.1.4 Given the sites position within the development boundaries existing and proposed the 5 year housing land supply is not a material consideration. The site would be considered appropriate, in principle, for housing development with or without a 5 year supply of housing land.

6.1.4 Policy CS6, amongst a range of considerations, requires proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic to be located in accessible locations where opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel to be reduced. Policy CS7 states that a sustainable pattern of development requires the maintenance and improvement of integrated, attractive, safe and reliable communication and transport infrastructure and services. And policy CS9 states that development that provides additional dwellings or employment premises will help deliver more sustainable communities by making contributions to local infrastructure in proportion to its scale and the sustainability of its location.

6.1.5 It is also appropriate to consider the NPPF as a whole in assessing the sustainability of this proposal. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that within the

Page 63

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

context of the ‘presumption in favour’ development should be approved unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweighs the benefits.

6.1.6 Within the Design and Access Statement the agent also comments on the compliance of the proposal with the Whitchurch Town Plan in providing 2 bed starter homes in the centre of Whitchurch. The Town Plan is a local document which is a material consideration in the determination of the planning application but can only be given limited weight in that it is not a Neighbourhood Plan and has not been through the process of examination and referendum to form part of the Council’s development plan documents.

6.2 Is the site sustainable? 6.2.1 Paragraph 7 of the NPPF sets out the three dimensions to sustainable development and provides an overview of what is considered to be the economic, social and environmental roles of the planning system. For a site to be considered to be sustainable development the three dimensions need to all be provided and the presumption in favour of sustainable development advises that, unless there are material considerations which significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, consent should be granted. It is not a case of having to prove the benefits outweigh the harm but to prove that any harm substantially and demonstrably outweighs the benefits.

6.2.2 The submitted Design and Access Statement includes the agent’s assessment of the sustainability of the site against the three threads in the NPPF. The agent notes the location of the site and the services and facilities available in the town. Whitchurch is identified in Core Strategy Policy CS3 as a Market Town which will have substantial development, recognising its accessible location on the highway and rail network, maintaining and enhancing its vibrant town centre and balancing business and housing development. The site is close to the bus station and the town has a train station with good links to neighbouring towns. As such the site is considered to be sustainably located. Whether it is wholly sustainable development depends on the economic, social and environmental benefits and harms.

6.3 Economic co nsiderations? 6.3.1 Within the submitted Design and Access Statement the agent has commented that 10 affordable dwellings on a brownfield infill site in Whitchurch town centre will make a valuable contribution to the local economy by providing local construction jobs and increase custom for small local businesses. This is acknowledged and although the benefit will be small in comparison to some of the larger sites being allocated and promoted it will still make a valuable contribution to the local economy and there is no identifiable economic harms resulting from the development.

6.3.2 As a scheme for 100% affordable housing, which can be controlled by condition, the proposal is exempt from Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). However the benefit of 100% affordable housing in an area where the policy requires 10% is a significant benefit and which provides the policy exception to CIL.

6.4 Social considerations?

Page 64

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

6.4.1 The D&A also notes that affordable housing contributes to the social strand of the sustainability. The application proposes 100% affordable housing which for a site of 10 houses will provide a good contribution towards affordable housing in the town. Following information from the agent regarding the discussions with the Housing Association who will rent out the properties the Council Housing Enabling Officer has confirmed that the size and tenure of the properties is acceptable. The provision of 100% affordable housing within close proximity of the town centre should be given significant weight in the determination of the application.

6.4.2 It is acknowledged that new housing will add pressure to existing services; however the proposal is considered a relatively small scheme for 10 dwellings within the market town which has large housing allocations proposed and an element of windfall allowance within the housing target as set in the Core Strategy. As such the proposal for 10 dwellings on this site is not considered to result in a social harm or tip the balance of the impact on existing facilities and services. Although CIL is not payable from this application it is due from other developments around the town and as such there will be funding available to enhance local services and facilities and respond to the priorities set within the Whitchurch Place Plan.

6.5 Environmental considerations? 6.5.1 The agent considers that the development protects the natural, built and historic environment. Furthermore it is within walking distance of local facilities and public transport reducing the reliance on private cars. It is noted that as a previously developed site there will be environmental benefits from redeveloping the site, the neighbours comments, noted later in the report, note that the site is untidy. However, there is also environmental harm from the clearance of the trees and hedges from the site and the associated impact on protected species.

6.5.2 Following a request by the Council Archaeologist a historic assessment has been undertaken and submitted in support of the application. This assessment notes that the site lies within a group of tenement plots of potential medieval date and that the lack of modern development of the site will mean that any archaeology is well preserved. It notes the history of Whitchurch and previous archaeology records around the town and the site and the levels of inter-visibility between the site and local heritage assets. The previous consent on the site for two dwellings included a condition requiring a watching brief and the report on the current application recommends evaluation trenches in the northeast part of the site and potential subsequent monitoring of work.

6.5.3 The Council Archaeologist has confirmed that the submitted information is acceptable at this stage and advises that, given the recommendations contained in the Desk Based Assessment and when also taking into account the current tree cover on the development site, a phased programme of archaeological work be made a condition of any planning permission. This should comprise an initial trial trenching exercise, followed by further mitigation as appropriate. A condition is recommended to deal with this matter and as such is considered to be capable of being dealt with by condition and therefore not a matter which should hold up the decision.

6.5.4 The main consideration of environmental impact is dependent on the layout, scale

Page 65

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

and design and the impacts on highways, trees, ecology and drainage. These matters are considered in detail in the following sections.

6.6 Layout, scale and design 6.6.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy requires development to protect and conserve the built environment and be appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design taking into account the local context and character. The development should also safeguard residential and local amenity, ensure sustainable design and construction principles are incorporated within the new development.

6.6.2 The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of 10 dwellings. The development is proposed in three parts, a block of four two bed apartments within one two storey building and two short terraces of three 2 bed, two storey, dwellings providing a total of 6 terrace houses. The flats are on the southern part of the site, where there is existing consent for a pair of semi detached houses, the terraces are on the northern half, the current coppice area. Following discussions with the Council Highway Officer the number of parking spaces has been reduced from 20 to 10 for the reasons given in section 6.8 of this report. These are to be located between the apartments and the access road to Tesco and between the apartments and the terrace houses. Access is also retained to the car parking space for the adjacent property.

6.6.3 The apartment block is located in the part of the site where it widens out, at the end of the garden of no.5 Bridgewater Street. An area of shared amenity space of approximately 120sqm is proposed to the rear of the apartments with hard standing paved area to the front to provide access and the parking opposite. The building is proposed to be orientated to face the access road to Tesco and is two storey in height. No.5 Bridgewater Street sits on slightly higher ground than the application site and is also two storey with Bridgewater Street rising up away from the application site it is considered that a two storey building in this position will not be significantly visually intrusive and is also in line with the previous consent for a pair of semi-detached, two storey, houses.

6.6.4 The terrace houses are also proposed to be orientated to face towards Tesco access road and are two storey in height. They are proposed with a paved footpath and shared landscaped area to the front of the properties and private gardens of a minimum of 36sqm to the rear. The gardens are to be provided with a paved area for a shed, grassed area and a rotary dryer to meet affordable housing requirements. A footpath is provided between the two terrace sections to access all rear gardens and provide access for bins. A small area adjacent to the vehicular access from Bridgewater Street is proposed to be hard surfaced which will provide an off-street area for bin storage on collection days, adjacent to this hard standing is a footpath link to the footpath along the access road to Tesco and a small area of landscaping. The proposal will be at the same ground level as the adjacent properties on Earl Edwin Mews which sit gable end facing towards Tesco car park. As such it is considered by officers that the scale and position of the two storey terrace houses in the proposed site will relate to these existing properties.

6.6.5 The Town Council and local residents have objected to the proposal on the grounds of overdevelopment of the site. This is a subjective matter. However,

Page 66

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

given the size of the proposed dwellings, the area of amenity space for each unit and that the proposal includes 1 parking space per dwelling this is not a view which is shared by officers. The scale of the development is considered to relate well to the development on Earl Edwin Mews which is also 2 storey terrace houses with small garden areas. The wider setting and other surroundings are a mix of house sizes and types, some smaller and some larger, and, although the application is not strictly in keeping with all of the surrounding development, it is not considered to be significantly out of context given the Earl Edwin Mews development.

6.6.6 The Council Conservation Officer also raised objections to the design of the proposed development as detailed at section 4 above. Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires Local Planning Authorities to give special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of that area. As such the development should seek to preserve and enhance the conservation area and this legislation is also followed through into national and local policies. Amendments have been sought from the applicant which officers consider provide better proportions to the windows on the front elevations of the terrace houses and also a request has been made for a design feature in the gable end of the apartments. The Council Conservation Officer has verbally agreed that these changes to the designs are improvements and, although the designs could be better and further enhance the conservation area, acknowledges that the development is for affordable housing and as such the cost of development can be considered a factor in the design detailing. It is officer’s opinion that the amended scheme is similar to other affordable housing schemes developed across the north of the County both in and outside of conservation areas and therefore that the designs are appropriate and that it would not be defendable to refuse the application on the grounds of the design of the dwellings or the conservation area.

6.6.6 Overall it is officer’s opinion that the development is of an appropriate layout, scale and design which will provide a group of small properties within the town centre, with sufficient parking and amenity space and in close proximity to services, facilities and alternative means of transport. As such it is considered that the development complies with the requirements of policy in regard to layout and context.

6.7 Impact on residential amenity 6.7.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should safeguard the residential and local amenity. Concern has been raised by local objectors about the potential for overlooking, loss of privacy, noise and impact from cars.

6.7.2 As part of the submission the applicant has met with the neighbouring property owners who have not raised any objection to the principle of the development, the loss of trees is noted as an impact on ecology but the neighbours have also commented that the development of the site will tidy it up and remove the antisocial aspect. The neighbours have requested restrictions on the timing of construction works, controlling traffic management to avoid congestion and additional fencing between the site and their property. The agent has agreed to all of these requests and has also amended the elevations of the apartments so that

Page 67

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

there is only one, obscure glazed, window facing towards the existing property.

6.7.3 The proposed apartment block will be approximately 11m form the closest point of no.5 Bridgewater Street. However, as noted above, there are only obscure glazed bathroom windows in the elevating facing towards this property and as such it is considered that the development will not adversely affect the amenities of this property to an unacceptable level. The other nearest properties are the terrace of houses on Earl Edwin Mews which are approximately 5m corner to corner of the proposed development. The proposed terrace houses are to be sited at a 90 degree angle from these existing dwellings and as such will not directly overlook these properties. There are windows in the rear elevations of the proposed properties which will be able to see towards these existing dwellings, however they overlook the fronts of these properties and the angle will limit any loss of privacy. The dwellings will face towards the Chapel on Dodington and the cemetery in between. There is approximately 27 metres between the Chapel and the proposed dwellings and as such the future use of the Chapel will not be unacceptably adversely affected.

6.7.4 With regard to noise impact as a residential development the noise which will result from the completed development would be similar to any other housing development and as such would not be considered to be a significant impact on the amenities of existing residential properties which are already neighboured by other residential properties. Noise during construction can affect amenity, however this would be short term only for the construction of 10 houses and the hours of construction can be controlled by condition to ensure that works are undertaken at appropriate times of the day.

6.7.5 The impact of lights from cars accessing the site will only affect no.5 Bridgewater Street’s ground floor windows, this can be mitigated through appropriate fencing on the boundary and also needs to be considered in the context of the adjacent access to Tesco which is used by cars, buses and large delivery vehicles. The impact of the 10 parking spaces for these properties and the associated traffic movements associated with residential occupation is not considered to result in unacceptable impact on the amenities of this property. Overall it is considered that the development will not result in a significant or unacceptable impact on the amenities of the existing residential properties around the application site.

6.8 Highways, access, parking and rights of way 6.8.1 Paragraph 32 of the NPPF advises that developments that generate significant amounts of traffic should be supported by a Transport Statement and promotes sustainable modes of travel, safe accesses and improvements to existing transport networks. Core Strategy Policy CS6 states that proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic should be located in accessible locations where opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel to be reduced.

6.8.2 The application is for 10 dwellings, 4 of which are two bed apartments and the other 6 are two bed terrace houses. The site is within close proximity of the town centre and the bus station and within the development boundary for Whitchurch. The application as originally submitted proposed 20 parking spaces, 2 per unit. During the consideration of the application this level of parking was reduced to 16

Page 68

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

space, then further reduced to 10 spaces. As such the development proposed is not considered to generate significant levels of traffic and is located in an accessible location with good opportunities for walking etc.

6.8.3 The amended proposal (plan to be provided) will show 10 parking spaces, which equates to 1 space per dwelling and also retains access to the existing parking area for the adjacent property. The reduction in the level of parking spaces to be provided was as a result of objections from the Council Highway Officer. The objection was based on the close proximity of the junction for the housing with the junction to Tesco. Although this access is existing it currently only serves one dwelling and although there is consent for two other dwellings off this access this would have limited the level of traffic movements. The Council Highway Officer was concerned about the level of development proposed and the potential for driver confusion created by the complex turning movements and also due to the limited width of the access not providing sufficient space for simultaneous movements of vehicles.

6.8.4 It was recommended that access should be provided off the access road into Tesco; however the agent has confirmed that this is not possible due to land ownership and other legal agreements between the Council and Tesco. The agent has therefore reduced the level of parking to what the Housing Association who will own the properties advise is the minimum acceptable to them. The agent has also sought to provide additional information to show that the level of vehicle trips will be low due to the affordable status of the housing and its proximity to the town.

6.8.5 The Council Highway Officer has advised that concerns remain about the access issues but that they note the sustainable location and potential impact of this on trip generation. As such the Highway Officer has advised that they are still unable to support the application but acknowledge that there is benefit from affordable housing. Overall it is considered that the strength of the Highway Officer objection has reduced with the reduction in parking spaces, there remains concerns and the potential for conflict is a harm that will result from the development but it is a matter for members to determine what weight to give to this harm in the overall planning balance. Officers advice is that the harm is acknowledged but that the trip generation will be reduced by the sustainable location and that the benefit of providing affordable housing within the town should be given substantial weight. As such it is officers opinion that the benefits of this scheme outweigh the harm.

6.9 Ecology and trees 6.9.1 The NPPF and policy CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy require consideration to be given to the impact of the proposed development on the natural environment. This particularly relates to the impact on statutorily protected species and habitats and existing trees and landscaping. A protected species survey has been undertaken and submitted with the application and this has been considered by the Council Ecologist.

6.9.2 The applicant’s ecology survey notes the locally recorded species (bats, otter, water vole and great crested newt) and the on site conditions of sycamore coppice, isolated from other green spaces, and its relationship to the Staggs Brook. No ponds were identified within 500m of the site and as such no further

Page 69

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

work was considered necessary with regard to GCN, Staggs Brook is in close proximity but with a hard surfaced and well used car park in between and the site is acknowledged to be existing woodland. The report therefore recommends further survey work for bats, removal of the trees outside of the bird nesting season and that no impact is expected on the water vole, otter or GCN populations. It recommends the provision of bat boxes, artificial bird nests and new landscape planting to mitigate the loss of the trees.

6.9.3 As noted at section 4 above, the Council Ecologist has requested the additional bat survey work be undertaken and submitted for consideration prior to the determination of the application or that the application be refused on the grounds of insufficient information to assess the impact on bats. The agent has confirmed that their ecologist has been instructed to carry out the bat survey but that this needs to be done between May and August. The surveys are being carried out and it is hoped that the report can be available before the committee meeting. However, at present the recommendation reflects that this information is not yet available and will need to be considered by the Council Ecologist. Should the survey results be acceptable consent can be granted, should they show an unacceptable impact consent can be refused.

6.9.4 A tree survey has also been submitted which notes that the trees on site are mostly sycamores with the boundary planted with Viburnum, Norway Maple and Cotoneaster. There is also Ash, Yew and Hawthorn which the surveyor considers is the remnants of an older hedgerow and that there is very limited understorey vegetation due to the extent of the tree canopy and the remains of rubble and a redundant drainage system from the previous use of the site. The application proposes the removal of all of the trees and only two small replacement trees and the planting of a hedge on the boundary of the site. This is acknowledged to be an environmental harm resulting from the development, however the agent considers that this should be weighed against the economic and social benefits of the proposed scheme.

6.9.5 The Town Council have raised concerns about the loss of the trees and have noted that there are TPO’s on the site. This has been queried with the Council Tree Officer who had advised, following receipt of the submitted tree survey, that none of the trees are TPO’d, none are worthy of TPO status and that there was no objection to the removal of all of the trees on the site as noted under section 4 above.

6.10 Drainage 6.10.1 Policy CS18 ‘Sustainable Water Management’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should integrate measures of sustainable water management to reduce flood risk and avoid an adverse impact on water quality and quantity.

6.10.2 A small part of the site is within the area identified within flood zone 2 on the Environment Agency Flood maps, however this does not include any of the built development and would only affect the landscaped frontage to plot 10. The property has separate means of access to the rear of the property and along a path to the rear of the gardens which will provide dry means of access. The Council Drainage Engineer has confirmed that a FRA could be submitted post

Page 70

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

decision and dealt with by condition and has also recommended conditions relating to surface water.

6.10.3 Foul drainage is to be connected to the existing mains drainage system and no objections have been received regarding this matter. The development of 10 small properties on the site would not result in a significant increase in foul drainage and there is no evidence of capacity issues in this part of Whitchurch.

6.10.4 Accordingly it is considered that, subject to conditions, there is a technical solution to the foul and surface water drainage of the proposed development which would comply with the infrastructure capacity requirements of policy CS6 and the surface water drainage requirements of CS18.

6.11 Other matters 6.11.1 Whitchurch Town Council have also raised concerns that the process has not been carried out correctly as land ownership is unknown and therefore notice has not been served. However, during consideration of the application the agent has confirmed the land ownership which is partly with the applicant and partly with Shropshire Council, with the neighbour having a right of access across the site. Notice has been served on the Council and as such it is considered that the correct procedure has been followed.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The application proposes 10 affordable dwellings within the development boundary of Whitchurch in close proximity and walking distance of the services and facilities within the town including the bus station. The principle of developing the site for housing has been established with the previous consent and accords with the saved policies of the North Shropshire Local Plan, the Shropshire Core Strategy and the NPPF and also with the forthcoming SAMDev policies.

7.2 It is considered that the layout, scale and design of the dwellings, which could be improved to further enhance the conservation area, is acceptable in its amended form to not have a harmful impact and that the Council has given special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area as required by Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The layout of the development is not considered to unacceptably affect the amenities of existing residential properties or the potential future use of the adjacent chapel building. The layout is not considered to be overdevelopment when assessed against the context of the surrounding built form.

7.3 Subject to further information regarding bats it is considered likely that conditions can mitigate against the impact on protected species and the exiting trees are not considered to be significant or warrant protection. Furthermore the redevelopment of the site is considered to provide visual enhancement to the immediate area by tidying up the existing overgrown brownfield site and any potential archaeological interest can be understood and recorded through an appropriate watching brief, subject to a condition on the consent.

7.4 The potential for driver confusion and conflict due to the close proximity of the access proposed to be used for the housing with other adjacent access points,

Page 71

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

including the access to Tesco, is noted as a harm resulting from the development. However, the level of parking has been reduced and it is considered that the sustainable location of the site will help to encourage other means of transport other than the private car. Furthermore, it is considered that substantial weight should be given to the 100% affordable scheme as providing much needed affordable housing in the town. The recommendation is therefore finely balanced in favour of development of affordable housing whilst acknowledging the access issues identified by the Council Highway Officer.

8.0 RISK ASSESSMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES APPRAISAL 8.1 Risk Management There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:

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 six weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose first arose.

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.

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.

Page 72

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 9.1 There are likely financial implications of the decision and/or imposition of conditions if 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. Local financial considerations are capable of being taken into account when determining this planning application – in so far as they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for the decision maker.

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies National Planning Policy Framework CS6 - Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS10 - Managed Release of housing Land CS17 - Environmental Networks CS18 - Sustainable Water Management CS3 - The Market Towns and Other Key Centres

Relevant planning history:

13/02030/FUL Erection of two semi detached dwellings GRANT 20th December 2013 12/05205/FUL Erection of a terrace of 3 dwellings landscaping and associated carparking REFUSE 3rd April 2013 13/02030/FUL Erection of two semi detached dwellings GRANT 20th December 2013

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 Thomas Biggins Cllr Peggy Mullock

Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Page 73

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (As amended).

2. 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.

3. No construction and/or demolition work shall commence outside of the following hours: Monday to Friday 07:30 to 18:00, Saturday 08:00 to 13:00. No works shall take place on Sundays and bank holidays.

Reason: to protect the health and wellbeing of residents in the area.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMENCES

4. No development shall take place until a scheme of foul drainage, and surface water drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before the development is occupied/brought into use (which ever is the sooner).

Reason: The condition is a pre-commencement condition to ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding.

5. As part of the site lies within an area at risk of flooding a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is required prior to the commencement of the development. The FRA shall be completed using Shropshire Council's Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) documents for guidance. The SFRAs are available on the Shropshire Council website. The criteria for a FRA are set out in National Planning Policy Framework and the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework. Reference should also be made to the Environment Agency West Area (Midlands) Flood Risk Assessment Guidance notes.

