Agenda and minutes

In respect of planning application TWC/2019/0499, Councillor C R Turley advised that he was a member of Stirchley and Brookside Parish Council but had not been involved in any discussions on this application.

In respect of planning application TWC/2019/0499, Councillor J Loveridge advised that she was a member of Stirchley and Brookside Parish Council but had not been involved in any discussions on this application.

Cllr J Jones declared an interest in planning application TWC/20190161 because she believed she may know the applicant and indicated that she would withdraw from the meeting during determination thereof.

Cllr A Jhawar declared an interest in planning application TWC/2019/0235 as he was a Member of Lawley & Overdale Parish Council and indicated that he would withdraw from the meeting during determination thereof.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 3 July 2019 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

None.

None.

Please note that the order in which applications are heard may be changed at the meeting.  If Members have queries about any of the applications, they are requested to raise them with the relevant Planning Officer prior to the Committee meeting.

Members had received a schedule of planning applications to be determined by the Committee and fully considered each report and the supplementary information tabled at the meeting regarding planning applications TWC/2019/0466 and TWC/2019/0177.

This was an application for the erection of 1no. industrial unit (Use Class B8) with amended description, plans and applicant details on land adjacent to Furniture Link UK Ltd, Hortonwood 65, Hortonwood, Telford, Shropshire.

This application was before the Committee as the Council was a joint applicant and the proposal was a major.

Hadley and Leegomery Parish Council had objected to this application with regard to noise, light and impact on local residents, but were not in attendance at the meeting.

During the debate some Members felt that this development was well hidden with trees and was within the industrial site and would provide jobs and prosperity.  Other Members raised concerns that the neighbouring houses may be built prior to the unit and the impact this would have.

The Planning Officer explained that a landscape bund would be provided, noise had been considered and there were a number of trees to the left of the bund which would help mitigate this.

On being put to the vote it was, by a unanimously:

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC/2018/0161 that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant full planning permission subject to the conditions contained within the report (with authority to finalise conditions and reasons for approval to be delegated to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager).

This was an application for the retention of a single storey portable building for use as the Tibberton Community Shop at Maslan Crescent, Tibberton, Newport, Shropshire.

This application has been called in by Tibberton & Cherrington Parish Council.

A site visit had taken place on the afternoon prior to the meeting.

Councillor J Berry spoke in favour of this application on behalf of Tibberton & Cherrington Parish Council.  This was a valuable community asset which everyone used and loved and was run by volunteers.  The shop raised funds to donate to projects within the village.   Letters of support had been sent from people from the village for the retention of the shop and the officer’s decision was contrary to the needs of the community.

Cllr S Burrell, Ward Councillor, spoke in favour of the application which was a necessity for a village which had almost doubled its size in 10 years.  The benefits of the shop to the village were vital means of communication for the elderly, volunteering and work experience which had attributed to a Duke of Edinburgh Award, had gained a Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service and brought the community together.  It was hoped in the future that the building would be replaced with a permanent structure.

Mr B Everitt, Chair of the Community Shop spoke in favour of the application on behalf of the public which was an important benefit to the community.  The granting of the permission would bring an enhanced offer for long term stability.  It would be wasteful to spend funds on a temporary scheme when these could be put towards a larger premises which could house the local shop and meeting rooms for the growing population.

Mr B Hampton, Applicant, spoke in favour of the application and was disappointed by the lack of understanding from the planners.  It was an important part of the street scene and the community with 60 volunteers who gave up their time freely.  The shop was trying to improve and was being economic with its funding and a pitch roof would cost some £8,000-£10,000 to build which could be spent in the future on extending the village hall, community rooms and shop as a larger project.

The Planning Officer informed Members that this application followed two previous temporary permissions and did not have formal planning permission.  A permanent permission would require alterations to install a pitch roof. 

During the debate some Members felt that the shop was valuable to the community and was a much needed as the nearest shop was 10 miles away and they could not support the officer decision to refuse planning permission

On being put to the vote it was, unanimously

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC2018/0960 that the recommendation to refuse planning permission be rejected.

It was moved and seconded that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant planning permission in accordance with the submitted plans with conditions regarding materials and timescale (with authority  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC15

This application was for an erection of up to 36no. dwellings and access with all other matters reserved on land between Hartfield House/41 Pool Hill Road, Horsehay, Telford, Shropshire.

This application had been referred to Planning Committee as the Council were the applicant and it was subject to a Memorandum of Understanding relating to financial contributions and a memo/condition relating to affordable housing.

