Committee and Date
Item
Central Planning Committee
11
25th April 2013
Public
Development Management Report
Responsible Officer: Tim Rogers
email: [email protected] Tel: 01743 252665 Fax: 01743 252619
Summary of Application
Application Number: 13/00847/OUT
Parish:
Bomere Heath
Proposal: Outline application for the erection of four dwellings including two with detached
garages (all matters reserved)
Site Address: Proposed Residential Development Opp Walford Heath Nurseries Walford
Heath Shrewsbury Shropshire
Applicant: Mr AE Reece
Case Officer: Jane Raymond
email: [email protected]
Grid Ref: 344722 - 319960
© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Shropshire Council 100049049. 2011 For reference purposes only. No further copies may be made.
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
Recommendation: Grant Permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 and
a S106 agreement to secure an affordable housing contribution.
Recommended Reason for Approval
The proposal is a departure to the development plan in that the site is situated within open
countryside and is contrary to CS5. However there are other material considerations that
should be given weight in setting aside the adopted policy. The site is supported by the Parish
Council and is being put forward as a 'Cluster' within the emerging 'Site Allocations and
Management of Development' document (SAMDev), and the proposal is considered acceptable
ahead of the adoption of this DPD. The density of the development is considered to be an
appropriate scale sympathetic to the locality and the proposal would have no highway safety
implications, and a S106 will secure the payment of an AHC. The proposal therefore accords
with Shropshire Council LDF Policies CS4, CS6 and CS11.
In arriving at this decision the Council has used its best endeavours to work with the applicant
in a positive and proactive manner to secure an appropriate outcome as required in the
National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187.
REPORT
1.0
THE PROPOSAL
1.1
This application is for outline permission for 4 dwellings with all matters reserved for
later approval including access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping. The
layout plan is only indicative but indicates the position of a single access to the site
and the site layout for four houses.
2.0
SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION
2.1
The application site is opposite the former plant nursery at Walford Heath and faces
the B5067 Shrewsbury to Baschurch Road. It is part of a large agricultural field to
the North East of the B5067 at Walford Heath that surrounds two houses (‘Stone
House’ and ‘Ivy Cottage’).
3.0
REASON FOR COMMITTEE/DELEGATED DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION
3.1
The proposed development does not accord with the requirements of the Councils
relevant adopted policies and therefore approval would be a departure from the
development plan. The Council Constitution provides delegated powers to Officers
to approve departures where no objections have been received. However although
the Parish support the proposal public objections have been received.
4.0
Community Representations
4.1
- Consultee Comments
4.1.1
SC Highways:
14 03 13: The scheme would require the forming of a new access onto the B5067
within a 40mph section of carriageway. Despite the speed limit, traffic entering into
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
it from the derestricted section to the north-west, does so fairly swiftly. This traffic is
on the same side of the road as the proposed site entrance and hence it is
essential that adequate visibility for emerging drivers is possible in this direction.
The desirable visibility is however to some extent hindered by a brow in the
carriageway vertical alignment and a section of hedge that bulges out next to the
pedestrian gate to Ivy Cottage. The submitted drawing does not show visibility
splays that are achievable from the proposed access position and I ask that the
agent is requested to provide details of those that can realistically be achieved to
the north-west. Visibility in the other direction is likely to be satisfactory but as the
land here is under the applicant's control, any amendment to the hedge line would
be possible. Unobstructed visibility should be provided for a distance dependent
upon the approaching vehicle's speed, deceleration rate and the driver's perception
and reaction time. For 40mph traffic the distance to be provided in accordance with
'Manual for Streets 2' is 79m from a point 2.4m back from the carriageway edge.
The detail of the access point onto the carriageway shown on the submitted
drawing is not satisfactory. No radii are shown and I would suggest that these are
required to a minimum of 6.5m in order to allow vehicles to expediently enter/exit
the carriageway on this Class II road. I would be pleased to comment further on
additional information/drawings the agent my wish to submit.
02.04.13: The amended site plan submitted by the agent shows the access to the
site moved further to the south-east and visibility splays to a minimum acceptable
standard indicated on the drawing. There are still no radii shown onto the
carriageway of the adjacent Class II at the access point and I consider these are
essential to allow vehicles to expediently enter/exit the highway. Following the
revision of the position of the access point, I do not raise any highway objections in
principle to the approval of this outline application but strongly recommend that a
condition regarding the access and sightlines is attached to any permission granted
in order that details of the access can be agreed in any subsequent reserved
matters or full application.