A FRA should include, as a minimum: - Assessment of the Fluvial flooding (from watercourses) - Surface water flooding (from overland flows originating from both inside and outside the development site) - Groundwater flooding - Flooding from artificial drainage systems (from a public sewerage system, for example)

Page 74

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

- Flooding due to infrastructure failure (from a blocked culvert, for example)

Reason: To ensure that all potential flood risk to the development has been addressed.

6. Prior to the commencement of the development, including any works of demolition, a Construction Method Statement shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Reason: This detail is required prior to commencement to avoid congestion in the surrounding area and to protect the amenities of the area.

7. No development approved by this permission shall commence until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a phased programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (WSI). This written scheme shall be approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works.

Reason: The development site is known to have archaeological interest

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION/PRIOR TO THE OCCUPATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

8. Prior to the above ground works commencing samples and/or details of the roofing materials and the materials to be used in the construction of the external walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the development is satisfactory.

9. Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings details of five artificial nests suitable for small birds such as robin, blackbird, tit species, sparrow and swallow shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of the dwelling/ building.

Reason: To ensure the provision of nesting opportunities for wild birds

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

10. The affordable housing units for rent shall be advertised through the Shropshire Choice Based Letting scheme, and allocated through the Shropshire Housing Allocation Policy and Scheme.

Reason: To ensure that all affordable properties are advertised to local people and that the Shropshire Housing Allocation Policy and Scheme (in combination with any local lettings plan or section 106 agreement) is applied in allocating the affordable properties for rent.

Page 75

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 8 – 5 Bridgewater Street Whitchurch

11. In addition to the requirements of the Shropshire Affordable Housing Allocation Policy and Scheme, all lettings by Registered Providers shall meet the local connection and/or cascade requirements set out in the Shropshire Type and Affordability of Housing SPD or any policy or guidance that may from time to time replace it.

Reason: To ensure compliance with Shropshire Core Strategy Policy

12. The dwellings shall not be let or occupied other than either:- a. under a tenancy in accordance with the normal letting policy of a Registered Provider; or b. by way of a Shared Ownership lease or equity share arrangement whereby the occupier cannot progress to or achieve a share greater than 80% of the whole; and/or c. by way of discounted sale price secured through a restriction on the Land Registry title of the dwelling providing that the development has been made in accordance with the Council's "Cross-Subsidy" model for exception site housing in accordance with the relevant provisions given in Appendix G of the Supplementary Planning Document.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the requirements of Shropshire

Page 76

Agenda Item 9

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 9

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/04168/OUT Parish: Ruyton XI Towns

Proposal : Outline application for the erection of 2 no. dwellings to include means of access

Site Address : Proposed Residential Development West Of Darlee Cottage Brownhill Ruyton XI Towns Shropshire

Applicant : Mr & Mrs B Grainger

Case Officer : Mark Perry email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 339775 - 322254

Page 77 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

Recommendation:- Grant Permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 subject to the applicant entering into a S106 to secure an affordable housing contribution.

REPORT

1. 0 THE PROPOSAL

1.1 The submitted application is for outline planning consent for the erection of two dwellings. The applicant is only seeking to establish the principle of erecting two dwellings on the site and the means of access. The appearance, landscaping, layout and scale are all reserved for later approval.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION

2.1 The site is located within the Ruyton XI Towns development boundary. The application site covers an area of 0.2 hectares and sits between the B4397, which passes through the centre of the village, and the River Perry to the north. The land drops away steeply from the road before it levels out close to the river’s banks. There is a drop of approximately 14 metres between the road and the land next to the river. The northern boundary of the site just clips flood zones 2 and 3, although the vast majority of the flood zone is to the northern side of the river.

2.2 To the east of the site there is the applicant’s property (Darlee Cottage) which is located adjacent to, but well below the passing highway from where only its rooftop is visible. Access to Darlee Cottage is by a stepped path from a parking area located at the same level as the highway. Access to the application site is currently possible from a gravel track leading away from the parking area referred to above, which traverses the hillside. This same access also leads towards the self-catering holiday chalet operated by the applicant.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION

3.1 The Parish Council have objected to the application and the Local Member considers that the scheme raises material planning issues which should be considered by the committee. The matter has been discussed by the Principal Planning Officer, Chair and Vice Chair of the planning committee who have agreed that the issues raised are material and that the application should be considered by the committee.

4.0 Community Representations

- Consultee Comments

4.1 Parish Council - At the Ruyton XI Towns parish council meeting on 11th May 2015 The councillors noted the changes to the application and the SC Highways comments which it endorses but these do not affect the Parish Councils original decision to oppose the application.

Page 78

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

1. It conflicts with OBC policies H13; which is now encapsulated into Shropshire Councils CS6;and also conflicts with CS11; 2. Recent remedial work in the area suggests that a structural survey might be appropriate to ensure safe development; 3. The proposed development is out of character with existing properties on Brownhill. 4. There are issues of sustainability as outlined in NPPF; paragraphs 7;14 and 109 which do not support the development.

4.2 SC Affordable Housing – Core Strategy Policy CS11 requires all open market residential development to contribute to the provision of affordable housing. If this development is considered to be acceptable then in accordance with the adopted Policy any consent would need to be subject to a Section 106 Agreement requiring an affordable housing contribution. The contribution will need to accord with the requirements of the SPD Type and Affordability of Housing.

4.3 SC Drainage – The drainage details, plan and calculations could be conditioned and submitted for approval at the reserved matters stage if outline planning permission were to be granted, with the conditions being found in full in the planning file.

4.4 SC Ecology - No objection subject to conditions and informative

4.5 SC Highways - No objections subject to condition requiring provision of visibility splays.

4.6 Community responses Comments received from 4 individuals (3 objections, 1 support) commenting on the following issues:

• Ground stability • Access to existing log cabin retained. • Impact on street scene • Development does not protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment. • Impact on highways safety • Local traffic includes 10% HGVs • Dwellings not accessible to old/ disabled persons • No demand for more houses with sites in the village undeveloped • Scheme does not meet manual for streets guidance • Loss of trees

• Size is of sufficient size to accommodate 2 dwelling • Suggest condition that the ridge of the dwellings shall not be more than 2 metres above level of the road

Page 79

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

Principle of development Siting, scale and design of structure Visual impact and landscaping Ecological Impact Highway Safety

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL

6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 The site is situated adjacent to the main road passing through Ruyton XI Towns. The application site is within the development boundary on the proposals map of the Adopted Oswestry Borough Local Plan, the development boundary extends down to the edge of the River Perry which passes to the northern side of Ruyton XI Towns. Ruyton XI Towns is being promoted as a community hub within the emerging SAMDev and no changes to the position of the development boundary are proposed. SAMDev proposes that the village will provide for sustainable development of around 15 dwellings by infilling, small groups of houses and conversions on suitable sites within the development boundary.

6.1.2 Under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, all planning applications must be determined in accordance with the adopted development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Since the adoption of the Council’s Core Strategy the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has been published and is a material consideration that needs to be given weight in the determination of planning applications. The NPPF advises that proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF constitutes guidance for local planning authorities as a material consideration to be given significant weight in determining applications.

6.1.3 The emerging ‘Site Allocations and Management of Development’ Plan (SAMDev) has been submitted to the Planning Inspector with the examination in public held in in December 2014. SAMDev has not yet been adopted and does not yet hold full weight. Paragraph 216 of the NPPF indicates that the ‘weight’ that can be attached to relevant policies in emerging plans such as the SAMDev depends on the stage of preparation, extent of unresolved objections, and degree of consistency with the NPPF. The Council’s view is that the SAMDev Plan has reached a point, being settlement and site specific and having undergone very substantial public consultation, where weight can be attached but, pending adoption, this needs to be considered with care alongside the other material considerations.

6.1.4 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that:

Page 80

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

• Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in [the]Framework taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in [the] Framework indicate development should be restricted.’

With regards to housing development paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that:

‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development’.

and that

‘Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.’

6.1.6 In this intervening period between submission and adoption, sustainable sites for housing where any adverse impacts do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development will still have a strong presumption in favour of permission under the NPPF, as the 5 year housing supply is a minimum requirement and the NPPF aim of significantly boosting housing supply remains a material consideration. Officers consider that it would be difficult to defend a refusal for a site which is considered to constitute sustainable development unless the adverse impacts of granting consent would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits (as outlined in paragraph 14 of the NPPF).

6.1.7 In this instance the site is within the development boundary shown in the adopted Local Plan and is proposed to remain so as part of SAMDev. The principle issue for consideration therefore is whether the development is sustainable or not when considered against the NPPF as a whole. The balance of material considerations is still in favour of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable. The key factor in determining this proposal is therefore assessing whether the proposal would represent sustainable development and whether there would be any significant impact or harm as a result of the proposed development that would outweigh the benefits. This will be considered in the paragraphs below.

6.2 Assessment of Sustainability 6.2.1 Policy CS6, amongst a range of considerations, requires proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic to be located in accessible locations where opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and

Page 81

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

the need for car based travel to be reduced. Policy CS7 states that a sustainable pattern of development requires the maintenance and improvement of integrated, attractive, safe and reliable communication and transport infrastructure and services. Policy CS9 states that development that provides additional dwellings or employment premises will help deliver more sustainable communities by making contributions to local infrastructure in proportion to its scale and the sustainability of its location.

6.2.2 The proposed site will result in residential development being located within the Ruyton XI Towns development boundary; a village that has already been demonstrated as being sustainable by its identification as a community hub and its commitment to providing further dwellings. The site will have easy access onto the main road which has a roadside pavement to enable occupants to access the local facilities including a primary school, convenience shop, public house, village hall, recreation facilities, church, local bus service and employment opportunities on foot. It is therefore considered that the site is situated in a sustainable location with regard to accessibility and proximity to essential day to day services and a range of facilities and employment opportunities without over reliance on the private motor car.

6.2.3 However ‘sustainable development’ is not solely about accessibility and proximity to essential services but the NPPF states that it is ‘about positive growth – making economic, environmental and social progress for this and future generations’. In paragraph 7 of the NPPF it states that these three dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of roles:

6.3 Economic Consideration 6.3.1 The proposal will, to a small extent, help boost the supply of housing in Shropshire and will provide employment during the construction phase of the development supporting builders and building suppliers. The provision of additional houses will also support local businesses as future occupiers are likely to access and use local services and facilities helping them to remain viable. The provision of more homes will create a stimulus to the economy and address the housing shortage. The proposal will also be liable for a CIL payment which will provide financial

Page 82

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

contributions towards infrastructure and opportunities identified in the Place Plan.

6.3.2 Objectors have commented on the impact the development will have on the existing self-catering chalet run by the applicant as the proposed dwellings would affect the access to the chalet. The loss of holiday accommodation would be an economic harm as tourism contributes to the local economy. The applicant’s agent has confirmed that it is the intention of the applicant to continue operating the holiday accommodation and that its access arrangements could be included within the reserved matters application. In any case the applicant could cease the use of the holiday let at any time should they choose as such officers advise that the impact on the development on the holiday use is awarded little weight in consideration of this application.

6.4 Social Considerations 6.4.1 The proposal will provide 2 houses which will help to boost the supply of open market housing. The proposal will provide an affordable housing contribution at the prevailing rate at the time of the reserved matters application. The current rate of 10% would provide an affordable housing contribution to be spent on local affordable housing. Villages need to expand in a controlled manner in order to provide support for and maintain the level of services and facilities available in the village and surrounding area. The NPPF positively encourages the siting of housing in settlements where it will support facilities helping to retain services and enhancing the vitality of rural communities. Providing housing that will support and maintain existing facilities will benefit both the existing and future residents and help meet the needs of present and future generations.

6.5 Environmental Considerations 6.5.1 The application sits adjacent to the road. The ground level falls away steeply before levelling out closer the edge of the river. The site affords views across the river and out across open farm land which is crossed by a public footpath which is around 240 metres from the edge of the application site. The view of Ruyton XI Towns from the footpath consists of dwellings interspersed along, up and on top of the steep hillside. Existing dwellings are varied in their design and scale; ranging from small two-storey cottages to larger split level properties which respond to their hillside setting and their gardens are partially screened by the varied trees and vegetation. Whilst the site is attractive and has character because of the way it falls away from the road providing view across the surrounding farm land it has no heritage, cultural or ecological designation. It is considered that the loss of this piece of land is not significant and the proposal would not result in any adverse ecological or environmental implications. The site contains a mix of trees and shrubs and some of which need to be removed to allow the development of the site. The applicant has stated that suitable distances between the proposed dwellings and mature trees can be maintained to ensure their roots and crowns are unaffected. This impact can be considered at the reserved matters stage when the scale and location of the dwellings is known. The proposal would also help contribute to a low carbon economy as the site is reasonably accessible on foot or by cycle to local services and facilities and by public transport to the range of services and facilities in the adjacent village.

6.5.2 Accompanying the planning application is a Phase 1 Environmental Survey which has been assessed and accepted by the Council’s Ecologist. The survey concludes

Page 83

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

that the proposed development is unlikely to impact current biodiversity on the site. The Council’s Ecologist has suggested a number of planning conditions which includes the protection of a 7 metre wide buffer along the edge of the river during the construction phase.

6.5.3 The balance of material consideration remains one of boosting housing supply in locations that are considered to be sustainable. Ruyton XI Towns as a whole has been identified as being sustainable settlement by its proposed designation as a community hub in SAMDev. The proposed site is considered to be in accordance with the sustainable objectives that are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework by providing economic, social and environmental benefits. Accordingly, it is considered that the principle of a residential development in this location is acceptable.

6.2 Siting, scale and design of structure 6.2.1 The applicant is only seeking to establish the principle of a two dwelling development and its means of access. At this stage the plans showing the proposed dwellings are only indicative to show how the site could be developed. Whilst the plans are only indicative it is clear that to develop the site would require substantial earthworks and engineering to provide a useable parking and turning area and to provide the dwellings. The indicative layout shows the parking area and garage adjacent to the highway would require the making up of ground levels and the dwelling provided slightly lower. From the road the dwelling would appear as a dormer bungalow but from the river side it would be three and a half storeys as it responds to the hillside. This is a very similar arrangement to the neighbouring dwelling to the east called Riverbank House. Whilst the construction of two dwelling on the site is likely to be a significant engineering operation which will need to take into consideration the stability of the land, it is considered that it can be achieved, and could, subject to an appropriate design and scale, be in keeping with character and appearance of the area. The scale, appearance and layout of the proposed dwellings would only be fully considered upon submission of a reserved matters application.

6.3 Impact on Neighbours 6.3.1 The nearest neighbours are the applicant property (Darlee Cottage) to the north, Hazel Nut Cottage to the west and on the opposite side of the road there is a property called Red Rocks which is slightly elevated above the road. Whilst the details provided at this outline stage are only indicative, they do show that it is possible to develop the site for two dwellings without impacting on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

6.4 Highway Safety 6.4.1 Following the initial comments by the Council’s Highways Officer the proposed access arrangements have been revised so that the access to the two new dwellings is via the existing access instead of requiring a new separate access and a new gap being created in the existing roadside sandstone wall. This will require the deepening of the existing access and the removal of the existing gates to allow vehicles to enter the site unimpeded. The applicant has demonstrated that visibility splays measuring 2.4 by 60 metres can be provided in both directions which ensure that drivers leaving the site have adequate visibility towards oncoming vehicles. The new shared access will continue to be used for the parking of vehicles on the

Page 84

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

existing area of hardstanding.

6.4.2 It is considered by Officers that the proposed development can be served by an appropriate means of access which would not cause any harm to the safety of highway users.

6.5 Affordable Housing 6.5.1 A S106 will secure a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing in accordance with the Shropshire Viability Index as set out in the adopted SPD.

6.5.2 Officers note the recent Ministerial statement and amendments to the National Planning Practice Guidance as a material consideration in determining a planning application. However, following a subsequent decision by the Cabinet of the Council, the Council continues to give full weight to Policy CS11 of the adopted Core Strategy and Type and Affordability of Housing SPD and continues to seek on site provision of affordable housing and/or developer contributions to the provision of affordable housing in relation to all sites (please see the public statement of the Council ‘as published on the website 30/01/15’)

6.5.3 Given the above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted only subject to the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement to secure the provision of affordable housing in accordance with the terms of the policy. Non compliance with the requirements of adopted Core Strategy Policy CS11 would mean that the proposal would be in clear conflict with the aims and requirements of the Development Plan and should therefore be refused, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The site is within the current Ruyton XI Towns development boundary and accords with paragraphs 7 and 8 of the NPPF where a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Although the Council has now demonstrated that it has 5 years worth of housing land the NPPF must still be awarded significant weight given the age of the North Shropshire Local Plan policies.

7.2 It is considered that the site is of a sufficient size to accommodate two dwellings and would not result in an unacceptable form of development within the village. It is considered that the site could be developed so that it has no adverse environmental effects, impact upon neighbours or detrimentally effects the safety of highway users. The detailed, appearance, landscaping, and scale designs would be considered at the reserved matters stage.

8.0 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, i.e. written

Page 85

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

representations, hearing or inquiry.  The decision may be 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 made a) promptly and b) in any event not later than six weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose.

8.2 Human Rights

Article 8 gives 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.

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 1990.

9.0 Financial Implications

There are likely financial implications if 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 dependent on the scale and nature of the proposal. Local financial considerations are capable of being taken into account when determining this planning application – insofar as they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for the decision maker.

Page 86

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

Central Government Guidance:

West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Policies:

Core Strategy and Saved Policies:

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: OS/03/12690/FUL Proposed garage and fitness studio REFUSE 12th August 2003 OS/03/12894/FUL Erection of double garage/studio GRANT 4th December 2003 OS/06/14498/FUL Alterations and extensions to dwelling GRANT 12th September 2006

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 Nick Bardsley

Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Page 87

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. Approval of the details of the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the development and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved.

2. Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

3. The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

4. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the deposited plans and drawings as amended by the revised plan Numbers SA16214-01 Rev A and SA16214- 02 Rev A received on 7th May 2015, these plans do not purport to grant consent for the scale, layout etc of the dwellings shown.

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

5. The first reserved matters application shall include the submission of an arboricultural impact assessment.

Reason: To enable full consideration of the development and its impact upon existing trees.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMENCES

6. Prior to the commencement of development the access alterations shown indicatively on drawing SA16214/02 Rev A together with 2.4 x 60 metres visibility splays and the setting back of any access gates a minimum distance of 5.0 metres from the highway boundary shall be fully implemented in accordance with a specification to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 88

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 9 Darlee Cottage, Ruyton XI Towns

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

7. No development shall take place until a scheme of foul drainage, and surface water drainage has been submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before the development is occupied.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding.

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

8. A total of 2 woodcrete artificial nests suitable for small birds such as robin, blackbird, tit species, sparrow and swallow shall be erected on the site prior to first occupation of the buildings hereby permitted.

Reason: To ensure the provision of nesting opportunities for wild birds

9. Prior to the commencement of work on site a minimum 7m buffer shall be fenced off parallel to the banks along the length of the water course, put in place within the site to protect the watercourse during construction works. No access, material storage or ground disturbance should occur within the buffer zone.

Reason: To protect features of recognised nature conservation importance.

Page 89

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 90 Agenda Item 10

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 10

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 15/00566/REM Parish: St Martins

Proposal : Approval of reserved matters (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to permission 14/01390/OUT for the erection of eight dwellings and two bungalows

Site Address : Proposed Residential Development West Of Cottage Lane St Martins Shropshire

Applicant : Mr Steve Jennings

Case Officer : Mark Perry email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 332764 - 336579

Page 91 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

Recommendation:- Grant Permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL

1.1 The submitted application seeks reserved matters approval for the erection of 8 dwellings and 2 bungalows. The access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale are all being considered under this reserved matters application.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTI ON

2.1 The site is located on the edge of St Martins, just outside, but adjoining the existing development boundary which runs along its eastern edge. To the north there is a separate triangular parcel of land which has an agricultural use and does not form part of this application nor is it within the ownership of the applicant. The development fronts onto Cottage Lane which beyond the housing estate to the east narrows to a single carriageway width. The land is currently in agricultural use and sits behind a mature roadside hedgerow. A public footpath is at the southern tip of the site which then heads in a south westerly direction away from the application site.

2.2 The site already benefits from outline planning permission which was granted on the 5 th February 2015 under delegated powers (application no. 14/01390/OUT). The outline planning permission only established the principle of a residential development on the site; it did not specify either the number or the types of dwellings.

3.0 REA SON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION

3.1 The Parish Council have objected to the scheme and the local Ward Member has asked that the application be considered by the Planning Committee. The Chair/ Vice Chair consider that the application warrant consideration by the planning committee.

4.0 Community Representations Objections received from 5 individual addresses commenting on the following issues: • Site is outside the development boundary • Access is onto a single carriageway • Increased number of vehicle movements • Walking route to school is unsafe • This site could lead to further development • Impact of vehicles on old buildings

Page 92

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

• The village already has plans for a further 200 dwellings • Road junction with Ellesmere road cannot be improved

Cons ultee Comments 4.1 Parish Council - St Martins Parish Council strongly objects to this application on the following grounds; enormous number of inaccuracies in application, concern over how this site is increasing in numbers by each submission, dangerous junction onto Ellesmere Road from Cottage Lane which cannot be improved and concern that Shropshire Councils Highway Officers raise no objections to the application, vehicle access from a single track lane, not included in the SAMDev by the parish council and concern that the road disappears into a field at the end of the proposed development which could lead to further development in the future. The Parish Council also object to the fact that the "road" is described as a Tarmac drive and as such would not be to highway standards - despite the application being for 12 houses. It also has no street light.