The Planning Officer informed Members that there were no technical objections and although there had been one objection regarding the Trees that this would be addressed at the reserved matters stage.

Upon being put to the vote it was, unanimously

RESOLVED – that in respect of Planning Application TWC/2019/0104 that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant outline planning permission subject to the following:

a)    the Council as part landowner of the site to provide a  

Memorandum signed by the Service Delivery Manager Business Development and Employment agreeing that the Council as landowner will pay the contributions i), ii) and iii) below, either upon the sale of any of the development land or upon commencement of the development whichever is the sooner (precise terms to be agreed by the Development Management Service Delivery Manager).

i)             Total Education contribution of £155,363 towards improvements to a local primary and secondary school,

ii)            Highways contribution of £19,285 towards improvements to the junction between Pool Hill Road and Doseley Road near to the site,

iii)          Children’s Play/Recreation contribution of up to £21,600 based on £600 per 2 bed (or more) property,

      iv)      Affordable Housing to be provided at 25%

b)        the conditions set out in the report (with authority to finalise       

           conditions and reasons for approval to be delegated to

           Development Management Service Delivery Manager).

This was a reserved matters application for the erection of 21no. houses and garages including details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale on land south and west of Tibberton Motor Repairs, Mill Lane, Tibberton, Newport, Shropshire.

An update report was tabled at the meeting.

 This application had been called in by Councillor S Burrell.

Cllr J Berry spoke against the application on behalf of Tibberton & Cherrington Parish Council who raised concerns regarding the pedestrian access, agricultural survey, toxins, third party access, two plots did not meet space standards and some garden space below standard and the 3m width of agricultural vehicles.  He asked that this application be refused or deferred.

Councillor S Burrell, Ward Councillor, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding the condition of the footpath on Mill Lane and pedestrian safety, the verge forming part of the highway, retaining walls impeding vehicular access and large agricultural vehicles.  It was asked that this application be deferred to ascertain land ownership and the position with regard to the footpath.

Mr J Wright, a member of the public, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding lack of pedestrian refuge, lack of footpath, agricultural vehicles and the minimum road width, unrestricted highway, access, layout, density and landscaping and he asked that this application be deferred for further consideration.

Mr A Beeston, Applicant, spoke in favour of the application for which the principle of development had already been approved.  Members were asked to approve the revised scheme of 21 dwellings, including social housing, on the edge of the village together with layout, scale and appearance in keeping with the local vernacular and of a Duke of Sutherland style.  There were no technical objections and highways and drainage was satisfactory.  A buffer to the River Mees would be provided.

The Planning Officer confirmed to members that the conditions imposed by the inspector would still be required to be discharged.  There was no right of way, but a right of access, density was comparable to other developments and there were no technical objections.

During the debate some Members raised concerns regarding the toxins in the ground and felt that they needed to be certain the ground was clear prior to approving the application and it was suggested that this application be deferred for further information to be provided.  Other Members raised concerns regarding right of access and pedestrian footpath/safety. 

It was moved and seconded that this application be deferred for further information to be provided regarding toxins and ground safety, access and egress for pedestrians and pedestrian safety and ownership of the land.

On being put to the vote it was, by a majority

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC/2019/0177 that this application be deferred in order for further information be provided regarding toxins and ground safety, access and egress for pedestrians and pedestrian safety and ownership of the land.

This was an application for the installation and display of 11no. non-illuminated parking information signs at WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc, Gresham Drive, Newdale, Telford TF3 5ES.

This application had been deferred at the meeting of the Committee on 3 July 2019 to await the determination of the appeal against the decision to refuse planning permission for the installation of the associated automatic number plate recognition cameras. 

Councillor J Greenaway spoke against the application on behalf of Lawley & Overdale Parish Council who raised concerns regarding the impact the proposed restrictions would have on the vibrant small businesses and staff, the lack of alternative parking, recent rise in business rates and community events such as Lawley Fun Run and suggested that Wm Morrisons listen to the wishes of the local community.

Councillor M Boylan, Ward Councillor, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding the impact to residents, visitors and employees.  The car park did not belong to Wm Morrisons and it was a community car park to benefit the community and would force cars to park in surrounding residential areas and impact their quality of life.

Mr J Yorke and Ms P Fanthorpe, members of the public, expressed concerns regarding the impact on the community car park which would be seriously eroded as it served a diverse range of community interest groups, parking for staff and customers and would force business to leave.   Wm Morrisons had not put forward any evidence to show the car park was full at peak times and an on-site survey had taken place which showed that at peak times only 75% of the car park was in use.

