Shrewsbury & Atcham
Borough Council

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;

2. 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.

3. 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 - 19^th July 2005

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee held on 19^th July 2005 be confirmed as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

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.

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.

To consider a report of the Planning Services Manager.

That the following orders be confirmed without modification:

1. Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (land at or adjacent to Yew Tree Lodge, Condover) Tree Preservation Order 2005.

2. Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (land at or adjacent to Rylands, Shrewsbury) Tree Preservation Order 2005.

3. Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (land at or adjacent to Main Road, David Avenue, Chapel Street, Pontestbury) Tree Preservation Order 2005 subject to amendments to the TPO to include the removal of T5, T14 and G4 from the Order.

6. B.T. PROPOSALS TO RE-ALIGN PROVISIONS IN SHREWSBURY AREA

To consider a report of the Planning Services Manager.

Recommendation:

That no objections are raised in principle to either the removal or replacement of the boxes referred to, but members views on individual boxes will be forwarded prior to 23^rd August 2005.

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 6 Thornhill Road, Shrewsbury – Erection of a two storey dwelling Ref. 04/1777/O

Decision: Appeal Dismissed 13 July 2005

Summary: The main issue in this case was the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area. The estate has a spacious and open quality with verdant setting. The dwelling would be set back from Thornhill Road and so would preserve openness. But on Westwood drive would project significantly and look obtrusive. Policy HS2 resists loss of green space including gardens. Corner plots are particularly attractive. Proposal would be discordant in street scene and would have unacceptable effect on character and appearance of the area.

Site: The Barn, Alderton, Montford Bridge, Shrawardine – Certificates of Lawfulness for (a) installation of 13 dormer windows and (b) 13 rooflights Ref. 04/1339/CLP and 04/1440/CLP

Decision: Appeal Dismissed 19 July 2005; application for costs refused 19 July 2005

Summary: Section 55 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 defines the meaning of development. Some building operations are not development if they do not materially affect the external appearance of the building. Interpretation is given by the Burroughs Day v Bristol City Council (1996) case. In this case all roof alterations would be plainly visible from points on the ground and some from neighbouring properties. The size and position of the dormers/rooflights and fact that they would affect every elevation of the house leads to a conclusion that they would materially affect the external appearance and hence constitute development. As permitted development rights were removed by condition the alterations require the Council's consent. The Council's refusal to grant Certificates of Lawfulness was well-founded. Costs – There is no provision for costs to be awarded for aggravation or stress caused by the refusal of the application. The Council gave proper consideration to the legal basis for its decision and did not behave unreasonably in refusing the applications.

Site: Plot at Armoury Gardens, 92 London Road, Shrewsbury – Variation of Condition 12 of Permission 04/1007/F to allow construction traffic to enter the site via Armoury Gardens Ref. 04/1605/VAR

Decision: Appeal Allowed 15 July 2005

Summary: The main issue in this case was the effect on highway safety and convenience in Armoury gardens. The Inspector accepted that construction traffic would inevitably cause some inconvenience and disruption to residents but this is an inevitable part of the construction process and would only be for a temporary period. Other large vehicles such as refuse and removal lorries visit on a regular basis. Allowing construction traffic through Armoury gardens would not affect highway safety. Conditions should be reasonable and necessary. In light of the above conclusion Condition 12 is unreasonable unnecessary. Alternative condition suggested by applicant (restrict to 4 wheel vehicles) is not within his control and would be unenforceable.

Site: Hill Crest, Preston Gubballs Road, Bomere Heath – Fell one tulip tree and two birch trees Ref. 04/1779/TPO

Decision: Appeal Dismissed 18 July 2005

Summary: The birches will cast a little shade onto rear windows but this will be minimal. The trees have light foliage so shade will not be intense. They are distinctly visible from Brook Road but only glimpsed from Preston Gubballs Road. They are not prominent but contribute to greening of surroundings and provide amenity to general public. The tulip tree is a pleasant feature and provides a degree of screening. It is small but clearly seen from the cul de sac. Its lighter green foliage will become distinct as it grows. It is a relatively rare tree in this country so would add intrinsic value and its loss would be regrettable.

The Guildhall

Shrewsbury

8^th August 2005