Highways - No objection subject to conditions

Rights of Way - No objection subject to the right of way remaining open during the construction works

Affordable Housing - The affordable housing rate suggested satisfies the provisions of the SPD Type and Affordability of Housing.

Waste Management - It is vital new homes have adequate storage space to contain wastes for a fortnightly collection (including separate storage space for compostable and source segregated recyclable material). Also crucial is that they have regard for the large vehicles utilised for collecting waste and that the highway specification is suitable to facilitate the safe and efficient collection of waste.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

Principle of development Siting, scale and design of structure Visual impact and landscaping Highway Safety Impact on Neighbours

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 The principle of residential development on this site has been accepted with the grant of outline planning permission 14/01390/OUT where the access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the development were reserved for later approval. Whilst the access to the site was a reserved matter, conditions attached to the outline consent did require the provision of a footpath and improvements to be made to the existing highway which included alterations to the Cottage Lane

Page 93

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

junction with the B5068. Also covered by conditions attached to the outline consent were matters relating to protected species and the drainage of the site. The consent was also accompanied by a S106 to secure an affordable housing payment to be made in accordance with the adopted Supplementary Planning Document.

6.1.2 Members are advised that they should not be considering the principle of a residential development on the site as this has already been established by the outline planning consent. Instead, the issues for consideration should relate solely to the reserved matters i.e. access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale.

6.1.3 A number of representations received have commented on how the plan submitted as part of the outline application showed a scheme of 8 dwellings. At the outline stage this plan was only an indicative layout to show one option of how the site could be developed. The layout or the number of dwellings did not form any part of the outline planning permission and was not considered at that time.

6.2 Siting, scale and d esign of structure 6.2.1 The plans originally submitted with this reserved matters application showed a scheme of 12 semi-detached, two storey dwellings with two separate accesses onto Cottage Lane. Following the comments made by members of the public, the Parish Council and in negotiation with Planning Officers, the scheme has been reduced to 10 properties which consist of 8 semi-detached dwellings, two detached bungalows and a single point of access into the site from Cottage Lane.

6.2.2 The revised scheme shows a single point of access to the site from which leads onto two small cul-de-sacs. The two bungalows would be on the entrance to the site with the remainder of the properties fronting onto the cul-de-sac. The bungalows would have 3 bedrooms and the two-storey dwellings would be equally split between 3 and 2 bed properties. The 3 bed properties would also have attached single garages. It is considered that the proposed development would provide a good mix of dwelling types which are of a size that are likely to make them more affordable to local people.

6.2.3 All of the properties are of a simple design but do include some design features such as bay windows and lean-to pitched porch canopies which provide some visual interest to the development.

6.2.4 The density of the development is comparable to existing neighbouring development and all of the dwellings would be provided with good sized rear gardens and two off road parking spaces. The scheme also includes two areas of landscaping at its entrance. It is considered by Officers that the density of the development is appropriate for its edge of village location and that it would not create a visually unsympathetic edge to the settlement.

6.2.5 The single point of access now requires only a limited amount of the roadside hedgerow to be removed. The hedgerow helps to soften the visual impact of the proposed development on the approach to the village and preserves some of the lane’s character. The proposed development will introduce a built form onto a site that is currently open agricultural land. The existing site is almost entirely screened

Page 94

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

by the roadside hedgerow with the exception of a small gap where a gate provides access to the public right of way. From the road there are already glimpses of the roof tops of existing dwellings in St Martins and the dwelling named Windy Ridge. Windy Ridge is located in an elevated position just outside the northern most part of the site and is clearly visible. Whilst the proposal will introduce new development is it not considered that there would be a significant detrimental impact upon the character of the immediate area. The two dwellings closest to Cottage Lane are now both proposed to be bungalows. Due to their low height these will be significantly obscured by the mature roadside hedgerow, it would also provide a more gradual transition in the height of the development away from the road and towards the existing housing estates to the north and west. The proposed bungalows would have casement and bay windows on their gable ends to avoid any blank and therefore bland elevations fronting onto the road.

6.2.6 To the south of the site there is a public right of way which heads away from the site in a westerly direction across the adjacent field. The right of way would not be affected by the proposed dwellings.

6.3 Visual impact and landscaping 6.3.1 The environmental role of sustainability, as set out in the NPPF, was considered at the outline application stage. Now that definitive plans and dwelling details have been provided this can now be considered further as part of this reserved matters application. The key issue is now whether the proposed development would be harmful to the intrinsic character of the area or cause harm to the landscape setting of the village. The proposed development would result in the loss of a small field which is of some value; however this field does not make any specific or substantial contribution to the character of the area and does not have any specific designation or protection. It is considered that the feature of the site which currently makes the biggest contribution to the character of the area is the mature roadside hedge which mirrors the hedge on the opposite side of the lane. The scheme as proposed allows the majority of this road side hedgerow to be retained where it will provide the southern boundary to some of the proposed dwellings. A condition will be imposed to ensure that this hedgerow is appropriately protected during the construction phase and thereafter retained and maintained.

6.3.2 The development of the site for 10 dwellings will alter the character of this part of the lane but any new residential development would be seen against a back drop of other dwellings and would not appear either out of keeping or as an isolated residential development. The applicant has included two areas of planting on the entrance to the site; it is considered that this will help to soften the appearance of development helping it to integrate with its surroundings.

6.4 Highway Safety 6.4.1 The scheme originally submitted included two separate accesses into the site. Following comments from the local community, highways and planning officers and the Council’s Waste Management team the scheme has been amended to a single access. The junction of the cul-de-sacs would also be to a high enough specification to allow refuse vehicles to turn within the site.

6.4.2 As part of the outline planning approval conditions 5, 6 and 7 required details of

Page 95

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

highway improvements to be approved prior to the commencement of development on the site. The works required include the provision of a footway to the site frontage, localised widening of Cottage Lane and improvements at the junction of Cottage Lane with the B5068. These details will be subject to a formal discharge of condition application however the applicant has already worked up a scheme for these improvements which has been agreed by the Council’s Highways Officer.

6.4.3 The proposed development would increase the number of vehicle travelling along Cottage Lane, this is an issue that has been voiced by the local community. It is considered by Officers that the number of likely vehicle movements from a residential development of 10 units would not result in conditions that would be detrimental to highway safety when combined with the required highway improvements. The highway improvements, especially those for the junction into Cottage Lane, would also benefit existing highway users by increasing the available visibility for vehicle users.

6.5 Impact on Neighbours 6.5.1 The site does not share any of its boundaries with the neighbouring housing estates other than at its north western corner. The exception is the shared boundary with the detached dwelling to the east called Windy Ridge. This existing property sits in an elevated position with the rear elevation facing directly across the northern section of the site; all of the proposed dwellings will sit on lower ground. It is considered that the erection of 8 dwellings and 2 bungalows on the site would not have any detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Representations received have commented how this the site will lead to the land to the north also being developed in the future. It is Officer’s understanding is that the applicant does not own this land. However, should a planning application be submitted in the adjacent land it will need to be considered on its individual merits at that time.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The principle of a housing development on the site was established by the previous granting of outline planning permission and therefore this application is only to consider the reserved matters. It is considered that whilst the scheme would result in the loss of an existing greenfield and the loss of some hedgerow it would provide a mix of dwelling types which are likely to be in demand and affordable to local people, in a sustainable location. The layout of the site has allowed the existing roadside hedgerow to be largely retained with the exception of the opening needed for the access. This in turn preserves the character of this stretch of Cottage Lane and provides a significant screen to both the proposed development and the existing development beyond.

7.2 The proposed access and the highway improvements approved at the outline stage would ensure that there would not be any detrimental impact upon the safety of highways users or pedestrians.

7.3 It is considered that the development is of an appropriate design, scale and density and would not have any detrimental impact on amenities of neighbouring occupiers of the character and appearance of the locality.

Page 96

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

8.0 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, i.e. written representations, hearing or inquiry. The decision may be 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 made a) promptly and b) in any event not later than six weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose.

8.2 Human Rights

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.

9.0 Financial Implications

There are likely financial implications if the decision and / or imposition of conditions is challenged by a planning appeal or judicial review. The costs of

Page 97

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

defending any decision will be met by the authority and will vary dependent on the scale and nature of the proposal. Local financial considerations are capable of being taken into account when determining this planning application – insofar as they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for the decision maker.

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

Central Government Guidance: National Planning Policy Framework

Core Strategy and Saved Policies: CS4- Community Hubs and Clusters CS5- Countryside and Green Belt CS6- Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS11- Type and Affordability of housing CS17- Environmental Networks

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

14/01390/OUT Outline application (all matters reserved) for residential development GRANT 5th February 2015

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 Steven Davenport

Appendices APPENDIX 1 - Conditions

Page 98

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the deposited plans and drawings as amended by the revised plan Numbers PL05 Rev B, PL08 Rev A, PL09 Rev A, PL10 Rev A, PL11 received 1st May 2015.

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. Prior to the commencement of development full engineering details of the means of access, construction, internal layout, parking and visibility splays together with highway improvements at the junction of Cottage Lane and the B5068, as shown indicatively on Drawing No's CL-RL-200 Rev B & CL-JP-201, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; the development hereby permitted shall not be first occupied until the approved details have been fully implemented.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION/PRIOR TO THE OCCUPATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

3. No built development shall commence until details of all external materials, including hard surfacing, have been first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approval details.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the development is satisfactory.

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

4. All existing roadside hedgerow, with the exception of where the access is to be created, shall be protected, retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority for the duration of any development works and for 5 years thereafter.

Reasons: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area.

5. All hard and soft landscape works detailed on the approved plans shall be carried to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant recommendations of appropriate British Standard 4428:1989. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the timetable agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants that, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, due or become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously

Page 99

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 10 – Cottage Lane, St Martins

damaged or defective, shall be replaced with others of species, size and number as originally approved, by the end of the first available planting season.

Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs

Page 100

Agenda Item 11

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 11

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 15/01386/COU Parish: Market Drayton Town

Proposal : Application under Section 73a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the change of use of swimming pool for the provision of swimming lessons (retrospective)

Site Address : Hunky Dory Tern View Market Drayton Shropshire TF9 1DU

Applicant : Mr & Mrs C Williams

Case Officer : Alison Groom email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 366655 - 333100

Page 101

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 11 – Hunky Dory, Tern View, Mkt Drayton

Recommendation:- Refuse for the following reason

1. It is considered that the proposed change of use is inappropriate due to the frequency of the lessons to be carried out, which will result in the proposal having a detrimental impact upon the residential and neighbouring amenity of the area. Furthermore the change of use will impact upon the shared private access to the site also, therefore is contrary to Policies CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the aims and provisions of the NPPF.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 Application under Section 73a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the change of use of swimming pool for the provision of swimming lessons (retrospective)

1.2 The proposed dwelling house and swimming pool were given planning approval on the 19.12.2002. The applicant has stated that the pool has been used to provide swimming lessons for the past three years.

1.3 Due to the small size of the pool (approx. 12m long x 4m wide) the pool is only suitable for beginner’s lessons and not recreational swimming.

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 Hunky Dory is a modern house which was one of three properties built 2004 by the applicants. The house is an innovative design over two levels and contains a modest sized swimming pool which has been used by the applicants and there family.

2.2 The site is situated off a private road which links with ‘Bottom Lane’, which provides direct access onto Tern View. The site is located to the south of Market Drayton, approximately 2 miles away from the town centre.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION 3.1 The officer recommends the application for refusal which is contrary to the Parish Councils recommendation to support the scheme. Therefore Cllr Minnery, has asked that the application to be determined at the local planning committee and this request has been confirmed with the Chair of the planning committee.

4.0 Community Representations 4.1 Consultee Comments 4.1.1 SC Highways The means of access to the site is via a restricted byway which forms a junction with the adopted highway, Tern View to the north of the site. The route is typically of single vehicle width and the Highway Authority would not wish therefore to see a significant increase in use of this access route which could be promoted by a general leisure pool facility. The size and design of the swimming pool in effects limits the number of swimmers and type of swimming lesson that can be held but ultimately the number of associated traffic movements would be determined by the scale of the hours of operation that are permitted.

Page 102

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 11 – Hunky Dory, Tern View, Mkt Drayton

Whilst the context of the proposal does not raise any significant highway safety concerns, in light of the comments above the Highway Authority would suggest that permission be granted for a temporary 2 year consent based upon the hours of operation being controlled.

4.2 Public Comments 4.2.1 Parish Council To raise no objection to this application.

4.2.2 Neighbour Comments – 2 Letter of objection received • Number & frequency of lessons • Use of the shared access • Increase in traffic • Single track to the site with bad visibility • Number of vehicles parked at the site at any one time • Impact to highway safety • Noised caused from every vehicle passing the neighbouring site is heard • Loss of privacy due to people constantly passing the neighbouring sites • Damage to the shared access • Visually the site becomes a parking lot

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES Principle of development Impact to the Highway and Parking Impact on Residential Amenity Clarification of Lesson Schedule

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 Policy CS8 ‘Facilities, Services and Infrastructure Provision’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that the development of sustainable places in Shropshire with safe and healthy communities where residents enjoy a high quality of life will be assisted by protecting and enhancing facilities, services and amenities that contribute to the quality of life of residents and visitors.

6.1.2 Policy CS13 ‘Economic Development, Enterprise and Employment’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy states “Shropshire Council, working with its partners, will plan positively to develop and diversify the Shropshire economy, supporting enterprise, and seeking to deliver sustainable economic growth and prosperous communities”

6.1.3 Policy CS16 ‘Tourism, Culture and Leisure’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy seeks to deliver high quality, sustainable tourism, and cultural and leisure development, which enhance the vital role that these sectors play for the local economy, benefits local communities and visitors, and is sensitive to Shropshire intrinsic natural and built environment qualities, supporting new and extended tourism development, and cultural and leisure facilities, that are appropriate to their location, and enhance and protect the existing offer within Shropshire.

6.1.4 The proposal is supported by the above policies subject to Policy CS6 'Sustainable

Page 103

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 11 – Hunky Dory, Tern View, Mkt Drayton

Design and Development Principles' of the Shropshire Core Strategy, which is addressed in more detail below.

6.2 Impact to the H ighway and Parking 6.2.1 Policy CS6 'Sustainable Design and Development Principles' of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that proposals likely to generate significant levels of traffic should be located in accessible locations where there are opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel to be reduced. This policy also indicates that development should be designed to be safe and accessible to all. Policy D7 'Parking Standards' of the North Shropshire Local Plan is still a saved policy and indicates that all development should provide an appropriate level of vehicle parking to avoid on street parking and increasing traffic problems.

6.2.2 As indicated on the plan submitted the site does have a sufficient turning area and parking provision for the pupils attending the lessons, however this does mean crossing a shared private access which has resulted in the wearing away and damage being caused to the shared access already, which is owned and used by two other properties.

6.2.3 Following clarification from the applicant they have confirmed that on average traffic will pass across the shard access a maximum of 182 times per week and a minimum of 156 times, for 40 weeks of the year with additional lessons being held during the school summer break which can be up to 6 weeks. This is a considerable increase in traffic crossing the private shared access for three dwellings.

6.2.4 The means of access to the site is via a restricted byway which forms a junction with the adopted highway, Tern View to the north of the site. The route is typically of single vehicle width and the Highway Authority would not wish therefore to see a significant in use of this access route which could be promoted by a general leisure pool facility. The size and design of the swimming pool in effects limits the number of swimmers and type of swimming lesson that can be held but due to the frequency and number of lessons proposed each week and the associated traffic movements this application cannot be supported.

6.3 Impact on Residential Amenity 6.3.1 Policy CS6 ‘Sustainable Design and Development Principles’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should safeguard the residential and local amenity.

6.3.2 The swimming pool is already in place and the application is to allow the use of the pool for private swimming lessons. Therefore structurally there will be no impact caused to the property or surrounding amenity. The applicant has stated that the business has been running for the past three years without complaint.

6.3.3 It is proposed that the swimming lessons will take place: Monday to Friday, 9am to 11am, 1pm to 3pm and 4pm – 7pm in the evening and Saturday morning 8:30am – 12noon, with a maximum a 6 pupils per class, each lesson is for the duration of 30 minutes, the applicant has provided a detailed break down of the average weekly occurrence of a total of 32 lessons taking place, which

Page 104

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 11 – Hunky Dory, Tern View, Mkt Drayton

will result in traffic passing across the shard access a maximum of 182 times per week and a minimum of 156 times, for 40 weeks of the year with additional lessons being held during the school summer break which can be up to 6 weeks.

6.3.4 Due to the site location and the number and frequency of the classes being held, the proposal will cause great disruption, harm and impact to the neighbouring amenity, resulting in the increase of passing traffic, noise, loss of privacy and increased wear and tear to the shared private access, the harm to the residential amenity is too great and therefore this application cannot be supported.

7.0 CONCLUSION It is considered that the proposed change of use is inappropriate due to the frequency of the lessons to be carried out, which will result in the proposal having a detrimental impact upon the residential and neighbouring amenity of the area. Furthermore the change of use will impact upon the shared private access to the site also, therefore is contrary to Policies CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the aims and provisions of the NPPF.

8.0 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, i.e. written representations, hearing or inquiry. • The decision may be 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 it’s planning merits. A challenge by way of Judicial Review must be made a) promptly and b) in any event not later than six weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose.

8.2 Human Rights Article 8 gives 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.

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

Page 105

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 11 – Hunky Dory, Tern View, Mkt Drayton

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 1990.

9.0 Financial Implications There are likely financial implications if 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 dependent on the scale and nature of the proposal. Local financial considerations are capable of being taken into account when determining this planning application – insofar as they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for the decision maker.

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

Central Government Guidance: NPPF

Core Strategy and Saved Policies: CS6 Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS8: Facilities, Services and Infrastructure Provision CS13: Economic Development, Enterprise and Employment CS16: Tourism, Culture and Leisure

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 Roger Hughes Cllr David Minnery

Page 106

Agenda Item 12

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 12

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/04555/FUL Parish: Whitchurch Rural

Proposal : Proposed orangery link extension and internal alterations to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall.

Site Address : Grove Barn Ash Parva Whitchurch SY13 4DT

Applicant : Mr Hinchcliffe

Case Officer : Alison Groom email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 357562 - 339342

Page 107 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

Recommendation:- Refuse for the following reason

1. The proposed scheme will have an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site with reference to paras 131 - 134 of the NPPF and that there are no public benefits of the proposal that out weigh the harm/impact of the current proposal. Therefore the proposed development is contrary to the NPPF and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the application is recommended for Refusal.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 The application seeks full planning consent for the erection of orangery link extension to an existing barn conversion to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall; affecting a Grade II Listed Building

1.2 Associated application for listed buildings consent has also been submitted for the above proposal on the 21.11.2014 ref: 14/05253/LBC

2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 Grove Barn is situated within a small village called Ash Parva which falls within the parish of Whitchurch Rural, Grove Barn is a Grade II Listed Building by virtue of its location within the curtilage of the Grove Farmhouse. Although located behind Grove Farmhouse, Grove Barn is a large and prominent building and can be clearly viewed from the South / Western approach road into the village of Ash Parva. The barn was approved for the conversion into residential use in 1997 and has since been extended with a conservatory in 2001. The barn is of a simple and traditional style building.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION 3.1 The officer recommends the application for refusal which is contrary to the Parish Councils recommendation to support the scheme. Therefore following contact with the local member Cllr Gerald Dakin, he has recommended that the application should go to the local planning committee meeting to be decided. This has been discussed with the Principal Planning Officer and the Chair and Vice Chair of the committee who agree that the application should be considered by members.

4.0 Community Representations 4.1 Consultee Comments 4.1.1 SC Conservation The following comments are made on the latest draft for the above scheme, after discussion with Philip Belchere (Conservation Architect): 1. The fascia is poorly detailed, as shown, and is therefore not acceptable. The whole idea was minimalism for this scheme and a large clumpy fascia is not what was envisaged. 2. The roadside wall, although some detailing has been shown, this still is not sufficient to lessen the impact of the very tall, overbearing wall in this location. The idea of visually lowering the impact of the wall still needs to be considered as part of the scheme. Having given this more thought, perhaps a clerestory detail would achieve this, together with an overall reducing in the

Page 108

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

height of the wall and the height of the extension, this is likely to help. The overall height has not been scaled from the drawings, as there is no facility to print off at A1, but the visual appearance would suggest that it is still in excess of 3 m? it would be useful to have dimensions shown on subsequent drawings, for clarity. 3. There is still no indication of the materials to be used for the frames of the glazed doors. The design would benefit from the use of steel as this would reduce the section size and therefore maintain the minimalistic theme which needs to be applied here. 4. Is the flue shown of the correct size and height which will be required for the biomass boiler and not just an interpretation? Confirmation of the manufacturer’s requirements will be necessary and accurately shown on the drawings. 5. The rooflight has not been reduced in size or height and is not accurately represented on the drawings, unless it is completely frameless?