The Planning Officer confirmed to Members the recent decision by the Planning Inspectorate which upheld the appeal for the ANPR camera on this site.  Previously an application for 23 signs had been refused and the application before members was to consider the visual amenity and public safety for the 11 proposed signs. 

The Legal Advisor informed Members that under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Paragraph 132 of the NPPF that the Council can only regulate the display of advertisements in the interests of amenity or public safety. He further clarified that among their amenity considerations, members could not include the content or subject matter of an advertisement..

During the debate, some Members felt that they had been put in a difficult position following the decision of the Planning Inspectorate and that signs had to be in place to advertise the ANPR camera and although they sympathised with the residents they were unable to overturn the Inspector’s decision and were only able to determine the application for 11 signs with reference to the interests of amenity or public safety.

On being put to the vote it was, by a majority:

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC/2019/0235 that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant advertisement consent subject to the conditions set out in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC18

This was an application for the creation of a new vehicular access and installation of a new driveway and associated hardstanding at 9 Richards Road, The Humbers, Donnington, Telford, Shropshire TF2 8LT.

A site visit had taken place on the afternoon prior to the meeting.

Councillor A Eade, Ward Member, had requested that the application be determined by the Planning Committee.

An update report was tabled at the meeting.

Councillor A Eade spoke in favour of the application which had received no objections from highways, drainage, Severn Trent, members of the public or the Parish Council.   He felt that this was a solution to the parking issues within the Humbers, was in the built up area of Telford and not the rural area, did not impact on amenity, respected the landscape under Policy B1 of the Local Plan and the design was in keeping with the Local Plan under Policy B2 and he asked Members to approve the application.

Mr M Scenters, Applicant, informed Members of the issues regarding parking and recent incidents.  Parked cars were causing damage to the grassed area which was problematic in winter.  There was no communal parking and there were no dropped kerbs or direct access to his garden.  He proposed a hardstanding cross over and would install a dropped kerb in keeping with the local area.  He had canvassed his neighbours and there were no objections.

The Planning Officers explained to Members that the installation of a hardstanding would change the area and set a precedent for the future and would interrupt the green area.

During the debate some Members felt that this application was a sensible, beneficial and much needed solution to the parking issues.  There was already some hardstanding within the area so could not support the refusal.  It was suggested that this application be approved.

Upon being put to the vote it was, unanimously

RESOLVED - that in respect of planning application TWC2019/0466 that the  recommendation to refuse planning permission be rejected.

It was proposed and seconded that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant planning permission (with authority to finalise conditions and reasons for approval to be delegated to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager).

Upon being put to the vote it was, unanimously:-

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC/2019/0466 that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager to grant planning permission (with authority to finalise conditions and reasons for approval to be delegated to the Development Management Service Delivery Manager).

This application was for the erection of a first floor front extension at 9 Belgrave Crescent, Stirchley, Telford, Shropshire TF3 1BJ.

Councillor A England, Ward Member, had requested that the application be determined by the Planning Committee.

Councillor R Breeze spoke against the application on behalf of Stirchley and Brookside Parish Council who raised concerns regarding size and appearance, overlooking, it would dramatically alter the view of the streetscene, neighbour objections, overdevelopment and although they sympathised with the family circumstances this was a large four bedroomed house and they felt a more appropriate solution could be sought.

Councillor A England, Ward Councillor, informed Members he felt this application would be detrimental to the local area and breached planning criteria.  He raised concerns regarding loss of privacy at the front of the house as it would overlook the bedrooms of young females, it was disproportionate to the existing building, overdevelopment and the pitch room was not in keeping with the surrounding area and would damage the street view.

Mr R Davies, a member of the public, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding the disproportionate size of the development, the impact of the streetscene which would spoil the character, impact on neighbouring property, overlooking his teenage daughter’s bedroom and he suggested that it would be more appropriate for a rear or garage extension.

The Planning Officer informed Members that there had been no technical objections to the application but there had been objections from Stirchley and Brookside Parish Council and eight neighbour objections.

During the debate some Members felt that this was a large extension at the front of the house and would impact the on the street, it was inappropriate and overbearing and affected the view and amenity of neighbouring properties and a bedroom/wet room in the garage space would be more appropriate.  Other Members echoed these concerns and raised further concerns with regard to privacy.  It was suggested that this application be deferred for a site visit.

On being put to the vote it was, unanimously:

RESOLVED – that in respect of planning application TWC/2019/0499 that this application be deferred for one cycle for a site visit to take place.