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, The Guildhall, Frankwell Quay, Shrewsbury on Tuesday, 26th April 2005 at 5.30 p.m.

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

Membership: Councillor Rees (Chairman)

Councillors:  Bebb, Mrs Brennand, Bushell, Chaplin, Cooke, Freestone, R. Jones, Owen, Price, Thurston, Townsend and Ms Wild.

Substitutes: Councillors Mrs Allaway, Evans, Mrs Jones and Mrs Williams.

Committee Officer Responsible: Liz Sidaway Tel. 01743 281032


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 Planning Services 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 additional letters before return to members.

AGENDA

1. MINUTES -  5th April 2005

Recommendation:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee held on 5th April 2005 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

ContentsSchedule of Applications

To consider the schedule of applications for development submitted by the Planning Services Manager.

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

5. OTELEY ROAD (LAND AT), SHREWSBURY

Oteley Road Report

To consider the report of the Planning Services Manager.

6. INTERIM AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICIES

Report - Interim Affordable Housing Policies

To consider the report of the Head of Planning Policy.

7. 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:

Site: Land at Grafton Mews, Harlescott - Change of use of retail shop to A3 takeaway. Ref 04/0054/F
Decision: Appeal dismissed 31 March 2005
Summary: The issues in this case were the impact on neighbouring properties from nuisance and disturbance and the potential for crime and anti-social behaviour in the locality. The Inspector did not consider that the previous permission for a takeaway as part of the original development was a material factor as circumstances had changed over time. He was concerned that the area showed signs of the congregation of youths at present and this use would exacerbate the situation. The area was in a vulnerable position and the offers made by the applicant regarding CCTV, reduced opening hours, a personal/temporary permission were not convincing arguments to make the scheme acceptable. The demand for the facility was recognised and no objections were raised to the impact of litter or the proposed extraction proposals.

Site: Two appeals at Former Garage, Walford Heath - A. Ref: 04/0726/F Erection of a 2m high timber fence and 2.5m high steel security fence and gates with associated planting; and B. Ref: 04/0717/F Change of use of open agriclutural land to a parking and hardstanding area for a maintenance depot (retrospective).
Decision: Both appeals allowed 31 March 2005.
Summary: Appeal A - key issues. The existing site looked discordant in the street scene and the new fencing would provide a defined boundary and a tidier appearance. The new landscaping would also soften the impact from the road. The proposed timber fence was compatible with the adjacent fence and would not be readily seen from the road. Overall, the proposals would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the locality.

Appeal B- The land involved was a minimal addition to the previous site and there was a minimum loss of agricultural land. The gap to neighbouring properties was still some 40metres. It was not therefore an undesirable intrusion into the countryside. The two poles would appear to fit in with the existing overhead cables a in the area. The development would not have a harmful effect on the area.

Site: Unit 6 Monkmoor Trading Estate. Ref 04/0895/VAR - Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 99/0533 dated 24th June 1999 to allow the ancillary retail showroom to be open on Saturdays from 13.00 hours to 17.00 hours. Decision: Appeal Allowed
Summary: The key issue was the potential impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties. It was considered that the location and orientation of the premises were such that the extra opening time would not be detrimental to neighbours as other activity already takes place from other units during the afternoon and a small showroom would be unlikely to generate significant additional movements of people and activity.

Site: Mill Cottage, Harley - Erection of a 2 storey side extension. Ref 04/1019/F
Decision: Appeal Dismissed 04/04/2005Summary: The key issue in this case was the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the locality. The extension was roughly the same size as the existing (100%) and its scale coupled with its position at right angles to the dwelling made it prominent when viewed from the main road. The plot was large but the extension would be highly visible and dominate and detract from the proportions of the existing house. The obtrusive and unbalanced impact was not acceptable on this modest cottage.

 

The Guildhall
Shrewsbury
18/04/05

Copies of the attached reports are available in large print on request from the Committee Section at The Guildhall, Frankwell Quay, Shrewsbury, SY3 8HQ Tel. 01743 281032