As the scheme stands it is still not something which can be supported in line with the requirements of the current policies we have to work with for Heritage Assets. If further negotiations wish to be entered into then this can be done, as far as I am concerned, but if the applicant/agent do not wish to do this then it is with regret that an objection will be lodged and a recommendation of refusal will be made from the HE Team. The grounds for this objection are that the scheme will have an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site with reference to paras 131 – 134 of the NPPF and that there are no public benefits of the proposal that out weigh the harm/impact of the current proposal.

4.1.2 SC Ecology Recommendation: The informatives should be on the decision notice. Great Crested Newts There is a pond within 70m of the application site, however, the proposed development has a small footprint and is to be built on hardstanding. It is highly unlikely that the development will affect any great crested newt breeding population, no surveys are therefore necessary. The following informatives should be on the decision notice. Informative Great Crested Newts are protected under the European Council Directive of 12 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (known as the Habitats Directive 1992), the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). If a Great Crested Newt is discovered on the site at any time then all work must halt and Natural England should be contacted for advice.

4.2 Public Comments 4.2.1 Parish Council The Parish Council raised no objections to the scheme.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES Principle of development Siting, Scale and Design of structure Impact to the character of a listed building

Page 109

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

Ecology

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Principle of develo pment 6.1.1 The application seeks full planning consent for the erection of orangery link extension to an existing barn conversion to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall; this is acceptable in principle subject to NPPF and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy which are detailed below.

6.1.2 Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires the local planning authority, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. This is a legislative requirement which should be given significant weight in the determination of the application. The advice provided in the NPPF and Core Strategy is provided below, however the Council is also required to comply with this legislation.

6.2 Siting, Scale and Design of s tructure 6.2.1 Policy CS6 'Sustainable Design and Development Principles' of the Shropshire Core Strategy requires development to protect and conserve the built environment and be appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design taking into account the local context and character. The development should also safeguard residential and local amenity, ensure sustainable design and construction principles are incorporated within the new development.

6.2.2 Policy 7 'Requiring Good Design' of the National Planning Policy Framework indicates that great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which help raise the standard of design more generally in the area. It also indicates that Local Planning authorities should not refuse planning permission for buildings which promote high levels of sustainability because of concerns about incompatibility with the existing townscape, if those concerns have been mitigated by good design.

6.2.3 The proposed siting of the link extension will make good use of a currently unused area within the barns immediate residential curtilage; however officers consider that the scale of the proposal is deemed as excessive and will detract from the main barn and its character.

6.2.4 The increase of the existing boundary wall will result in the loss of the existing hedgerow currently in place and is considerably high compared to the existing boundary wall resulting in a total height of 3.4 metres and although some detailing has been shown, this still is not sufficient to lessen the impact of the very tall, overbearing wall in this location.

6.2.5 The design and scale of the proposal is vital to ensure that it respects that of the existing barn and no harm or impact is caused to the heritage asset. Following several meetings and discussions with the agent and application / owner of the site, this was made clear to them and that a minimalistic theme to the proposal would be something we could support, however due to the applicants / owners needs and

Page 110

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

finances the design and scale of the proposed has not been altered to reflect the advice given by the Historic Environment team, nor has the proposal been reduced or minimised as advised. The scheme remains to results in a large clumpy fascia, having an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site. Therefore it is officers opinion that the scheme cannot be supported in line with the requirements of the currently policies we have to work with for Heritage Assets and the policy CS6 Sustainable Design and Development Principles of the Shropshire Core Strategy.

6.3 Impact to the character of a listed building 6.3.1 Policy CS17 ‘Environmental Networks’ of the Shropshire Core Strategy indicates that development should protect and enhance the high quality and local character of Shropshire built and historic environmental and that it should not adversely affect the visual or heritage values and functions of these assets. This is reiterated in policy 12 ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment’ of the National Planning Policy Framework which supports the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to a viable uses consistent with their conservation.

6.3.2 Section 12 of the NPPF paragraph 132 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification.

6.3.3 Section 12 of the NPPF paragraph 133 states that where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss.

6.3.4 Following extensive discussions between the agent, applicant / owner and the Historic Environment team the historic environment officer remains to strongly object to the proposed scheme as it will have an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site with reference to paras 131 – 134 of the NPPF and that there are no public benefits of the proposal that out weigh the harm/impact of the current proposal and recommend that the application is refused. Full details of the Historic Environment Officers objections are detailed within section 4.1.1 of this report.

6.4 Ecology 6.4.1 There is a pond within 70m of the application site, however, the proposed development has a small footprint and is to be built on hardstanding. It is highly unlikely that the development will affect any great crested newt breeding population, no surveys are therefore necessary. However following consultation with the Ecology specialist an informative will be applied to the decision if approved to ensure the protection of Great Crested Newts.

Page 111

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

7.0 CONCLUSION Due to the above findings the proposed development is contrary to the NPPF and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the application is recommended for Refusal.

In arriving at this decision the Council has used its best endeavours to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner to secure an appropriate outcome as required in the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187.

8.0 Risk Assessment and Opportunities Appraisal 8.1 Risk Management There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:

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 1990.

Page 112

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

National Planning Policy Framework CS6 - Sustainable Design and Development Principles D6 - Control and Design of Extensions CS17 - Environmental Networks

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

NS/96/00015/LBC - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation, including demolition works Refused 18.12.1996

NS/97/00019/FUL - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation Approved 24.03.1997

NS/97/00021/FUL – Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation with alterations to existing vehicular access Approved 18.08.1977

NS/97/00022/LBC - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation, including demolition works Approved 18.08.1997

NS/97/00099/FUL Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a detached dwelling house with detached garage and alterations to existing vehicular access Approved 16.04.1997

NS/97/10468/LBC Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation involving demolition works. Approved

NS/97/10469/FUL Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation with alterations to existing vehicular access. Approved

NS/01/00388/FUL Erection of a conservatory to side elevation of existing dwelling Approved 05.09.2001

Page 113

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 12 Grove Barn, Ash Parva

NS/01/00480/LBC Erection of a conservatory to side elevation of existing dwelling Approved 05.09.2001

11. Additional Information

View details online:

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 Gerald Dakin Appendices N/A

Page 114

Agenda Item 13

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 13

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 14/05253/LBC Parish: Whitchurch Rural

Proposal : Erection of orangery link extension to an existing barn conversion, to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall and incorporating the removal of 1 no. window and brickwork below to create access affecting a Grade II Listed Building

Site Address : Grove Barn Ash Parva Whitchurch SY13 4DT

Applicant : Mr Hinchcliffe

Case Officer : Alison Groom email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 357562 - 339342

Page 115 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

Recommendation:- Refuse for the following reason

REPORT

1.2 Associated application for listed buildings consent has also been submitted for the above proposal on the 21.11.2014 ref: 14/05253/LBC

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION 3.1 The officer recommends the application for refusal which is contrary to the Parish Councils recommendation to support the scheme. Therefore following contact with the local member Cllr Gerald Dakin, he has recommended that the application should go to the local planning committee meeting to be decided. This has been discussed with the Principal Planning Officer and the Chair and Vice Chair of the committee who agree that the application should be considered by members.

Page 116

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

clerestory detail would achieve this, together with an overall reducing in the height of the wall and the height of the extension, this is likely to help. The overall height has not been scaled from the drawings, as there is no facility to print off at A1, but the visual appearance would suggest that it is still in excess of 3 m? it would be useful to have dimensions shown on subsequent drawings, for clarity. 3. There is still no indication of the materials to be used for the glazed doors. The design would benefit from the use of steel as this would reduce the section size and therefore maintain the minimalistic theme which needs to be applied here. 4. Is the flue shown of the correct size and height which will be required for the biomass boiler and not just an interpretation? Confirmation of the manufacturers requirements will be necessary and accurately shown on the drawings. 5. The rooflight has not been reduced in size or height and is not accurately represented on the drawings, unless it is completely frameless?

As the scheme stands it is still not something which can be supported in line with the requirements of the currently policies we have to work with for Heritage Assets. If further negotiations wish to be entered into then this can be done, as far as I am concerned, but if the applicant/agent do not wish to do this then it is with regret that an objection will be lodged and a recommendation of refusal will be made from the HE Team. The grounds for this objection are that the scheme will have an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site with reference to paras 131 – 134 of the NPPF and that there are no public benefits of the proposal that out weigh the harm/impact of the current proposal.

4.1.2 SC Ecology Recommendation: The following informatives should be on the decision notice. Great Crested Newts There is a pond within 70m of the application site, however, the proposed development has a small footprint and is to be built on hardstanding. It is highly unlikely that the development will affect any great crested newt breeding population, no surveys are therefore necessary. The following informatives should be on the decision notice. Informative Great Crested Newts are protected under the European Council Directive of 12 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (known as the Habitats Directive 1992), the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). If a Great Crested Newt is discovered on the site at any time then all work must halt and Natural England should be contacted for advice.

4.2 Public Comments 4.2.1 Parish Council The Parish Council raised no objections to the scheme.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES Principle of development Siting, Scale and Design of structure

Page 117

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

Impact to the character of a listed building Ecology

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 The application seeks full planning consent for the erection of orangery link extension to an existing barn conversion to include the increase in height of the side boundary wall; this is acceptable in principle subject to NPPF and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy which are detailed below.

6.3 Siting, Scale and Design of structure 6.2.1 Policy CS6 'Sustainable Design and Development Principles' of the Shropshire Core Strategy requires development to protect and conserve the built environment and be appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design taking into account the local context and character. The development should also safeguard residential and local amenity, ensure sustainable design and construction principles are incorporated within the new development.

Page 118

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

something we could support, however due to the applicants / owners needs and finances the design and scale of the proposed has not been altered to reflect the advice given by the Historic Environment team, nor has the proposal been reduced or minimised as advised. The scheme remains to results in a large clumpy fascia, having an adverse impact on the significance of the Heritage Asset and the wider setting of the main Heritage Asset on the site. Therefore it is officers opinion that the scheme cannot be supported in line with the requirements of the currently policies we have to work with for Heritage Assets and the policy CS6 Sustainable Design and Development Principles of the Shropshire Core Strategy.

Page 119

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

7.0 CONCLUSION Due to the above findings the proposed development is contrary to the NPPF and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the application is recommended for Refusal.

8.0 Risk Assessment and Opportunities Appraisal 8.1 Risk Management There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:

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 1990.

Page 120

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

10. Background

Relevant Planning Policies

Core Strategy and Saved Policies:

National Planning Policy Framework CS6 - Sustainable Design and Development Principles D6 - Control and Design of Extensions CS17 - Environmental Networks

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

NS/96/00015/LBC - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation, including demolition works Refused 18.12.1996

NS/97/00019/FUL - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation Approved 24.03.1997

NS/97/00022/LBC - Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation, including demolition works Approved 18.08.1997

NS/97/00099/FUL Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a detached dwelling house with detached garage and alterations to existing vehicular access Approved 16.04.1997

NS/97/10468/LBC Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation involving demolition works. Approved

NS/97/10469/FUL Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to form a dwelling with private double garage and ancillary accommodation with alterations to existing vehicular access. Approved

NS/01/00388/FUL Erection of a conservatory to side elevation of existing dwelling Approved 05.09.2001

Page 121

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 13 – Grove Barn, Ash Parva

NS/01/00480/LBC Erection of a conservatory to side elevation of existing dwelling Approved 05.09.2001

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 Gerald Dakin Appendices N/A

Page 122

Agenda Item 14

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 14

9th June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

Summary of Application

Application Number: 15/00452/EIA Parish: Llanyblodwell

Proposal : Construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping

Site Address : Bryn-y-Groes Llanyblodwel Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB

Applicant : DV & GE Wigley & Son

Case Officer : Philip Mullineux email : [email protected]

Grid Ref: 324526 - 323061

Page 123

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

Recommendation:- Approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

REPORT

1.0 THE PROPOSAL

1.1 Application proposes construction of two intensive broiler units and associated infrastructure for the housing of up to 100,000 broilers on land situated to the rear, (north west), of an existing farmstead in the control of the applicants.

1.2 Each unit will measure 113 metres x 26.6 metres with height of 6.05 metres to the ridge vents. Three ancillary feed bins and a feed control building are to be located on land between the two broiler units. Also proposed is construction of a ‘plant room measuring 10 x 7 metres floor space for the housing of ground source heat pump exchanges and related infrastructure. Information in support of the application indicates that the external construction of the two broiler units and plant room will be of portal frame construction with steel cladding finished in Juniper Green colour code BS12B29. The application also proposes re-location of the farm access off the adjacent public highway to serve the proposed development and the existing farmstead.

2.0 SITE LOCATI ON/DESCRIPTION

2.1 The site is located on farmland which forms part of a ‘bowl’ within the landscape and is located to the rear north west side of ‘Bryn-y-Groes’ Llanyblodwel. This is a traditional mainly livestock rearing unit typical of the surrounding area, that amounts to approx 87 hectares. To the rear of the site is open farmland.

2.2 Access to the site is proposed along a new farm access directly from the B4396 public highway which passes to the south of the application site. The new access is proposed to replace an existing farm access directly off the B4396 highway. Alongside this highway are various other dwellings that are outside the control of the applicant.

2.3 The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement, as the application is within the criteria of Schedule 1 (17a), Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2011, and therefore an ES in support of the application is mandatory.

2.4 Also accompanying the application is a design and access statement, set of elevation and floor plans, landscape and visual impact assessment, tree survey, drainage and flood risk assessment, ecology survey, heritage assessment, odour impact assessment and highways statement.

2.5 The application proposes ‘ broiler’ production which entails day old chicks being bought into the broiler units on site where they are retained on site for an average of 35-36 days with at least a 10 day turn around period. It is anticipated that up to 7 crops will be produced on site annually. The chickens will be grown for a food processing company that supplies chicken to the retail trade. In order to supply the retail trade, all farmers must as a minimum, be members of the independently

Page 124

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

audited Red Tractor Farm Assured Chicken Scheme (formerly ACP). The scheme requires farmers to comply with strict management requirements such as stocking at a maximum of 38kg/m2. Some retailers now require the supply of “Higher Welfare Chicken” (HWC), which includes those endorsed by the RSPCA Freedom Foods Scheme stocked to a lower rate of 30kg/m2. At the end of the growing period they will be collected and transported to a processing plant.

3.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION

3.1 The proposal is for schedule ’1 ‘ EIA development and therefore Committee consideration is mandatory in accordance with the Council’s scheme of delegation.

4.0 Community Representations

4.1.1 Llanyblodwel Parish Council has responded to the application indicating that they do not object to the application but they would like to submit the following comment

‘The Parish Council has no objection to the application but in order to reduce the impact of the sheds on the landscape the council would wish to see the gable ends of the sheds clad in Yorkshire board so that they blend with the existing buildings and overall agricultural appearance of the area’.

4.2 Consultee Comments 4.2.1 Natural England raises no objections. Their response indicates that they do not consider that this application poses any likely or significant risk to those features of the natural environment for which we would otherwise provide a more detailed consultation response and so does not wish to make specific comment on the details of this consultation.

4.2.2 The Environment Agency raises no objections. Their response indicates: (Reproduced here in full owing to the sensitivity of the site and the requirements for an Environmental Permit in order for the development as proposed to operate).

‘Intensive pig and poultry sites are regulated by us under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2010. Farms that exceed capacity thresholds >40,000 birds require an Environmental Permit (EP) to operate. For completeness, the total number of bird places proposed (approximately 100,000 broilers) would exceed the capacity thresholds and require an EP to operate. We have just received an EP application for this proposal. We normally recommend the ‘twin tracking’ of the EP application alongside the planning application. The ‘twin tracking’ of applications allows for a more comprehensive submission. A cross reference with the permit requirements (those affecting land use decisions) would help demonstrate “the development itself is an acceptable use of the land” (NPPF, paragraph 120).

For information, we have provided the applicant with an initial ammonia screening assessment as part of a pre-permit application consultation. Our report concludes that, based on the information provided, the applicant would not need to submit detailed modelling with their EP application’

Under the EPR the EP and any future variations cover the following key areas of

Page 125

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

potential harm: - Management – including general management, accident management, energy efficiency, efficient use of raw materials, waste recovery and security; - Operations – including permitted activities and operating techniques (including the use of poultry feed, housing design and management, slurry spreading and manure management planning); - Emissions – to water, air and land including to groundwater and diffuse emissions, transfers off site, odour, noise and vibration, monitoring; and - Information – including records, reporting and notifications.

Development Proposals: Key environmental issues that are covered in the EP include odour, noise, ammonia, bio-aerosols and dust. These relate to any emissions that are generated from within the EP installation boundary.

Based on our current position, we would not make detailed comments on these emissions as part of the planning application process.

As part of the EP application it is the responsibility of the applicant to undertake the relevant risk assessments and propose suitable mitigation to inform whether these emissions can be adequately managed. For example, management plans may contain details of appropriate ventilation, abatement equipment etc.

Should the site operator fail to meet the conditions of an EP we will take action in- line with our published Enforcement and Sanctions guidance.

For the avoidance of doubt we would not control any issues arising from activities outside of the EP installation boundary. Your Council’s Public Protection team may advise you further on these matters.

Water Management: The Water Framework Directive (WFD) waterbody in closest proximity to the proposed development site is the ‘River Tanat - confluence River Rhaeadr to confluence River Vyrnwy’ (Waterbody Reference GB109054050050), which is classified as a ‘moderate’ waterbody. Any development should not cause any deterioration in water quality or hamper efforts to improve waterbody status to ‘good’ by 2027.

Clean Surface water can be collected for re-use, disposed of via soakaway or discharged directly to controlled waters. Dirty Water e.g. derived from shed washings, is normally collected in dirty water tanks via impermeable surfaces, as proposed. Any tanks proposed should comply with the Water Resources (control of pollution, silage, slurry and agricultural fuel oil) Regulations 2010 (SSAFO). Yard areas and drainage channels around sheds are normally concreted.

Shed roofs that have roof ventilation extraction fans present, may result in the build up of dust which is washed off from rainfall, forming lightly contaminated water. The EP will normally require the treatment of roof water, via swales or created wetland from units with roof mounted ventilation, to minimise risk of pollution and enhance water quality. For information we have produced a Rural Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) Guidance Document, which can be accessed via:

Page 126

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/PDF/SCHO0612BUWH-E-E.pdf

Flood Risk (Surface Water): Based on our ‘indicative’ Flood Map for Planning (Rivers and Sea), the proposed site is located within Flood Zone 1 which comprises of land assessed as having a less than 1 in 1000 annual probability of river flooding (<0.1%). In considering surface water run-off, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) includes a ‘Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment’ by Woodsyde Developments Ltd (Appendix 10 and Chapter 13 of the ES). For applications subject to EIA we wish to provide ‘strategic’ surface water comments. We would recommend that your Flood and Water Management team are consulted on the detail of the surface water drainage proposals, as the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA). We acknowledge the proposals incorporate SuDS in the form of open and stone filled trenches with discharge to an existing watercourse limited to greenfield run-off rate for events up to a 1 in 100 year plus climate change (20% allowance) design standard.

We note that Appendix 10 and Chapter 13 of the ES make reference to a low risk of groundwater flooding; we would leave the detail of this for consideration by the LLFA.

For further information please refer to our LPA Process Note ‘Operational Development (1ha) within Flood Zone 1’.

Manure Management (storage/spreading): Under the EPR the applicant will be required to submit a Manure Management Plan, which consists of a risk assessment of the fields on which the manure will be stored and spread, so long as this is done so within the applicants land ownership. It is used to reduce the risk of the manure leaching or washing into groundwater or surface water. The permitted farm would be required to analyse the manure twice a year and the field soil (once every five years) to ensure that the amount of manure which will be applied does not exceed the specific crop requirements i.e. as an operational consideration. Any Plan submitted would be required to accord with the Code of Good Agricultural Policy (COGAP) and the Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ) Action Programme where applicable.

The manure/litter is classed as a by-product of the poultry farm and is a valuable crop fertiliser on arable fields.

We can confirm that the proposed site (as shown on the site plan submitted) is not located within a NVZ.

Pollution Prevention: Developers should incorporate pollution prevention measures to protect ground and surface water. We have produced a range of guidance notes giving advice on statutory responsibilities and good environmental practice which include Pollution Prevention Guidance Notes (PPG's) targeted at specific activities. Pollution prevention guidance can be viewed at: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/444251/444731/ppg/

The construction phase in particular has the potential to cause pollution. Site operators should ensure that measures are in place so that there is no possibility of

Page 127

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

contaminated water entering and polluting surface or ground waters. No building material or rubbish must find its way into the watercourse. No rainwater contaminated with silt/soil from disturbed ground during construction should drain to the surface water sewer or watercourse without sufficient settlement. Any fuels and/or chemicals used on site should be stored on hardstanding in bunded tanks.’

4.2.3 SC Public Protection have responded to the application indicating will be no significant adverse impact on the amenity of the area. The permit issued and regulated by the Environment Agency will control these elements.

