Navigate

Menu

    Rating

    Page not yet rated.
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1

    Contact Us

    Address:
    The Guildhall
    Frankwell Quay
    Shrewsbury
    SY3 8HQ
     
    Telephone:
    01743 281000
     
    email:

    DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND

    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITTEE

    Meeting to be held in the Council Chamber, Oakley Manor, Belle Vue Road, Shrewsbury on Tuesday 16th March 2004 at 5.30 p.m.

    Site Visits from Oakley Manor at 10.00 a.m. (light refreshments will be provided for Members and Officers in the Committee Room from 5.00 p.m)

    Membership: Councillor Brennand (Chairman)

    Councillors: Banks, Bebb, Bushell, Chaplin, Freestone, R. Jones, Price, Rees, Thurston, Townsend, Mrs Williams and Ms Wild.

    Substitutes: Councillors Mrs Allaway, Cooke, Evans, Mrs Jones.

    Committee Officer Responsible: Fiona Howe – Tel. 01743 – 281031

    Members are respectfully reminded of the following planning procedure adopted by the Council:

    1. The Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee will refer to the Planning Committee for determination:

    1. any proposed refusal of deemed planning permission or the reference back to the Cabinet of a decision to seek planning permission;
    1. and with reasons, any application for planning permission where the Committee is minded to approve the application contrary to the officer’s recommendation and where, if approved, the application would be a significant departure from the policies of the development plan.
    2. any controversial application which this committee has failed to determine.

    2. That in the event of the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee recommending the determination of an application for planning permission contrary to a development plan then the reason for so doing shall be minuted.

    3. That where the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee is minded to refuse an application for planning permission contrary to the officers recommendation then:

    1. the Committee shall specify as fully as possible the proposed grounds for refusal;
    2. the Solicitor in conjunction with the Development Control Manager shall be asked to consider whether any of the grounds for refusal are lawful and sustainable;
    3. If one or more grounds for refusal are lawful and sustainable the application shall be refused on the grounds stated;
    4. if none of the grounds are considered to be lawful and sustainable, the application shall be referred back to the Committee for determination at the next meeting with a report from the Solicitor.

    4. That all correspondence received by members on current or forthcoming planning applications be forwarded to the Planning Department for details to be included in the officers’ report or schedule of late letters before return to members.

    A G E N D A

    1. MINUTES – 24th February 2004

    Recommendation:

    That the Minutes of the meeting of the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee held on 24th February 2004 be confirmed as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

    2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE/NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTES

    3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST AND DISPENSATIONS

    To receive any declarations of members’ interests in any matters which are to be considered at this meeting and to receive any dispensations which will be relied upon.

    (a) Personal  (b) Personal and Prejudicial

    When members are declaring a personal interest, or a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of which they have dispensation, they should specify the nature of such interest. Members should leave the room if they have a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of which they do not have a dispensation.

    4. APPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT

    Contents Page     Schedule of Applications

    To consider the schedule of applications for development submitted by the Director of Development Services.

    The Chairman will propose that with regard to applications on the schedule of applications for development submitted by the Director of Development Services on which there is no debate, the recommendations of the Officers be deemed to have been accepted without any modifications.

    5. IMPLEMENTING DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BEST VALUE REVIEW

    Best Value

    To consider a report by the Development Control Manager.

    6. SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT LOW COST HOUSING - SHRAWARDINE

    Shrawardine

    To consider a report by the Development Control Manager.

    7. ARTICLE 4 DIRECTIONS

    To note that a report by the Conservation Officer on Article 4 Directions and the need for equality will be brought to the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee on 27th April 2004.

    8. PLANNING APPEALS

    The following decisions of the Planning Inspectorate have been received by the Council regarding appeals against a decision to refuse to grant planning permission:

    (a) The Wain House Berrington - Erection of a lean-to at the end of the house. Two appeals Ref 03/0879/F and 03/0847/LB

    Decision: Both dismissed 17/02/2004

    Summary: The main issue was the effect of the extension on the character and appearance of the listed building. The Inspector agreed that the extension satisfied a need by the family but in terms of its design it was insensitive and inappropriate. It was unsympathetic to the barn and would have a serious adverse effect on the historic interest and character of the converted barn.

    (b) 1 and 2 Greenfield Street Shrewsbury - Erection of a detached dwelling and new access onto Ellesmere Road Ref 03/0393/F

    Decision: Allowed subject to conditions 25/02/2004

    Summary: The key issues in this case were the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the locality and the living conditions of occupiers of adjoining properties having regard to loss of privacy and overbearing appearance.

    The Inspector considered that the size of the site was such that the building would reflect tye character and appearance of the surrounding area. The small garden size would be sufficient to meet the needs of the residents had not appear cramped. The access would include on site turning and the gable would be 13metres away from the nearest dwelling thus no significant levels of overbearing would be caused. The window positions would also result in minimal overlooking of neighbouring properties.

    No objections were raised on highway safety grounds. Overall the development was considered to be acceptable.

     

    Guildhall, Shrewsbury 09/03/04

     

    Copies of the attached reports are available in large print on request from the Committee Section at The Guildhall, Dogpole, Shrewsbury, SY1 1ER Tel. 01743 281031