Shrewsbury & Atcham
Borough Council

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.

1. 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.

2. 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.

1. MINUTES - 8^th November 2005

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee held on 8^th November 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. The Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (Land at Condover Pumping Station) Tree Preservation Order 2005;

2. The Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (Land at or adjacent to The Old Rectory, Smethcott) Tree Preservation Order 2005; and

3. The Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (Land at Manor Gardens, Manor Park and Main Road, Pontesbury) Tree Preservation Order 2005.

That the following order be confirmed with modifications:

1. The Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council (Land at or adjacent to Hinton Lane, Hall Bank and Station Road, Pontesbury) Tree Preservation Order 2005 be confirmed; subject to amendments to the TPO to include the addition of one group of 8 trees to the Order.

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: Oakrill, Hopton, Nesscliffe – Erection of a garage over existing outbuilding Ref: 04/0488/F

Decision: Appeal Allowed 22^nd November 2005

Summary: The main issue in this case was the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside. The proposed garage would be large and larger than that previously refused but it would be seen as separate from the main dwelling unlike the previous. It would have many design features in common with traditional rural outbuildings. Compared to style, scale and design of existing dwelling and farm complexes in the area, proposed garage would not look disproportionate or out of character with its surroundings. It would not obscure any landscape views from surrounding footpaths and existing mature landscaping would provide screening from viewpoints to east, west and north.

The Guildhall

Shrewsbury

28/11/2005