4.2.4 Shropshire Fire Service raises no objections.

4.2.5 SC Drai nage has responded to the application indicating that the surface water drainage design for the site is acceptable. The drainage details, plan and calculations could be conditioned if planning permission were to be granted.

4.2.6 S.C. Highways. The highway authority raises no objection to the proposed poultry shed development subject to conditions with regards to the new access and closing off the existing access being attached to any approval notice issued.

4.2.7 SC Planning Ecologist in their initial response to the application raised no objections subject to a satisfactory Phase 2 bat survey being submitted in support of the application in order to assess the presence/absence of bats in a mature Oak proposed for removal from site and conditions to be attached to any approval notice issued with regards to a wildlife protection plan, installation on site of 4 woodcrete artificial nests and a scheme in relationship to landscaping being submitted to the Council prior to any development on site.

Final comments in response to additional information received from the applicants in relationship to on site bat activity raises no objections.

Comments are made that the watercourse just beyond the northern boundaries of the grass field is narrow and was slow flowing at the time of survey. The water was silty with a maximum approximate depth of 0.3 m, which was likely to be a result of recent heavy rains. The earth banks are steep and sparsely vegetated due to the heavy shading from the trees that line the watercourse. The watercourse does act as a wildlife corridor and as such consideration must be taken to ensure protection of the watercourse from sediment and pollution run off during and post development works.

In relationship to the Habitat Regulation Assessment the response indicates that the proposed application is for 2 poultry sheds. Each building will house c. 50,000 birds. The Environment Agency (EA) Ammonia Screening Assessment has been based on a total of 120,000 broiler chickens and no issues of concern are raised. A copy of the HRA is attached to this report.

4.3 Public Commen ts

4.3 .1 One letter of support has been received from members of the public. The letter states support for the proposal with consideration to its location and impact upon the landscape and also makes comment that the development is appropriate for the

Page 128

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

farming business concerned.

5.0 THE MAIN ISSUES

• Principle of development • Siting, scale and design of structure • Visual impact and landscaping • Residential amenity and public protection • Ecological issues.

6.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL

6.1 Principle of development 6.1.1 The National Planning Policy Framework, (NPPF), emphasises in paragraph 28 on Supporting a prosperous rural economy, that planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas, in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development and promote the development and diversification of agriculture and other land based rural businesses.

6.1.2 Policy CS5: Countryside and green belt in the Core Strategy states that new development will be permitted where it improves the sustainability of rural communities where development diversifies the rural economy including farm diversification schemes. The policy further states that large scale agricultural related development will be required to demonstrate that there are no unacceptable adverse environmental impacts.

6.1.3 Policy CS6: Sustainable design and development principles emphasises how development must be designed to a high standard using sustainable design principles and make the most effective use of land whilst safeguarding natural resources.

6.1.4 Policy CS13: Economic development, enterprise and employment, puts emphasis on diversifying the Shropshire economy, supporting enterprise and seeking to deliver sustainable economic growth and in rural areas recognising the continued importance of farming for food production and supporting rural enterprise and diversification of the economy and in particular areas of economic activity associated with agricultural and farm diversification.

6.1.5 The policies referred to above clearly support appropriate agricultural economic growth and diversification in context to the local environment.

6.1.6 The development in principle is considered an appropriate form of farm diversification in relationship to the agricultural business concerned, proposing construction of two broiler units for the housing of up to 100,000 broilers on site at any one time as a form of diversification in relationship to a family owned and managed, mainly stock rearing, unit which amounts to 87 hectares. As such the principle of the development is considered acceptable and in accordance with relevant national and local planning policies as outlined above.

6.1.7 The location for the development is to the rear of an existing farmstead in the

Page 129

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

control of the applicants, the site considered the most appropriate location for the development, and as such the sequential site selection in relation to all relevant planning issues is considered acceptable subject to satisfactory consideration to other planning issues as considered later in this report.

6.2 Siting, scale and design of the development and impact on surrounding landscape character and built environment. 6.2.1 The development construction proposes two steel profile and clad broiler units each measuring 113 x 26.6 metres floor space with a height of 6.05 metres to the ridge vents. Also proposed is a plant room with floor space of 10 x 7 metres and this will house heat pumps and associated equipment which will be used to heat the poultry units. The application also proposes three feed silos alongside the units. As such it is acknowledged that the development is large scale which will have an impact on the landscape.

6.2.2 The location for the development is to the rear of the existing farmstead on a site which appears as a natural ‘bowl’ within the landscape topography and it is considered with additional landscape mitigation in the form of tree and hedge planting that the development can be incorporated into the landscape without a significant detrimental impact . Information in support of the application indicates that the proposed plant room and broiler units themselves will be finished In dark green profile sheeting, (colour code BS12B29), and with consideration to the location this is considered acceptable. However no indication is given in relationship to the external colour of the feed silos. These by the nature of their height and scale can appear conspicuous in the landscape and as such it is recommended that a condition is attached to any approval notice issued in order to ensure the whole of the development is finished in the dark green colour as suggested.

6.2.3 Impact on the surrounding built environment is considered acceptable. The development will have no significant detrimental impact on heritage assets.

6.2.4 On this basis the detail as indicated in the landscape and visual impact assessment submitted in support of the application is considered acceptable, the development on the whole considered to be in accordance with relevant national and local planning policies in relationship to siting, scale and landscape and visual impact.

6.3 Residential amenity an d public protection. 6.3.1 The proposed development is located some 150 metres from the nearest residential dwelling outside the control of the applicants. The National Planning Policy Framework in paragraph 122 states that ‘local planning authorities should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of the land, and the impact of the use, rather than the control of processes or emissions themselves where these are subject to approval under pollution control regimes. Local planning authorities should assume that these regimes will operate effectively.

6.3.2 The applicants will need to obtain from the Environment Agency an Environmental Permit in order to operate from the site, this will control issues in relation to residential amenity. The Environment Agency’s response to the application raises no objections indicating that they have received an environmental permit application from the applicants and that this will cover issues such as on site noise, emissions and waste generated on site and their management, the permit will also covers

Page 130

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

issues of concern in relationship to surrounding residential amenity. An odour management plan will also form part of the Environmental Permit. The response also refers to planning advice as set out in the NPPF. Management operations are as outlined in the EA response as indicated in paragraph 4.1.3 of this report. The EA response indicates that they have provided the applicants with an initial ammonia screening assessment as part of a pre-permit application consultation and that their report concludes that, based on the information provided, the applicant would not need to submit detailed modelling on environmental issues with their EP application’ It is noted Natural England raises no objections to the development.

6.3.3 Information submitted in support of the application, as part of the Environmental Statement is considered acceptable in relationship to residential amenity and it is noted that none of the statutory consultees raise any objections on this matter.

6.3.4 It is also noted that SC Public Protection have responded to the application indicating that, based on the information submitted in support of the application, there will be no significant adverse impact on the amenity of the area and that the permit issued and regulated by the Environment Agency will control these elements.

6.3.5 However the Environmental permit issued and monitored by the Environment Agency only covers on site activities and therefore feed deliveries to the site and manure movements off the farming unit concerned will not be covered by the permit, (other than on-site activities), and as such with proximity to the site of dwellings outside of the applicants control it is recommended that conditions are attached to any approval notice issued restricting times for feed deliveries and that any manure removed off site is done so in sealed and covered containers/trailers.

6.3.6 On balance the proposal is considered acceptable in relationship to surrounding residential amenity issues subject to the applicants obtaining an environmental permit for the operations as proposed from the EA. As such the proposal, on balance, is considered to be in accordance with relevant policies of the Shropshire Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework on issues in relation to residential amenity and public protection.

6.4 Ecological impacts 6.4.1 The application is accompanied by an ecological assessment and further information has been received in relation to bats and potential habitat and the conclusions to the reports are considered satisfactory. A Habitat Regulations Assessment has been carried out and this is attached to the report for reference purposes and for members to note in the determination of the application.

6.4.2 Natural England and SC Ecology raise no objections and recommend the attachment of conditions to any approval notice issued with regards to a wildlife protection plan, nesting provision for small birds, and on site landscaping. Also recommended are the attachment of informatives’ in order to remind the applicants/developer with regards to the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, external lighting, trench excavation, storage of construction materials and badger protection

6.4.3 On ecological issues the proposal is considered acceptable and in accordance with Policy CS17: Environmental Networks of the Shropshire Core Strategy and other

Page 131

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

relevant local plan policies as well as the National Planning Policy Framework.

6.5 Other mat ters 6.5.1 Impacts on public highways and transportation matters are considered acceptable. The development will have direct access from land in the applicants control onto the B4396 public highway and it is considered that this highway is capable of absorbing the additional traffic as a result of the proposal.

6.5.2 The application proposes closing off an existing farm access onto the B4396 and creation of a new farm access to serve both the existing farm operations and the proposed development. This is considered acceptable with attachment of conditions to any approval notice issued as recommended by the Council’s Highways Officer, in relation to permanently closing off the existing access, creation of the necessary visibility splays and any necessary native hedgerow planting.

6.5.3 With consideration to the above-mentioned the development is considered satisfactory in relationship to transportation issues and as such is considered to be in accordance with relevant national and local planning policies on transportation and highway matters.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal is for two intensive broiler units and supporting infrastructure which will house up to 100,000 birds on site, as part of an appropriate farm diversification venture for the existing family farming business.

7.2 The proposed development raises no adverse concerns from any of the statutory consultees to the application and with no objections from the local Parish Council or members of the public. The proposal will require an Environmental Permit to be issued and monitored by the Environment Agency in order to operate and this will control issues in relationship to residential amenity, noise and environmental matters.

7.3 The findings and conclusions as indicated in the Environmental Statement submitted in support of the application are considered acceptable.

7.4 As such the proposed development is considered acceptable and in accordance with relevant policies as set out in the Shropshire Core Strategy, the National Planning Policy Framework and other relevant planning guidance. The recommendation is therefore one of approval subject to conditions as attached to this report.

8.0 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, i.e. written representations, hearing or inquiry. The decision may be challenged by way of a Judicial Review by a third party.

Page 132

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

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 made a) promptly and b) in any event not later than six weeks after the grounds to make the claim first arose.

8.2 Human Rights

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 1990.

9.0 Financial Implications

10.0 Relevant Planning policies.

10.1 National Planning Policy Framework. (Key sections are considered to be), - Building a strong, competitive economy. - Supporting a prosperous rural economy. - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment.

Page 133

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

10.2 Shropshire Core Strategy – Polices CS4, CS5, CS6,CS7, CS13, CS16, CS17, CS18

10.3 Shropshire SAMDev.

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 Arthur Walpole Appendices APPENDIX 1 – Conditions APPENDIX 2 – Habitats Regulations Assessment

Page 134

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

STANDARD CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (As amended).

2. 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

5. Within a period of 3 calendar months of the new access being brought into use, the existing access onto the B4396 shall be permanently closed in accordance with details and a specification to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

6. No development shall take place until a scheme of foul drainage and surface water flooding has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be completed before the development is brought into use and will pay particular attention to the north west area of the site which is considered to be at risk of surface water flooding from the adjacent watercourse. As the site is being cut into the existing ground, it should be demonstrated that measures have been taken to reduce the risk of flooding from this source.

Reason: To minimise the risk of surface water flooding.

8. No development or clearance of vegetation shall take place until a Wildlife Protection plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The plan shall include: a. An appropriately scaled plan showing 'Protection Zone' where construction activities are restricted and where protective measures will be installed or implemented; b. Details of protective measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid pollution and sediment impacts on the watercourse during and post construction.

Reason: To protect features of recognised nature conservation importance.

Page 135

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

10. No development or clearance of vegetation shall take place until a scheme of landscaping is submitted and agreed in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. The submitted scheme shall include: a. Planting plans, including wildlife habitat and features (e.g. bird and bat boxes, bat lighting plan) b. Written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant, grass and wildlife habitat establishment) c. Schedules of plants, noting species (including scientific names), planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate. Native species used to be of local provenance (Shropshire or surrounding counties) d. Details of trees and hedgerows to be retained and measures to protect these from damage during and after construction works e. Implementation timetables

Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity and biodiversity afforded by appropriate landscape design.

11. On the Pluvial Flood Map, the north west area of the site is at risk of surface water flooding from the adjacent watercourse. As the site is being cut into the existing ground, it should be demonstrated that measures have been taken to reduce the risk of flooding from this source.

Reason: To minimise the risk of surface water flooding.

12. No development shall commence until the developer has prepared a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with and this has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the development and to ensure no adverse impacts occur to the surrounding environment.

13. Lighting schemes a) Prior to the installation of external lighting, complete details of all external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. b) The lighting scheme shall be installed in accordance with the approved scheme and shall thereafter be maintained.

Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to minimize light spillage beyond the site and thus minimize the potential for light pollution and nuisance.

CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION/PRIOR TO THE OCCUPATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

3. he development hereby permitted shall not be undertaken other than in accordance with the procedures as set out in the Noise Management Plan submitted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment.

Reason: To protect local and residential amenity from adverse noise impact.

Page 136

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

9. A total of 4 woodcrete artificial nests suitable for small birds such as robin, blackbird, tit species, sparrow and swallow shall be erected on the site prior to first occupation of the buildings hereby permitted.

Reason: To ensure the provision of nesting opportunities for wild birds.

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

7. Not withstanding the approved plans the external colouring of the development hereby approved shall be to colour code juniper green BS12B29 or other dark colour approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to any development on site.

Reason: In consideration of landscape and visual impact and to comply with Policies CS5, CS6 and CS17 of the Shropshire Core Strategy.

Page 137

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

APPENDIX 2

Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA) Screening Matrix

Application name and reference number:

15/00452/EIA Bryngroes Llanyblodwel Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB Construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping.

Date of completion for the HRA screening matrix:

21 st April 2015

HRA screening matrix completed by:

Nicola Stone Assistant Biodiversity Officer 01743-252556

Table 1: Details of project or plan

Name of plan or 15/00452/EIA project Bryngroes Llanyblodwel Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB Construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping. Name and description European Designated Sites within 10km: of Natura 2000 site Tanat and Vymwy Bat SAC Montgomery Canal SAC Midland Meres & Mosses - Phase 2 Ramsar

NB For completeness the SSSI’s within 5km and local sites within 2km are listed below: SSSI’s within 5km Llanymynech and Llynclys Hills Craig Sychtyn Blodwel Marsh

Page 138

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

Trefonen Marshes Sweeney Fen Montgomery Canal Llanymynech and Llynclys Hills

Local Sites within 2km Moelydd Porth-y-Waen Meadow Cefn Lane Globe Flower Field-Nant Mawr Nant Mawr Reserve Nant Mawr Meadows new Steetley Fields Llynclys Quarry Mount Zion Offa's Dyke - Nant Mawr Jones Rough Nant Mawr Nant Mawr Porth-y-Waen Bird Site Llanymynech Hill Wood Blodwell Hall Wood Llynclys Hill Wood Plantation on Ancient Woodland Site

Description of the plan Construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new or project vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping. Is the project or plan No directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site (provide details)? Are there any other Not Applicable – Where no likely significant effect of the proposal is noted on a projects or plans that European Designated Site (see modelling from the Environment Agency) then together with the consideration of the in-combination effects test is not recommended by project or plan being Natural England or Environment Agency. Shropshire Council is taking advice assessed could affect from EA and NE throughout the Habitat Regulation Assessment Process. the site (provide details)?

Statement This site has had pre-application advice from Environment Agency reference EPR/VP3237WY/A001 for 120,000 broiler places.

Natural England has been formally consulted on this current planning application and has responded dated 17 th April 2015 with no objection.

SC Ecology has contacted the Environment Agency in order to receive a copy of their Ammonia Screening Assessment. Kevin Heede has provided this on the 1 st April 2015.

Page 139

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

The relevant thresholds have been agreed between Natural England and Environment Agency for use with the Environment Agency detailed emissions model: - Emissions of ammonia under 4% of the critical level for a European Designated Site (within 10km) - Emissions of ammonia under 20% of the critical level for a SSSI (within 5km) - Emissions of ammonia under 50% of the critical level for a local wildlife site or ancient replanted woodland (within 2km)

If any emission on a European Designated Site is over these thresholds then a full appropriate assessment would be required. Any emission under these thresholds is not considered ‘significant’ by Environment Agency and Natural England and is considered to have no in-combination effects.

All designated sites have screened out below the critical level of ammonia. The EA has stated that detailed modelling is not required to support this application.

The Significance test Based on the Ammonia Screening out put which has been provided by the Environment Agency, and using the modelling and thresholds agreed by Environment Agency and Natural England, there is no likely significant effect of the proposed activity under planning application 15/00452/EIA at Bryngroes, Llanyblodwel, Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB for the construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping.

The Integrity test There is no likely effect on the integrity of any European Designated Site from planning application 15/00452/EIA at Bryngroes, Llanyblodwel, Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB for the construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping.

Conclusions

The Habitat Regulation Assessment screening process has concluded, supported by the eviden ce from Environment Agency, that there is no likely significant effect and no likely effect on integrity of the European Designated from planning application reference 15/00452/EIA at Bryngroes, Llanyblodwel, Oswestry Shropshire SY10 8NB for the construction of two poultry sheds, feed bins and plant room; formation of new vehicular access with visibility splays (following closure of existing access); ancillary works and associated landscaping on any European Designated Site.

An Appropriate Assessment is not required and there is no legal barrier under the Habitat Regulation Assessment Process to planning permission being issued in this case.

Guidance on completing the HRA Screening Matrix

The Habitat Regulation Assessment process

Essentially, there are two ‘tests’ incorporated into the procedures of Regulation 61 of the Habitats Regulations, one known as the ‘significance test’ and the other known as the ‘integrity test’ which must both be satisfied before a competent authority (such as a Local Planning Authority) may legally grant a permission.

The first test (the significance test) is addressed by Regulation 61, part 1:

Page 140

North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 14 – Bryn-y-Groes, Llanyblodwel

61. (1) A competent authority, before deciding to undertake, or give any consent, permission or other authorisation for a plan or project which – (a) is likely to have a significant effect on a European site or a European offshore marine site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects), and (b) is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of that site, must make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives.

The second test (the integrity test) is addressed by Regulation 61, part 5:

61. (5) In light of the conclusions of the assessment, and subject to regulation 62 (consideration of overriding public interest), the competent authority may agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site or the European offshore marine site (as the case may be).

In this context ‘likely’ means “probably”, or “it well might happen”, not merely that it is a fanciful possibility. ‘Significant’ means not trivial or inconsequential but an effect that is noteworthy – Natural England guidance on The Habitat Regulation Assessment of Local Development Documents (Revised Draft 2009).

Habitat Regulation Assessment Outcomes

A Local Planning Authority can only legally grant planning permission if it is established that the proposed plan or project will not adversely affect the integrity of the European Site.

If it is not possible to establish this beyond reasonable scientific doubt then planning permission cannot legally be granted.

Duty of the Local Planning Authority

It is the duty of the planning case officer, the committee considering the application and the Local Planning Authority is a whole to fully engage with the Habitats Regulation Assessment process, to have regard to the response of Natural England and to determine, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, the outcome of the ‘significance’ test and the ‘integrity’ test before making a planning decision.

Page 141

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 142 Agenda Item 15

Committee and Date Item

North Planning Committee 15 th 9 June 2015 Public

Development Management Report

Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers Email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 258773 Fax: 01743 252619

SCHEDULE OF APPEALS AS AT COMMITTEE 9th June 2015

Appeals determined

LPA reference 14/01982/OUT Appeal against Non determination Committee or Del. Decision Appellant Gladman Developments Proposal Outline application (access for approval) for mixed residential development (up to 162 dwellings), associated open space and landscaping Location Land On Both Sides Of Rush Lane Market Drayton Date of appeal 13.01.2015 Appeal method Hearing Date site visit 18.03.2015 Date of app eal decision 18.05.2015 Costs awarded No Appeal decision Allowed

LPA reference 14/00797/OUT Appeal against Refusal Committee or Del. Decision Committee Appellant Mr & Mrs M Jones & F, S, P, H Ratcliff Proposal Outline planning permission for residential development to include access Location Land Adj To The Larches Shawbury Road Wem Date of appeal 11.12.2014 Appeal method Hearing Date site visit 03.02.2015 Date of appeal decision 19.05.2015 Costs awarded Appeal decision Dismissed

Page 143 North Planning Committee – 9 June 2015 Agenda Item 15 Appeals

LPA reference 14/00426/OUT Appeal against Refusal Committee or Del. Decision Committee Appellant Mr H Martin Proposal Outline application (access for approval) for mixed residential development; alterations to existing vehicular access; works to existing highway Location Land Off Chapel Lane Trefonen Date of appeal 10.12.2014 Appeal method Written Date site visit 10 .03.2015 Date of appeal decision 20.05.2015 Costs awarded Appeal decision Dismissed

LPA reference 14/02864/FUL Appeal against Refusal Committee or Del. Decision Committee Appellant Mr Malcolm Guest Proposal Erection of 1No dwelling with detached garage (revised scheme) Location Cross Keys Inn Kinnerley Oswestry Date of appeal 09.01.2015 Appeal method Written Date site visit 11.05.2015 Date of appeal decision 28.05.2015 Costs awarded Refused Appeal decision Dismissed

Page 144

Appeal Decision Hearing held on 18 March 2015 Site visit made on 18 March 2015 by R C Kirby BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 18 May 2015

Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/A/14/2227146 Rush Lane, Market Drayton, Shropshire TF9 3QX The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for outline planning permission. The appeal is made by Gladman Developments Limited against Shropshire Council. The application Ref 14/01982/OUT, is dated 30 April 2014. The development proposed is outline planning application for up to 162 dwellings with associated open space and landscaping, with all matters reserved except for access.

Decision

1. The appeal is allowed and outline planning permission is granted for up to 162 dwellings with associated open space and landscaping, with all matters reserved except for access at Rush Lane, Market Drayton, Shropshire TF9 3QX, in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 14/01982/OUT, dated 30 April 2014 and subject to the 13 conditions in the Schedule attached to this decision.

Application for Costs

2. An application for costs was made at the Hearing by Shropshire Council against Gladman Developments Limited. This application is the subject of a separate Decision.

Procedural Matter

3. The application was submitted in outline and the application form makes it clear that access is to be determined at this stage. At the Hearing the appellant confirmed that the drawings within the Design and Access Statement were for illustrative purposes only. It is on this basis that I have determined the appeal.

4. An Agreement under Section 106 (S106) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 was submitted at the Hearing. I have considered the content of this later in my decision.

Background

5. This appeal arises as a result of the Council not determining the planning application within the extended period for determination agreed with the appellant. The appeal site forms part of a larger site allocated for housing within the emerging Site Allocations and Development Management Plan (SAMDev). It is clear from the Council’s evidence that had it bee n given the opportunity to determine the application, it would have granted planning permission for the scheme, subject to a

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 145 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

number of planning conditions. Indeed, during the course of the appeal process, the Council granted outline planning permission for mixed residential development (up to 162 dwellings), associated open space and landscaping on the appeal site 1.

6. Although the principle of residential development is not in dispute between the main parties, the appellant is concerned that the suggested conditions relating to the submission of a master plan and adherence to it, are not necessary. The Council’s objective of achieving a coordinated approach to development on the appeal site and wider allocated site could be achieved through alternative planning conditions.

Main Issue

7. In view of the above, the main issue in this case is whether or not the proposed development of the appeal site would prejudice a coordinated residential scheme for the wider allocated site.

Reasons

8. The appeal site is located at the northern edge of Market Drayton, adjacent to the A53. It comprises 4 agricultural fields and a number of farm buildings. The site has an area of approximately 7.68 hectares. It is bounded on 2 sides by residential development; the A53 on its northern boundary and agricultural fields on its eastern boundary. Rush Lane bisects the site, off which a number of residential properties and a farm house are served. There are numerous trees and hedgerows upon the site.

9. The appeal site comprises part of the allocated housing site MD030 within the emerging SAMDev, located to the east and west of Rush Lane. That part of the appeal site to the east of Rush Lane adjoins the A53 and a roundabout is proposed on this road, from which vehicular access into the site would be provided.

10. Schedule S11.1a of the emerging SAMDev requires development of site MD030 to be coordinated and to include access improvements, cycle and pedestrian links towards the town centre, open space provision and a landscaped buffer along the A53. Flood mitigation should also be provided on that part of the site to the east of Rush Lane. Such a coordinated approach is supported by the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which advises at paragraph 61 that planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and places and that new development should be integrated into the natural, built and historic environment.

11. The Council submit that conditions requiring the submission of a Master Plan showing how the development would integrate with the remainder of the allocated site would ensure that a consistent approach is applied to the wider allocated site. Indeed such conditions have been attached to the existing planning permission on the site, and the same approach would be taken with the adjoining Danbank site, where the Council has resolved to grant planning permission subject to a S106 Agreement.

12. The appellant considers that the principles of integrating the appeal site with the wider allocated site were established as part of the planning application where a

1 Application Ref 14/04701/OUT

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 146 2 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

master planning exercise was undertaken with the adjacent landowners. This resulted in the submission of a Comprehensive Illustrative Masterplan (CIM). Whilst this plan is only illustrative, it demonstrates how the appeal site could integrate with the adjoining sites and includes primary and secondary access routes, public open space and landscaping.

13. Whilst supporting a coordinated approach to the wider allocated site, the appellant considers that a Grampian style master plan condition is unreasonable, as such an exercise would involve land outside of the appellant’s control. Only matters that are deliverable within the boundaries of the appeal site should be provided. This could be achieved through the submission of layout details as part of any reserved matters application, along with details showing pedestrian, cycle and vehicular connectivity up the site’s boundaries.

14. Whilst noting that the Council consider that a Grampian style Master Plan condition would give more certainty to the development of the larger allocated site, I have not been provided with substantive evidence that the approach suggested by the appellant would prejudice the development of the adjoining sites. The adjacent landowners have raised no objections to the appeal proposal and I have no reason to find that the principles of the CIM would not be adhered to.

15. In any event, I consider that alternative planning conditions could be imposed to achieve the same objective of connectivity with the adjoining sites, the details of which would be for the Council to determine in the future. Such an approach would reduce the likelihood of delays in deliverability of housing on the site. In the event that the neighbouring sites were developed first, the Council would be in a position to ensure that the appeal site was designed in such a way to ensure connectivity and integration with them.

16. I therefore conclude that subject to appropriately worded planning conditions, the development of the appeal site would not prejudice a coordinated residential scheme for the wider allocated site. There would be no conflict with the objectives of Schedule S11.1a of the emerging SAMDev, or paragraph 61 of the Framework in this respect.

Other Matters

Whether new housing in this location would represent sustainable development

17. The appeal site is in close proximity to the town of Market Drayton, and the services and facilities therein. Policy CS1 of the Shropshire Local Development Framework Adopted Core Strategy (Core Strategy) sets out the strategic approach to new development within the County. It identifies Shrewsbury as the sub- regional centre and a growth point. Within the Market Towns, of which Market Drayton is one , around 40% of Shropshire’s residential development will be accommodated over the plan period. The allocation of new housing sites is deferred to the SAMDev.

18. The site is located within the countryside where Core Strategy Policy CS5 strictly controls new development. The proposal would not result in an exception to that strict control and there is therefore conflict with this policy.

19. However, within the emerging SAMDev the appeal site has been identified as suitable for housing. There are no outstanding objections to this allocation and I have no reason to disagree with the Council that more than limited weight should be given to this SAMDev allocation in my consideration of the proposed scheme.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 3 147 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

The Council has identified part of the site as being capable of delivering approximately 80 dwellings by March 2018 within its Five Year Housing Land Supply Statement (September 2013), and this carries additional weight in favour of the proposal.

20. Furthermore, a planning permission exists on the site for an identical development. Whilst noting local resident’s concerns in respect of the suitability of the site for housing, such concerns were aired as part of planning application Ref 14/04701/OUT. In these circumstances, it is clear that while these comments have been aired before, the Council did not find they amounted to reasons to refuse this planning application. Whatever my decision on this appeal, this planning permission could be implemented on the site, and this carries significant weight in my consideration of the appeal proposal.

21. In light of the foregoing, I have no reason to reach a different conclusion to the main parties that new housing in this location would represent sustainable development. The Framework makes it clear at paragraph 49 that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Whilst there would be conflict with Core Strategy Policy CS5, this is outweighed by the provision of new housing in a location that is considered suitable for residential development. Accordingly there would be no conflict with the objectives of Core Strategy Policy CS1 or with the objectives of Policy CS3 which identifies Market Drayton as suitable for amongst other things, substantial development that balances business development with housing development.

Highway safety

22. The proposed access would be off the A53 where a new roundabout junction would be provided. This would also serve the wider allocated site. Local residents have raised concern that this would result in 4 roundabouts within close proximity which would cause traffic queues on roads leading to the A53 and would result in local roads being used as rat runs.

23. Whilst noting local residents’ concerns, the appellant’s traffic impact assessment demonstrates that the proposed scheme would have a minimal impact on the highway network and the proposed access junction would operate well within capacity and would adequately accommodate vehicles associated with the allocated site. Furthermore, although there have been recorded accidents within the vicinity of the site, these were slight and largely due to driver error. None were serious or fatal.

24. Local residents are also concerned about the impact of the proposal on Rush Lane which is used by pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders. The appeal site crosses Rush Lane and illustrative drawings were submitted as part of the application showing measures to prevent vehicles associated with the development using this lane. However, whilst there was some discussion in respect of this matter at the Hearing, it was agreed between the parties that the detailed design of this crossing point would be the subject of a further application in the event that planning permission was granted for the scheme.

25. Having regard to my findings, the support for the scheme from the Highway Authority, and in the absence of substantive evidence to demonstrate otherwise, I have no reason to find that the scheme would be harmful to highway safety.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 148 4 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

Drainage

26. At the Hearing my attention was drawn to sewage problems within the area. I observed on my site visit that there was a pumping station on the corner of Rush Lane with Bridge Road. I was also advised that there were easements across the appeal site.

27. In terms of the easements, this is a private matter and something that the appellant noted at the Hearing. This matter is therefore not a determining factor in my decision. Whilst noting local residents’ concerns in res pect of drainage, I note that Severn Trent Water raised no objection to the scheme and recommended planning conditions in respect of future drainage on the appeal site. In light of this, I have no reason to doubt that the site could not be suitably drained in the future.

Living conditions

28. Local residents have expressed concern about the impact of the scheme on their living conditions, particularly through noise and disturbance and privacy. However at this outline stage, matters of layout and appearance are not before me. Such details would be the subject of a further planning application.

Effect on crime

29. At the Hearing I was told by a local resident that the police station in Market Drayton was closing down. As a result there is concern that an increase in population may result in increased crime in the area. The appellant submits that a subsequent layout of the site could ensure that public spaces are overlooked and the Council did not dispute this matter. I share the view that it would be at the reserved matters stage where details such as layout and providing a safe environment for future residents to live in would be considered. In the absence of substantive evidence to demonstrate otherwise, I attach limited weight to these matters at this outline stage.

Effect on local services particularly health and education

30. Local residents have expressed concern that the proposal would place additional demands on the health services in the area, particularly doctors and dentists. The doctor’s surger y in Market Drayton serves the town and the rural area around it. I was told that it is often weeks before an appointment can be given and that the surgery has difficulty recruiting doctors.

31. The doctors’ practice serves approximately 17,500 patients and whilst the proposal would generate a demand for medical services, I have not been provided with convincing evidence that the existing practice is at capacity and unable to take on further patients. Furthermore, the Council did not raise this concern within its evidence.

32. In terms of education provision, there would be a high probability that some of the new houses would be occupied by children of school age; there is no dispute between the main parties that the site would generate 30 primary aged school children. Whilst noting local residents’ concerns that this would place pressure on the existing education facilities, the Council has advised that it is not aware of capacity issues at either primary or secondary level. On the basis of the evidence before me, I have no reason to find that the existing education facilities would not be able to accommodate children that may live upon the appeal site in the future.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 5 149 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

Agricultural land value

33. There is no dispute between the main parties that the appeal site comprises largely grade 2 and some grade 3a agricultural land. The Framework advises at paragraph 112 that where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of higher quality. The Council acknowledge that there are insufficient brownfield sites or lower grade agricultural land within the area to accommodate the scale of development necessary for the plan period. Furthermore, it considers that the economic benefits of retaining the land in agricultural use, would not outweigh the provision of housing development on this site. I have no substantive evidence before me to reach a different conclusion to the Council.

Ecology

34. Concern has been raised in respect of harm to ecological interest that would arise as a result of the appeal scheme. An ecological assessment and survey was undertaken as part of the planning application and mitigation measures recommended. Both t he Council’s Ecologist and Tree Officer considered that the natural and local environment could be enhanced by the proposed scheme and planning conditions could be imposed to ensure this. I have no reason to find that subject to such measures, the ecology of the area would be harmed.

Use of land off Longslow Road

35. The appellant has advised that the area of land on Longslow Road does not form part of the appeal site. It is clear from the submitted drawing that it does not form part of the site and the concerns in respect of the use of this land are not matters for my consideration.

Allotments

36. The Council has advised that the provision of allotments is a function of the Town Council and not a matter that would be material in my determination of the appeal scheme. I have no reason to disagree with the Council in this respect.

Section 106 Agreement

37. The obligations contained within the S106 in respect of affordable housing and public transport provision are not in dispute. However, I am obliged to consider whether such provision is in accordance with paragraph 204 of the Framework, and the statutory tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.

38. Policy CS11 of the Core Strategy requires new development to provide an appropriate housing mix and type, including tenure and affordability. Further guidance is given within the Council’s adopted Type and Affordability of Housing Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). At present the SPD requires 10% of the overall number of dwellings to be affordable. However, this is monitored annually and may change. The S106 makes provision for this and it would be the rate that was prevailing at the reserved matters stage that would be applied. This accords with the guidance within the SPD. I am satisfied that the provision of affordable housing on the site is necessary and reasonable to make the development acceptable.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 150 6 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

39. The S106 makes provision for a contribution to be paid towards extending the Market Drayton bus service into the appeal site. Policy CS9 of the Core Strategy supports the provision of such infrastructure. The provision of a bus service within the site would give future residents a choice of how they would wish to travel, in accordance with the sustainability objectives of both local and national planning policies. Whilst the route has yet to be finalised (depending on the details submitted as part of a subsequent application), I am satisfied that an extension to the bus service is reasonable and necessary, to support the new housing scheme. The statutory tests are therefore met.

Conditions

40. The Council has suggested a number of conditions it would wish to see imposed in the event that the appeal was allowed. The appellant has also suggested a number of conditions. I have considered the suggested conditions below, in accordance with the advice on conditions within the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).

41. A condition is necessary to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. In order to protect the living conditions of nearby residents, a Construction Method Statement condition is necessary. To prevent pollution of ground and nearby water sources, a condition requiring the submission of a Site Investigation report is necessary. In the interests of archaeology, a condition is necessary requiring a scheme of archaeological investigation.

42. Conditions that protect and enhance the ecology and biodiversity of the site are necessary including work within the zone of a badger sett and tree protection. To ensure that the development is sustainable, a condition requiring the submission of a drainage scheme for surface and foul water is necessary.

43. In order to ensure that the development of the site coordinates with the development of adjoining sites, conditions requiring pedestrian, cycle, and vehicle links to be provided to the eastern and western boundaries of the site are necessary, along with a condition requiring details to be submitted showing the extension of the play area on Meadow Close and other public open space for the scheme.

44. However, I have amended some of the suggested wording so that it complies with the guidance within the PPG.

45. Given the nature of the outline application and the matter for which approval is being sought, conditions relating to the provision of artificial nests, bat boxes and external lighting are not necessary at this stage. The appellant’s suggested condition limiting the number of dwellings to 113 is not necessary given the description of proposed development. Furthermore, the suggested condition relating to the provision of a temporary flag and pole bus stop is not necessary at this outline stage.

Conclusion

46. For the above reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed.

R C Kirby

INSPECTOR

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 7 151 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

APPEARANCES

FOR THE APPELLANT

Mr Laurie Lane Gladman Developments Limited

FOR THE COUNCIL

Miss Karen Townend Principal Planning Officer

INTERESTED PARTIES

Ms Sandra Kiessling Local Resident

Mr Emrys Lloyd Edwards Local Resident

Mr Neil Tasker Local Resident

Ms A C Allen Local Resident

Mrs Alison Lewis Local Resident

Mrs Karen Chatterton Local Resident

Mr Llewellyn Local Resident

Mrs Llewellyn Local Resident

Mr Deryck Armitage Local Resident

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AT THE HEARING

1. S106 Agreement dated 16 March 2014

2. Copy of newspaper article entitled Council Reserves from the Shropshire Star (9 March 2015)

3. Copy of statement from the Friends of Rush Lane Action Group

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AFTER THE HEARING

1. Agreed wording of 3 conditions between the main parties

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 152 8 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

SCHEDULE

CONDITIONS 1) Details of the appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale, (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved. 2) Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than three years from the date of this permission. 3) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved. 4) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan Drawing No 2013-100- 001 and Drawing No SK04. 5) The layout submitted as part of any reserved matters application shall include details for the provision of pedestrian and cycle routes through the site, linking to the eastern and western boundaries. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, and shall be constructed prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on the site. 6) The layout submitted as part of any reserved matters application shall include details of vehicular routes to be provided from the approved A53 site access to points on the eastern and western boundaries of the site. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be constructed prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on the site. 7) The layout submitted as part of any reserved matters application shall include details of an extension to the existing play area on Meadow Close, including details of play equipment and a safe pedestrian route to it, and the provision of informal, natural and semi-natural open space on the site, along with a timetable for implementation. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 8) No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: i) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate v) wheel washing facilities vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 9 153 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works viii) hours of work for clearance, construction and deliveries to and from the site ix) no burning of materials or vegetation on the site during demolition and construction. 9) No development shall take place until a phased programme of archaeological work has been implemented. The programme of work shall make provision for an initial field evaluation, comprising a sample geophysical survey and targeted trial trenching of any anomalies thus identified (up to a 2% sample of the study area), followed by further mitigation as appropriate. Each phase of work should be in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (WSI). These written schemes shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of works. 10) No development shall take place until a Site Investigation Report has been undertaken to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site. The Site Investigation Report shall be undertaken by a competent person and conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'. The Report is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

In the event of the Site Investigation Report finding the site to be contaminated, a further report detailing a Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Remediation Strategy must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.

The works detailed as being necessary to make safe the contamination shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy.

In the event that further contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the local planning authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of (a) above, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of (b) above, which is subject to the approval in writing by the local planning authority.

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a Verification Report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority that demonstrates the contamination identified has been made safe, and the land no longer qualifies as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 154 10 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

11) No site clearance works within 30 metres of the badger sett on site shall commence until the sett on site has been closed under licence, in accordance with the details within the Ecological Assessment by FPCR. 12) No ground clearance, demolition, or construction work shall commence until an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority to ensure no damage to any existing trees or hedgerows within or adjoining the site. The approved scheme shall be retained on site for the duration of the construction works. 13) No development, other than the formation of the site access shall take place, until details of the implementation, maintenance and management of a sustainable drainage scheme for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 11 155 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 156

Costs Decision Hearing held on 18 March 2015 Site visit made on 18 March 2015 by R C Kirby BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 18 May 2015

Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/A/14/2227146 Rush Lane, Market Drayton, Shropshire TF9 3QX The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). The application is made by Shropshire Council for a full award of costs against Gladman Developments Limited. The Hearing was in connection with an appeal against the failure of the Council to issue a notice of their decision within the prescribed period on an application for outline planning permission for up to 162 dwellings with associated open space and landscaping, with all matters reserved except for access.

Decision

1. The application for an award of costs is refused.

The submissions for Shropshire Council

2. The Council consider that following the grant of outline planning permission for the same development on the appeal site, the appellant has acted unreasonably in pursuing the appeal.

3. Accordingly, the Council consider that it has been put to unnecessary expense in processing the appeal, including sending appeal notifications to interested parties, preparing the statement of case and statement of common ground (SoCG), as well as preparation for, and attendance at the Hearing. Furthermore, the Council incurred costs in terms of the Hearing venue, which was unnecessary as the areas of disagreement between the parties could have been considered through the written procedure, rather than a Hearing.

The response by Gladman Developments Limited

4. The appeal was submitted fol lowing the appellant’s frustration at the lack of progress in determining the planning application. There was no indication that the subsequent application on the site would be determined prior the appeal being considered. Once permission had been granted, and following the agreement of the SoCG, it was too late to change the appeal to the written representations procedure and cancel the Hearing.

5. Furthermore, the appellant was not happy with the master plan conditions attached to the planning permission on the site. This matter was raised with the Council in correspondence dated 1 October 2014. Whilst the Council indicate that the wording of condition No 4 changed following discussions with

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 157 Cos ts Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

the appellant, it attached a Grampian style master plan condition to the planning permission.

6. The appellant considers that a Grampian master plan condition, and condition requiring that it is adhered to, are not reasonable or necessary. As such, and given that the Council were suggesting that the same conditions were attached to the appeal proposal if the appeal was successful, it was necessary to pursue the appeal. The appeal was therefore reasonable and necessary and the appellant did not act unreasonably in pursuing the appeal.

Reasons

7. The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that parties in planning appeals should normally meet their own expenses. All parties are expected to behave reasonably to support an efficient and timely process, for example in providing all the required evidence and ensuring that timetables are met. Where a party has behaved unreasonably, and this has directly caused another party to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process, they may be subject to an award of costs.

8. The appellant submitted a draft SoCG with the appeal form which stated that the matters in dispute were, amongst other things, the wording of the master plan condition. The appellant submits that the Council did not comment on the draft SoCG in a timely manner. It appears to me, that as a result of this the Council undertook unnecessary work based on the draft areas of disagreement.

9. It was not until just before the Hearing that the main parties agreed a SoCG (10 March 2015). The matter in dispute was the Grampian style master plan condition. The delay in agreeing the SoCG was in part due to the time taken to issue the decision notice for the subsequent application on the site, following completion of the Section 106 Agreement. It seems to me that neither party alone was to blame for this matter.

10. I consider that if the SoCG had been agreed earlier within the appeal timetable, the amount of work undertaken by both parties could have been reduced. The appeal procedure could also have been changed from a Hearing to Written Representations given the matter in dispute. However, by the time the SoCG was agreed, it was too close to the Hearing date to change the appeal procedure as it would have been difficult to advice interested parties of the change. The Hearing procedure was therefore necessary in these circumstances.

11. Throughout the appeal process, the appellant has been supportive of the Council (and vice versa) in seeking adjournments as the subsequent application progressed. Whilst these requests were refused, it certainly indicates that the appellant was aware that both parties may be put to unnecessary expense in preparing their case if the appeal progressed. This does not demonstrate unreasonable behaviour on the appellant’s behalf.

12. Whilst the appellant could have withdrawn the appeal before me and submitted an appeal in respect of the disputed condition following the grant of outline planning permission on the site, it is likely that such an appeal would still be in progress at this time. By continuing with the appeal, the appellant was likely to receive a decision sooner than if they had submitted a separate one. As a

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 158 2 Cos ts Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2227146

result, it is likely that the site could be made available for housing development sooner than if an alternative appeal had been pursued.

13. I therefore find that although the appeal site has planning permission for a residential scheme, the appellant has not acted unreasonably in pursuing the appeal, given the concern the appellant had in respect of the master plan condition suggested by the Council. I shared the view that the objective of the master planning exercise could be achieved by imposing alternative planning conditions. Whilst some of the work undertaken by the Council was unnecessary, this was due to a SoCG not being agreed early on in the appeal process. It was not the result of unreasonable behaviour on the part of the appellant. The work undertaken in respect of a coordinated approach to development on the site by the Council was necessary and does not amount to wasted time and expense.

14. For the above reasons, I find that unreasonable behaviour resulting in unnecessary or wasted expense, as described in the PPG has not been demonstrated.

15. The application for an award of costs is therefore refused.

R C Kirby

INSPECTOR

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 3 159 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 160

Appeal Decision Hearing held on 3 February 2015 Site visit made on 3 February 2015 by Tom Cannon BA DIP TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 19 May 2015

Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/W/14/3000672 Land adjacent to The Larches, Shawbury Road, Wem, Shrewsbury, SY4 5PF The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission. The appeal is made by Mr & Mrs M Jones and F, S, P, H Ratcliff against the decision of Shropshire Council. The application Ref 14/00797/OUT, dated 21 February 2014, was refused by notice dated 5 June 2014. The development proposed is outline planning permission for residential development and access (all other matters reserved).

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed

Preliminary Matters

2. The application was made in outline with all matters reserved other than access. I have determined the appeal on this basis.

3. The parties agreed at the Hearing that the Co uncil’s emerging Site Allocations and Management of Development Plan (SAMDev) can be afforded limited weight as the examining Inspector’s report has yet to be produced. Based on all that I have read and heard I agree with this. I have, therefore, considered the appeal against the adopted development plan and national policy.

4. The appellant submitted an amended plan with the appeal reducing the site area. Although the Council confirmed at the Hearing that the revised site area would not have altered their decision on the original application, they agreed that the proposed amendment would represent a significant change. Furthermore, local people and statutory bodies have not been formally consulted on the proposed amendments.

5. Therefore, following the Wheatcroft principles, as the site area would be significantly altered and those who should have been given the opportunity to comment on this amendment have been denied the right to do so, I have not accepted the amended plan as part of this appeal. Thus, I will proceed to determine the appeal on the basis of the plans on which the Council made their decision.

6. The representative acting on behalf of local residents wished to place on record that work involved preparing a response on the amended plan had therefore been unnecessary, and could have been avoided if it had not been accepted when the appeal was lodged. Nevertheless, it is clear from the correspondence

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 161 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

on file that the decision on whether or not to accept the amended plan would rest with the Inspector at the Hearing.

7. I have also been provided with updated position statements from the parties regarding housing supply in Shropshire, and a copy of the appellant’s Five Year Supply Rebuttal Statement submitted to the SAMDev examining Inspector. Comments have been received from both the appellant and Council in response to the respective statements.

Main Issues

8. Based on all that I have seen, read and the discussion at the Hearing, I consider that the main issue in this case is whether or not the proposal would provide a suitable site for housing having regard to housing supply, the character and appearance of the area and the principles of sustainable development.

Reasons

Housing land supply

9. The Framework sets out in paragraph 47 that to boost significantly the supply of housing, local planning authorities should be able to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites. There is a disagreement between the parties as to whether the Council can demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land. The Council confirmed at the Hearing that they can currently demonstrate a 5.43 year supply of deliverable housing land not the 5.48 years referred to in their appeal statement.

Housing requirement

10. Policy CS1 of the CS sets out a housing requirement figure of 27,500 new homes for Shropshire within the plan period 2006-2026. The Council would prefer to apply a phased rather than annualised approach to calculating their housing requirement. I recognise that this method has been accepted elsewhere and the policy wording in Policy CS10 of the CS originally contained reference to a phased trajectory prior to its adoption in 2011. However, this reference was removed due to concerns that it could supress development. Moreover, the explanation for Policy CS10 makes it clear that the purpose of this policy is to guide phased allocations in the SAMDev and will not impact on the assessment of five year supply. Therefore, in my view the annualised approach is the most appropriate method to apply in this case. This equates to an annual requirement of 1,375 dwellings or a total requirement for the period 2006-2014 of 11,000 new homes.

Under-delivery and application of the buffer

11. Over the first 8 years of the plan period 8,280 dwellings have been provided in Shropshire. This represents a shortfall in the supply of housing of 2,720 dwellings. In addressing its existing shortfall the Council has put forward four potential scenarios. One of these approaches follows the ‘Sedgefield method’ where the shortfall in delivery should be met within the next five years, with the remaining three options advocating the ‘Liverpool method’ where it should be spread out over the remainder of the plan period, in this case the next 12 years.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 162 2 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

12. I acknowledge the Council’s concerns that the resultant five year requirement is so large that it would be undeliverable in the Shropshire market. I also recognise that the SAMDev is at an advanced stage of preparation and may facilitate the delivery of sites later on in the plan period. However, this would be at a stage of even higher forecast housing demand following the increasing five year bands in Policy CS10 and where there are likely to be fewer allocations. Moreover, the ‘Sedgefield approach’ more closely accords with the Framework requirement to ‘boost significantly the supply of housing’ and advice in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) that local planning authorities should aim to deal with any undersupply within the first five years of the plan period where possible, which in this case amounts to 2,720 dwellings.

13. The Council does not dispute that there has been persistent under delivery of housing in previous years of the plan period. In the circumstances, the application of a 20% buffer, in accordance with paragraph 47 of the Framework, is agreed between the parties. I have no reason to disagree. This amounts to a total of 1,375 dwellings.

14. It is however disputed how the 20% buffer should be applied to the five year requirement or to the five year requirement plus the backlog. The appellants argue that the application of the buffer should include the backlog, thereby increasing the five year housing requirement, and reducing the housing land supply to less than five years based on the late November 2014 figure. The Framework makes clear that the buffer is to ensure choice and competition in the market for land, that it should be supply brought forward from future years of the plan period. I am persuaded by the Council’s argument that applying the buffer to the sum of the five year requirement and the backlog would increase the total housing requirement over the lifetime of the plan, and that this approach would represent a penalty on the Council which is not intended by the Framework.

Housing supply

15. I do not agree with the a ppellant’s points concerning an additional discount for North Shropshire, due to the viability of building residential properties in the Northern part of the County as opposed to other parts of the County. Although the appellant has indicated that the delivery rate is proportionally lower in the North, the logical implication of such a policy would be to even out such a discount by reducing discounts in other areas of the County.

16. The appellant has made reference to delays in issuing section 106 legal agreements and older consents. The Council confirmed at the Hearing that about 76% of applications with a resolution to grant subject to a section 106 agreement included in their five year supply have now been issued. Whilst a proportion of these applications remain unsigned, I note that such sites have a 10% discount applied to them which appears reasonable to me. This buffer also allows for reduced delivery rates on sites recently granted outline planning permission, or sites in the early stages of construction such as on land at Bowbrook and Sutton Grange in Shrewsbury and Coppice Green Lane, Shifnal.

17. It has been put to me that the proposed delivery rates for the Shrewsbury and Oswestry Sustainable Urban Extensions (SUEs) are overly optimistic. The SUEs at Shrewsbury south and west are either under construction or subject to current planning applications. The time period allowed for the appropriate consents and suggested delivery rates appear to be reasonable in both cases.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 3 163 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

However, a planning application has yet to be submitted on land North of Shrewsbury Road, Oswestry. There are also potential land ownership issues with this site. It therefore appears somewhat optimistic for outline and reserved matters approval to be granted, conditions discharged and the first 25 dwellings to be constructed by the end 2017 as the Council suggests. Consequently, I have discounted the 25 units to be provided in 2016/17 from the Council’s late November 2014 housing supply figure of 11,063 houses.

18. In reference to older permissions, the Council has included a number of outline consents which are over three years old and have therefore expired. Some of these permissions were granted more than ten years ago and have not been superseded by full planning permissions. The Council’s housing supply update confirms that sites at Ellesmere Wharf, the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital, Arrow County Services, Longden, Mill Green Lane, Knighton and Newcastle Road Market Drayton have either been constructed or benefit from extant planning permissions. However, on the basis of the evidence put before me I am unable to conclude that the remaining sites are still viable or available, offer a suitable location for development, and are achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered within five years. Therefore, I cannot conclude that any of these sites are deliverable. As such, I have deleted 39 dwellings in this category.

19. From the other sites identified with potential delivery problems, I also note that the Former Dairy Site, School Road, Ruyton XI Towns is still in commercial use. Nevertheless, the Council’s update has confirmed that this site has an extant planning permission. I have not therefore discounted the impact of this site (80 units) from supply.

20. It has als o been put to me that C2 units should not be included in the Council’s 5 year supply figures, with affordable housing only counting if it has secure funding from the Homes and Community Agency (HCA). The Council confirmed that it only includes C2 accommodation if they are self-contained residential units, which appears to be a reasonable approach to me. Although the appellant has queried whether certain sites have HCA funding I have not been provided with any evidence to verify this. Furthermore, the Cou ncil’s November 2014 update confirms that the Unicorn/Whittington Road site in Oswestry which benefits from HCA funding has not been included in their 5 year supply. This site would provide 53 units and therefore exceed the total number of affordable units referred to by the appellant. The site at Station Road, Dorrington which was dismissed on appeal has also been deleted from the Council’s November 2014 figures.

21. The appellant has referred to the recent examination into the Cheshire East Local Plan where the Inspector stated that many local plan proposed allocations may be excluded from supply since they are not yet allocated or committed. Nevertheless, although it has been agreed that the SAMDev only attracts limited weight in the assessment of this appeal it is clearly at an advanced stage of preparation with the Inspector’s report anticipated in April/May 2015.

22. Furthermore, I have not been supplied with specific details of the potential unresolved objections to certain selected allocations which the appellant indicates should not be considered. Nor, as confirmed by the Council at the Hearing, should small sites such as Schoolhouse Lane, Bishops Castle be discounted purely due to their relative proximity to the River Clun Special Area

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 164 4 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

of Conservation. Consequently, the evidence provided by the Council provides an up to date assessment on the current status of many of these sites and the ones considered appropriate to include within the 5 year housing land supply. I am therefore satisfied on the basis of the evidence put before me that these sites are achievable and viable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the sites within five years.

Housing conclusion

23. In summary, the Council’s five year housing requirement is 6,875. Accounti ng for the identified shortfall and implementation of the 20% buffer, and removing 25 dwellings from the total number of units to be delivered at the Oswestry SUE and 39 houses from sites with outline consent from the late November 2014 figure of 11,063 leaves a supply of 10,999 dwellings. This represents a surplus of 29 houses.

24. Therefore, from the evidence that was available to me, it appears that from the Council’s perspective, they are able to demonstrate a 5 year supply deliverable housing land. Consequently, paragraph 49 of the Framework is not engaged and local plan policies relevant to the supply of housing are up-to-date, subject to their consistency with the Framework as set out in paragraph 215.

Development Plan

25. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan comprises of the Shropshire Local development Framework Adopted Core Strategy 2011(CS) and certain policies of the North Shropshire Local Plan 2005 (LP) which have been saved following a Direction made by the Secretary of State.

26. Policies CS1 and CS3 of the CS specify the number and distribution of housing across the County, with new development to be focused in market towns and other key centres. Policy CS5 states that new development will be strictly controlled in the countryside except for certain defined uses, none of which are subject to this proposal. These policies are broadly consistent with the Framework objectives to focus new development in sustainable locations and protect the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. The appeal site is located in the open countryside, outside a market town or other key centre and thus would conflict with Policies CS1, CS3 and CS5 of the CS.

27. Reference has also been made to Saved Policy H5 of the LP. This policy essentially seeks to restrict housing development to within settlement boundaries. It therefore applies a more restrictive approach and is not entirely consistent with the Framework’s presumption in favour of sustainable development. This reduces the weight I attach to this policy in my assessment of this case.

Character and appearance

28. The appeal site comprises of an irregular shaped parcel of land situated in the open countryside to the south-east of the town of Wem. Although there are several residential properties immediately opposite the site, and the land adjoins the existing dwelling at The Larches, the area, particularly on the

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 5 165 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

northern side of Shawbury Road is largely defined by open, undeveloped agricultural land. The varied field pattern and absence of built development in this area contributes to a pleasant semi-rural environment.

29. The land sits away from the main urban form of Wem and is physically separated from the town by the raised railway embankment which defines the eastern boundary of the settlement. Whilst there is a cluster of development and a proposed employment site in the emerging SAMDev directly adjacent to the railway line, the appeal site is physically detached from this area by open agricultural land.

30. I recognise that the proposed residential development is in outline form. The appellant also confirmed at the Hearing that part of the appeal site would be designated as an area of open space and that the number of dwellings could be restricted to 17. However, the land extends out significantly to the side and rear of The Larches. By introducing new residential development in this area which is surrounded by agricultural land, the appeal scheme would introduce a visually intrusive form of development which would conflict with the open, undeveloped character of the area. This impact would be exacerbated by the even land form and alignment of Shawbury Road which would open up the site to view from the surrounding countryside.

31. Although there is some sporadic housing development on Shawbury Road, this principally comprises of a small linear group of dwellings on the southern side of the road. The appeal scheme due to the quantum of development proposed and extensive depth and scale of the site would also therefore fail to respect the established structure and pattern of exiting development in the area.

32. I am mindful that the proposed employment land could project out into the open countryside to the north. Nevertheless, this site adjoins an existing employment site and follows the route of the railway line. As such, it would be both physically and functionally connected to the settlement reducing its potential incursion into the countryside. It would therefore differ from the appeal scheme which would retain a sense of separation from the built form of Wem. Whilst I recognise that there is no specific policy requirement for new development to be ‘contiguous’ , this does not outweigh the harm I have identified to the form and layout of this semi-rural area.

33. Thus, the proposed residential development would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be contrary to Policies CS6 and CS17 of the CS which require new development to protect and enhance the high quality and local character of Shropshire’s natural and built environment. It would also conflict with a core planning principle of the Framework, to take account of the different roles and character of different areas and recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

Sustainability and accessibility

34. The appeal site is located on Shawbury Road approximately 300 metres south- east of Wem. There is a continuous footway linking the site with the edge of the town and a petrol station and general convenience store. Whilst the footpath is only partially lit and located on a busy road, it would provide a clear route into Wem for potential future occupiers. I also observed that the footway narrows in places including on either side of the railway bridge and at certain points along the route into the town centre. However, it is proposed to widen

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 166 6 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

the footway adjacent to the bridge to improve access. This could be achieved by utilising part of the highway verge through an appropriately worded condition as suggested by the Council’s h ighways engineer.

35. I was also able to walk into the centre of Wem to access shops, schools and the towns train station. At a distance of about 1 kilometre, the range of services and facilities within the High Street are within a reasonable walking distance of the appeal site even accounting for the need to cross the road at several points. Although the train station and schools are between 1.5 and 2 kilometres away they would also be relatively accessible from the appeal site, particularly by bicycle. Indeed, existing residents in the southern part of the town have to travel similar distances to access these facilities.

36. In terms of public transport, the nearest bus stop is situated on the route into town about 650 metres from the site. I observed during my site visit that this bus stop provides a regular service between Shrewsbury and Whitchurch. This adds to the sustainability credentials of the scheme.

37. Having regard to the above factors, I conclude that the appeal development is located in a reasonably accessible and sustainable location. It would therefore accord with Policy CS6 in this respect which requires proposals that are likely to generate significant levels of traffic should be located in accessible locations where opportunities for walking, cycling and use of public transport can be maximised and the need for car based travel reduced. These objectives are consistent with guidance in paragraph 17 of the Framework that planning should actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling.

Overall Planning Balance

38. Paragraph 7 of the Framework states that there are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. These roles are mutually dependant and should be jointly sought to achieve sustainable development.

39. The Framework seeks to boost significantly the supply of housing. Given my conclusion of the Council’s five year housing supply, however, the appeal site is not required to meet the area’s identified housing need. Therefore, little weight can be attached to the release of this unallocated, greenfield site to meet housing need.

40. The proposal would generate substantial economic benefits during the construction phase and through the ongoing support for local businesses in Wem by future occupiers of the new dwellings. It would also provide additional income through the new Homes Bonus and Council Tax receipts. I attach moderate weight to these benefits.

41. Turning to the social aspects of sustainability, the scheme would provide on- site affordable housing to meet a recognised need in accordance with Policy CS11 of the CS and the Shropshire Local Development Framework Type and Affordability of Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2012 (SPD). It would als o represent chargeable development under the Council’s Community Infrastructure Levy required to mitigate the effects of the proposal and thereby contributes towards infrastructure in the local area. I apportion moderate

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 7 167 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

weight to such considerations. In addition, the sites relatively accessible location also weighs in favour of the scheme.

42. In relation to the environment, the submitted Environmental Survey identifies that the development would not adversely affect ecology. I also recognise that conditions requiring a detailed landscaping scheme to be submitted could mitigate the visual impact of the scheme to a limited extent. Furthermore, the introduction of energy efficiency measures in the design of the dwellings at reserved matters stage could provide some additional limited benefits.

43. However, on the other hand, there would be significant harm to the character and appearance of the area, in conflict with development plan policies referred to earlier and the policies of the Framework to conserve and enhance the natural environment.

44. Boosting significantly the supply of housing will inevitably require housing to be built on some greenfield sites which will result in changes to the local environment. Nonetheless, the substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area that would arise from this development, and the conflict with specific development plan policies would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the acknowledged benefits of the proposal. I therefore find that the appeal development would not provide a suitable site for housing having regard to housing supply, the character and appearance of the area and the principles of sustainable development.

Other Matters

45. Local residents have raised concerns regarding existing problems with flooding in the area. It is evident from the photographs and both written and verbal evidence provided at the Hearing that both the land adjoining and opposite the site floods during periods of heavy rain. Sections of Shawbury Road can also become flooded. I appreciate that residents are concerned about the potential implications the appeal development could have on adjacent land including their own properties. However, such matters could be mitigated through the imposition of conditions requiring the submission and approval of a comprehensive drainage scheme and Flood Risk Assessment prior to the submission of reserved matters.

46. I have been provided with a copy of a letter from Wem Town Council (WTC) which indicates that up to 100 dwellings could be provided on Shawbury Road. Nevertheless, WTC have objected to the appeal scheme and I have taken their representations into account in reaching my decision.

47. It has also been put to m e that the Council’s Planning Policy Team (PPT) questioned the Council’s ability t o resist the development. From my reading of the PPT formal comments it is clear that they objected to the scheme and indicated that the case officer would need to balance any benefits associated with the development against any potential adverse impacts. It is evident from the committee report that this balancing exercise has clearly been carried out by the Council in reaching their decision.

48. Whilst paragraphs 186 and 187 of the Framework advise that local planning authorities should approach decision-taking in a positive way and look for solutions not problems, in this case the appeal proposal would conflict with the overarching aim of the Framework to deliver sustainable development. Nor

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 168 8 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

would the fact that the scale of the appeal scheme would not compromise the future housing allocations in the SAMDEV for Wem or its limited impact on the living conditions of nearby properties justify the development.

Unilateral Undertaking and the Community Infrastructure Levy

49. A signed Unilateral Undertaking (UU) dated 30 January 2015 has been submitted which would secure contributions towards affordable housing. The appeal proposal would also represent chargeable development under the Council’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which would help mitigate the impact of the scheme if permission were granted. However, given my conclusions on the appeal, there is no need for me to consider the matter further.

Conclusion

50. For the reasons set above, and having regard to all other matters raised, including the scope of possible planning conditions, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

T Cannon

INSPECTOR

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 9 169 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3000672

APPEARANCES

FOR THE APPELLANT:

Mr M Parrish The Planning Group Limited

Mr D Richards The Planning Group Limited

Mrs H Howie Berrys

FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY:

Mr A Cooper Team leader Environmental Policy Shropshire Council

Mrs J Preece Technical Specialist Planning Officer Shropshire Council

Mr D Corden Planning Policy Officer Shropshire Council

INTERESTED PARTIES

Mr R Unwin Richard Unwin Chartered Surveyors Acting on behalf of local residents

Mr A Gregory Local resident, Stamford, Shawbury Road, Wem, SY4 5PF

Mr G McGrath Local resident, Red House, Shawbury Road, Wem, SY4 5PF

Mr B Clay Local resident, Waldrow, Shawbury Road, Wem, Shropshire, SY4 5PF

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AT THE HEARING

1. Plan identifying the Wem development boundary in the North Shropshire

Local Plan 2005

5. Plan identifying the Wem development boundary in the emerging

Site Allocations and Management of Development Plan (SAMDev)

8. Updated appendices 3 and 4 to the Shropshire Five Year Housing Land Supply

Statement www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 170 10

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 10 March 2015 by William Fieldhouse BA (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 20 May 2015

Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/A/14/2228940 Oswestry Road, Oswestry Rural, Trefonen SY10 9DX The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission. The appeal is made by Mr Howard Martin against the decision of Shropshire Council. The application Ref 14/00426/OUT, dated 29 January 2014, was refused by notice dated 5 September 2014. The development proposed was originally described as “use of land for residential development and the formation of a vehicular access” .

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Preliminary Matters

2. The description of development set out in the header above is taken from the planning application form. However, the decision notice and appeal form refer to an outline application (access for approval) for mixed residential development, alterations to existing vehicular access, and works to existing highway. It is clear from various documents that the application sought outline planning permission with all matters, other than access, reserved for subsequent approval, and that the submitted layout plan is for illustrative purposes only rather than a formal part of the proposal.

3. At the appeal stage, the appellant submitted a plan showing a minor amendment to the red line boundary along the Oswestry Road frontage to ensure that it correctly corresponds to his land ownership. This would not materially affect the nature of the development, and I am satisfied that no third party interests are prejudiced.

4. The planning application that led to this appeal was recommended for approval by officers, along with a number of others, in 2014. As it is entitled to do, a committee of the Council decided to refuse planning permission contrary to officer advice. I have been referred to a number of the other recent proposals for residential development in Shropshire, including in the village, as well as to various appeal decisions. I have taken account of these other proposals and decisions in so far as they are relevant. However, I have determined this appeal in the context of the particular nature of the site and its surroundings having regard to national and local planning policies and all of the information

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Page 171 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

provided to me including the assessment of the planning application by Council officers.

5. On 27 February 2015, the Government published 2012-based household projections for England 2012-2037. The appellant and Council were given the opportunity to comment on whether these latest projections have implications for the current proposal. I have taken account of the responses received.

Main Issues

6. The main issues are:

whether the proposal would be in accordance with national and local planning policies relating to the location and supply of housing;

the effect on the character and appearance of the area; and

whether the proposal would result in a sustainable pattern of development, having regard to access to job opportunities, shops, services and facilities.

Reasons

7. Trefonen is a medium-sized village surrounded by attractive hilly countryside with fields, country lanes, scattered buildings, hedgerows and areas of woodland. There is a variety of dwellings and other buildings in the village in terms of age, layout and design. Services and facilities include a primary school, church, public house, village hall, sports pitch, playground, bus service to Oswestry and, at the time of my site visit, a shop and post office.

8. The appeal site is a low lying, essentially flat field on the northern edge of the village located between Oswestry Road to the east and Chapel Lane to the west and south. There is one mature tree, subject to a tree preservation order, and a substantial hedgerow along the Oswestry Road frontage and a stone wall along Chapel Lane. A public footpath demarcates most of the northern boundary of the site, beyond which the agricultural land continues at a similar level and then rises with a limited number of houses and farm buildings dotted across the hillside. Offa’s Dyke, a Scheduled Ancient Monument, is located in a field to the north west of the site on the other side of Chapel Lane. Offa’s Dyke path, a national trail, runs north to south further to the west.

9. The main parts of the village to the west and south west are on higher ground than the site, and to the east and south east are the outdoor recreational facilities, village hall, church and primary school on the other side of Oswestry Road. Immediately to the south of the site, across Chapel Lane, is a small area of public open space known as Chapel Green.

Whether the Proposal would be in accordance with the Objectives of National and Local Planning Policies relating to the Location and Supply of Housing

10. The site is outside the development boundary defined in the Oswestry Local Plan (1999) meaning that the proposal would not be in accordance with policy H5. Furthermore, policy CS5 of the Shropshire Core Strategy (2011) states that development will be strictly controlled in the countryside and that new housing will only be allowed in a limited number of circumstances, none of

2 Page 172 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

which apply in this case. Policy CS4 of the core strategy states that development will not be allowed in rural areas outside community “hubs and clusters” unless it meets policy CS5, and makes it clear that these settlements will be defined in the Site Allocations and Management of Development Plan (“SAMDev”). The emerging SAMDev, which does not identify Trefonen as a hub or cluster, was submitted for examination in 2014 , and the Inspector’s report has not yet been published. I attach only limited weight to the SAMDev at this stage given that there are outstanding objections to relevant policies.

11. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to both existing and emerging development plan policies aimed at protecting the countryside and ensuring that new housing is located where it will contribute towards a sustainable pattern of development, albeit that the emerging policies carry only limited weight.

12. The National Planning Policy Framework (“NPPF”) aims to boost significantly the supply of housing and makes it clear that local planning authorities should be able to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites 1. I have been referred to two recent appeal decisions, one of which found that the Council could demonstrate an appropriate supply, the other that the evidence was inconclusive 2. The evidence presented to me by the Council, based on that which it submitted to the SAMDev examination, shows that in late November 2014 there were deliverable sites for 11,063 dwellings. This represents 5.43 years supply against the requirement for 10,180 dwellings for the period 2014- 2019 based on the core strategy and to make up for a shortfall in delivery since 2006 along with a 20% buffer.

13. The appellant disagrees with the calculation of the current five year requirement. However, neither party suggests that t he Government’s latest household projections have implications for the current five year requirement, and based on the information before me I am satisfied that the housing figure set out in the core strategy, which was adopted as recently as 2011, should remain the starting point for calculating the five year housing supply as recommended in national guidance 3. The appellant does have serious doubts about the deliverability of some of the sites, but I have not been provided with a detailed critique of the Council’s latest analysis and am not therefore persuaded that they are unlikely to be developed by 2019.

14. The matter of housing land supply , along with whether “hubs and clusters” have been appropriately identified, will be thoroughly and properly tested at the SAMDev examination. In the meantime, and in the absence of any definitive evidence to lead me to conclude that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, I do not consider local plan and core strategy policies relating to the supply of housing and protection of the countryside to be out of date notwithstanding that the village development boundary was defined in the context of a plan that looked forward to 2006.

15. I therefore conclude on this issue that the proposal would be contrary to the objectives of local plan policy H5 and core strategy policies CS4 and CS5 relating to the location of housing development in rural areas. Furthermore,

1 NPPF paragraph 47. 2 Appeal refs APP/L3245/A/14/2223481 (land off Oldbury Road, Bridgnorth), dismissed 19 January 2015; and APP/L3245/A/14/2223087 (land adjacent to Rednal Manor, West Felton), dismissed 13 January 2015. 3 PPG ID-3-030.

3 Page 173 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

those policies need not be considered out of date in the context of current national planning policies relating to housing land supply, sustainable development, and protection of the countryside.

Character and Appearance

16. As all matters other than access are reserved, the assessment of this issue depends on whether some form of residential development would, in principle, have a materially harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area.

17. Whilst the village development boundary is clearly defined on the local plan proposals map, there is not an obvious edge to the northern side of the settlement that one experiences on the ground. As one approaches the village along Oswestry Road from the north there are buildings and a playing field before the development boundary is reached, and similarly there are dwellings along Chapel Lane outside the local plan boundary. The agricultural land between those two roads, of which the appeal site forms part, extends some distance into what could reasonably be perceived as the built up area of the village on either side.

18. To my mind, the site at present contributes positively to the rural setting of the village, being part of a relatively narrow strip of countryside that extends into the settlement as far as Chapel Green near its centre. The open nature of this land is clearly apparent from a number of vantage points including from the surrounding roads, the public footpath to the north, and Chapel Green to the south. Whilst the hedgerow along Oswestry Road obscures views of the field to some extent, it adds to the rural quality of the area.

19. The open nature of the site and adjoining agricultural land to the north is clearly valued by local residents. This is apparent from the representations made in response to this proposal and by the Village Design Statement (2007) which states that open land and countryside surrounding the settlement must be protected from development and the part of the field next to Chapel Green, bordered by Chapel Lane and Oswestry Road should, if it ever became available, be considered for development as a public open space for community use to complement Chapel Green. Whilst the Village Design Statement predates the core strategy and NPPF, it is not inconsistent with the objectives of current and emerging development plan policies relating to Trefonen and therefore it can be afforded some weight.

20. By reducing the extent of the open wedge of countryside, the proposal would cause moderate harm to the rural setting and quality of this part of the village. Furthermore, it is inevitable that houses, however well designed and sited, would alter longer distance views into the village from the north, towards the church from the west, and out of the village from Chapel Green and nearby roads. This would, to some degree, further impact on the perceived character of this part of the village.

21. I conclude on this issue that the proposal, by leading to the loss of part of a valued open area of countryside that extends into the village, would have a moderate adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would, therefore, be contrary to the objectives of national policy 4 and core

4 NPPF paragraph 17, 5 th bullet point.

4 Page 174 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

strategy policies CS5 and CS6 which collectively recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and seek to ensure that development respects and enhances local distinctiveness.

Sustainable Pattern of Development?

22. The site is within easy walking distance of the local services in the village meaning that future residents would not be dependent on the use of a car to meet many daily needs. Oswestry, which provides a wider range of shops, facilities and job opportunities, is only around 5 kilometres away meaning that even if the somewhat limited bus services were not used, the length of car journeys need not be excessive. I am satisfied, therefore, that the site is in a reasonably accessible location for a limited number of new homes in a rural area. Furthermore, additional residents would be likely to support businesses and services in the village, including the village school which has a significant amount of spare capacity and the recently opened shop and post office, thereby helping to sustain their existence.

23. In coming to this view, I am aware that Trefonen is not designated as a “hub or cluster” in the emerging SAMDev, but understand that is something that depends on a broader range of issues than the accessibility of the site and, in any case, is a matter that should properly be determined through the on-going examination process. Furthermore, I am aware of a number of appeal decisions where the issue of whether new housing in rural parts of Shropshire would represent sustainable development was considered 5. However, those decisions relate to different locations, and reflect the particular circumstances of those cases which no doubt were materially different to those before me.

24. I conclude on this issue that the proposal would result in a sustainable pattern of development consistent with the objectives of national policy 6 and core strategy policy CS6 which collectively seek to ensure that development is accessible to all, the need for car based travel is reduced, and housing in rural areas is located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities.

Other Matters

25. A signed planning obligation has been submitted at the appeal stage which would ensure the provision of on-site affordable housing and a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing elsewhere in accordance with Council guidance 7. This would mean that the proposal would help to meet identified housing needs in the area in accordance with core strategy policy CS11. On this basis I am satisfied that it would meet the relevant legal and national policy tests, and I will therefore take it into account in coming to my decision 8.

26. The proposal would lead to social and economic benefits through the provision of twenty or so new homes in a location that would help to maintain and

5 Appeal refs APP/L3245/A/14/2212314 (land adjoining The Romping Cat, near Bomere Heath) dismissed 7 October 2014, and APP/L3245/A/14/2222742 (land to north side of Station Road, Dorrington) dismissed 10 November 2014. 6 NPPF paragraphs 32 and 55. 7 Supplementary Planning Document on the Type and Affordability of Housing (adopted 2012) 8 NPPF paragraph 204.

5 Page 175 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

enhance the vitality of a rural community, as well as by making a contribution towards providing affordable housing elsewhere. The development would also create additional work for builders during the construction phase. Given that the scale of the proposal is limited, and that I have found that the Council is able to demonstrate a five year supply of housing land, I attach moderate weight to these benefits.

27. The proposal would lead to the loss of grade 3 agricultural land. However, given the limited size of the site, and the fact that it is bounded on three sides by roads and development within the village, I attach only limited weight to the harm that would be caused.

28. The site is sufficient distance away from Offa’s Dyke, with existing buildings and Chapel Lane in between, to mean that the proposal would have no material impact on the Scheduled Ancient Monument or its setting. Subject to conditions, any heritage assets associated with former mining and brickworks carried out on and around the site could be protected and recorded as appropriate meaning that the site’s contribution to the historic character of the area would be protected.

29. The proposal has attracted opposition from a large number of local residents and the Parish Council who have various other concerns, in addition to the issues that I have already considered, including in relation to highway safety, car parking, local infrastructure, ecology, contamination, land stability, drainage and flooding. However, these have all been carefully considered by the Council with the benefit of expert advice from a number of consultees. Based on all that I have read, including the various technical reports submitted by the appellant as well as information provided by third parties, and seen during my site visit, I agree with the Council that the proposal would cause no material harm in these respects provided that appropriate conditions were attached if the appeal were to be allowed.

30. The appellant is concerned that vociferous local residents are unreasonably opposed to much needed new housing in the village, and frustrated that a site that was identified in the Council’s strategic housing land availability assessment as suitable as long ago as 2009 has not been allowed to be developed. However, I have considered the current proposal on its own merits in the context of relevant national and local planning policies.

Overall Assessment and Conclusion

31. A core principle is that planning should be genuinely plan-led, meaning that plans should be kept up to date and that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise 9.

32. The proposal would be contrary to current development plan policies relating to the location of new housing.

33. The proposal would also be contrary to policies in the Village Design Statement and the emerging SAMDev, and lead to the loss of a small area of agricultural

9 NPPF paragraph 11 and 17.

6 Page 176 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/A/14/2228940

land. Whilst I attach only limited weight to these factors, they count against the proposal.

34. Furthermore, I have found that the proposal would cause moderate harm to the character and appearance of the area.

35. On the other hand, the proposal would have social and economic benefits to which I attach moderate weight.

36. As I have found that relevant local plan and core strategy policies are not out of date, it is not necessary for me to consider whether the adverse impacts that I have identified would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits 10 . Rather, the balancing exercise that I need to undertake is simply whether material considerations indicate that development that is not in accordance with the development plan should be allowed.

37. As I have identified moderate harm to the character and appearance of the area, along with some other limited harm, and benefits that are worthy of moderate weight, the material considerations do not indicate to me that the proposal should be allowed contrary to the development plan.

Conclusion

38. For the reasons given above, I conclude on balance that the appeal should be dismissed.

William Fieldhouse

INSPECTOR

10 NPPF paragraph 14.

7 Page 177 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 178

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 11 May 2015 by I Radcliffe BSc(Hons) MCIEH DMS an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 28 May 2015

Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/W/14/3001275 Cross Keys Inn, Kinnerley, Oswestry SY10 8DB The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. The appeal is made by Mr Malcolm Guest against the decision of Shropshire Council. The application Ref 14/02864/FUL, dated 25 June 2014, was refused by notice dated 30 September 2014. The development proposed is a 4 bedroom detached dwelling with detached garage.

Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Application for costs 2. An application for costs was made by Mr Malcolm Guest against Shropshire Council. This application will be the subject of a separate Decision. Main Issues 3. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the setting of Cross Keys Inn, a Grade II listed building and St Ma ry’s Church, a Grade II* listed building. Reasons 4. In the exercise of planning functions, the statutory test in relation to a listed building is that special regard shall be had to the desirability of preserving the building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Policy CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy is consistent with this test. 5. Paragraph 126 of the National Planning Policy Framework advises, amongst other matters, that the conservation of the historic environment can bring wide social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits. It also identifies that heritage assets are irreplaceable resources. Paragraph 132 advises that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, such as a listed building, great weight should be given to conservation of the asset. 6. Cross Keys Inn is a Grade II listed building. It is located on the corner of School Road and Vicarage Lane in a prominent position in the centre of the village. It is a timber cruck framed building dating from the fourteenth century, with additional alterations from the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The eastern side of the building has a gabled end and white washed walls. The nineteenth century western end has red brick walls

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 179 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3001275

laid in English garden wall bond with painted stone dressings and a hipped slated roof. Its significance therefore derives from its architectural and historic interest. The spacious open setting of the public house within its grounds contributes visually to its significance. 7. The appeal site occupies the open land that formed the side garden of the public house between its western side elevation and the first house on Vicarage Lane. Development along the Lane is characterised by a mixture of mature residential dwellings and late twentieth century infill housing. However, an important feature, characteristic of development generally in the vicinity of the public house, is that houses are well spaced with gaps typically of several metres between buildings. The proposed development would occupy the vast majority of the open land to the western side of the public house. The urbanisation of this land would have a significant adverse effect on the public house’s spacious open setting and distract from its appreciation. It would also be out of keeping with the pattern of development in the area. 8. The harmful effect of the proposed development that I have described would be apparent in views from School Road, which is the main route through the village, and from Vicarage Lane. It would also be apparent in views from the ground floor windows within the western elevation of the public house. Rather than facing onto the open side garden these windows would face the blank side wall of the garage that would serve the proposed house. In views from St Mary’ s Church the articulation of the proposed dwelling would provide more visual interest than the existing plain side elevation of No 1. However, this consideration, along with the design of the dwelling which would be sympathetic to the form and architectural style of the public house and the neighbouring dwelling, would be insufficient to overcome the demonstrable harm that I have described. 9. St Mary’ s Church dates from 1600 and has later additions. It is constructed from red sandstone blocks, with a slated and tiled roof, and has many details. Its significance is therefore architectural. The Church separated from the appeal site by School Road and the public house would be sufficiently distant for its setting not to be adversely affected by the proposal. Notwithstanding my favourable findings in relation to the effect of the proposed development on the setting of the Church, this does not overcome the harm that the proposed development would cause to the setting of Cross Keys Public House. 10. The harm that would be caused to the listed building ’s setting and the significance of the building would be less than substantial. In such circumstances paragraph 134 of the Framework advises that the harm that would be caused should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. In accordance with the statutory duty described I attach considerable importance and weight to the harm that would be caused to the setting of Cross Keys Public House, a Grade II listed building. 11. On the other side of the balance, the proposed development could help finance improvements to the public house and enable it to reopen. However, I am not persuaded on the basis of the submitted evidence that the proposed development is the only realistic method by which the public house could be brought back into use. Furthermore, even if I was there is no legal agreement in place to ensure that the proceeds of the development would be used for this purpose. I therefore attach minimal weight to this consideration in favour of

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 180 2 Appeal Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3001275

the appeal. The proposal would provide an additional house that would help meet housing need in a sustainable location. Its construction and fitting out would result in employment and generate economic activity. These considerations are of some weight in favour of the development. 12. Taking all these matters into account, my overall conclusion is that the public benefits of the proposal do not outweigh the harm that would be caused to the setting of the listed building. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the Framework as well as failing the statutory test. It would also be contrary to the objectives of policy CS6 of the Core Strategy. This policy is consistent with the Framework and requires the protection of the character and appearance of a locality, including the historic environment, through high quality design that respects local design features. 13. The Council seeks a contribution towards affordable housing. In November 2014, the Government announced changes to its Planning Practice Guidance. Further updates on 27 February 2015 make clear that the changes to the planning guidance were changes to national policy. Among other things, those changes advise that contributions towards affordable housing should not be sought from small-scale developments of ten units or less. The tests in paragraph 204 of the Framework and regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 apply to planning obligations. However, in this case as the appeal is to be dismissed on its substantive merits it is not necessary to assess what is sought against these requirements. 14. For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. Ian Radcliffe Inspector

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 3 181 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 182

Costs Decision Site visit made on 11 May 2015 by I Radcliffe BSc(Hons) MCIEH DMS an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 28 May 2015

Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/W/14/3001275 Cross Keys Inn, Kinnerley, Oswestry SY10 8DB The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). The application is made by Mr Malcolm Guest for a full award of costs against Shropshire Council. The appeal was against the refusal of planning permission for a four bedroom detached dwelling with detached garage.

Decision 1. The application for an award of costs is refused.

Reasons

2. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that costs may be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. There is one claim to assess; whether the Council failed to produce adequate evidence to substantiate its reason for refusal, and thereby prevented development which clearly should have been permitted having regard to the development plan, national policy and any other material considerations.

3. The officer recommendation in relation this application was to grant permission. However, determining this application involved judgement. In such circumstances planning authorities are not obliged to accept officer recommendations, so long as reasonable planning grounds are advanced for taking a different decision. In its reason for refusal the Council identified that the close proximity of the proposed building would harm the setting of the listed public house. The appeal statement reaffirms this and by way of explanation notes that the proposal would adversely alter the historical context of the building and how it would be read within the street scene. It also notes that the statutory test in relation to a listed building is that special regard shall be had to the desirability of its preservation, including its setting. I therefore find that the Council through its reason for refusal and appeal statement presented respectable evidence which substantiated its reason to refuse planning permission.

4. It is alleged that the decision to refuse permission was perverse as the proposed development would enable the public house to come back into use. However, for the reasons given in the appeal decision I agree with the Council that this assertion is not well founded.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectoratePage 183 Costs Decision APP/L3245/W/14/3001275

5. Taking all these matters into account, I therefore find that the Council presented respectable evidence which substantiated its reason to refuse planning permission. As a result, unreasonable behaviour resulting in unnecessary or wasted expense, as described in PPG, has not been demonstrated. An award of costs is therefore not justified. Ian Radcliffe

Inspector