4.1.2
SC Drainage: Recommends conditions and informatives regarding surface water
drainage to be conditioned and submitted for approval at the reserved matters
stage if outline planning permission is granted.
4.1.3
SC Waste Management: The residents will need to be aware that Shropshire
Council operates a kerbside collection policy and the residents' waste containers
will only be collected from the edge of the adopted highway.
4.1.4
SC Affordable Houses: If this site is deemed suitable for residential development,
the scheme would be required to contribute towards affordable housing. Any
consent would need to be subject to a S106 Agreement which prescribes such a
contribution. The level of contribution would be at the prevailing percentage rate
given in the SPD on the Type and Affordability of Housing applicable at the date of
the Reserved Matters.
4.1.5
SC Ecology: The site has the potential for foraging and commuting bats and
nesting wild birds and recommends conditions and informatives.
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
4.2
- Public Comments
4.2.1
Bomere Heath Parish Council: Whilst we did originally suggest in our SAMDEV
response a maximum of 5 dwellings for any one cluster and have already agreed in
principle the outline for 6 dwellings on the brownfield site of Walford Heath
Nurseries the feeling was that Walford Heath could stand the further addition of 4
dwellings that this application proposes. We would however like to suggest that no
further building is permitted in this cluster for sometime to come as we feel the area
will need to assimilate the new residents and does not want to be swamped.
4.2.2
Seven letters of objection have been received summarized as follows:
 The land is Greenfield land in addition to being valuable agricultural land.
 This application plus the scheme approved on the nursery site opposite will
almost double the number of dwellings in Walford Heath and will
substantially alter the area.
 The proposed site is lower than the road and is frequently waterlogged and a
large puddle collects in one corner of the field and takes days to soak away.
 The sewage and drainage facility here often seems to be overloaded with
Severn Trent having to pump excess sewage into tankers.
 The B5067 through Walford Heath is a very busy fast road (as the 40mph
speed limit is not enforced) making access onto this road difficult and
because of the dip in the road access from the proposed site would be
dangerous.
 The new access will be opposite the access to the development approved at
the nursery opposite and will become an accident black spot.
 The proposal will result in an increase in traffic which will impact on highway
and pedestrian safety particularly dangerous for school children waiting for
the school bus.
 This proposal is not for the benefit of the community but is about making
money.
 Concerned that this is phase one of a larger scheme as the site is part of a
larger field.
 The position of the proposed houses will impact on privacy of the
neighbouring property and also impact on the view from this property.
 The planting of a row of trees will block the view and light to a neighbouring
property.
4.2.3
Baschurch Parish Council: Baschurch Parish Council has been approached by
local residents to this application and Councillors wish to forward concerns on the
planning application although just outside their parish boundary. Several residents
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
object to the application as traffic on B5067 at present is usually travelling at speed
which exceeds the 40mph signs. If the building of more houses were to go ahead
there would be an increase of traffic which would worsen the situation and make it
more dangerous and a possibility of more road accidents. More houses being built
would have a worsening effect on the sewage and drainage facilities in the area.
These are already proving problems by being overloaded and Severn Trent having
to pump out the extra into tankers on regular occasions.
5.0
THE MAIN ISSUES
Principle of development
Scale, layout and design
Highways
6.0
OFFICER APPRAISAL
6.1
Principle of development
6.1.1
The site is currently classed as ‘Open Countryside’ under CS5 and therefore open
market residential development of the site would be contrary to policy and the
proposal has therefore been advertised as a departure. However paragraph 216 of
the NPPF states that decision-takers should give weight to the relevant policies in
emerging plans according to:
•
•
•
the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the
preparation, the greater the weight that may be given);
the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the
less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be
given); and
the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the
policies in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the
policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).
6.1.2
The emerging ‘Site Allocations and Management of Development’ DPD (SAMDev)
is at the ‘preferred options’ consultation stage and Bomere Heath and District
Parish Council has supported the identification of Merrington, Oldwoods and
Walford Heath as a Community Cluster (under Policy CS4), and the development
of an additional 10-25 dwellings for the cluster for the period to 2026. The Parish
initially indicated up to a maximum of 5 dwellings in any one settlement but they
have now withdrawn their support for Oldwoods as part of this cluster and are
supportive of an additional 4 dwellings in the settlement of Walford Heath in
addition to 6 dwellings approved at the Walford Heath Nursery site opposite
(13/00057/OUT).
6.1.3
This is considered to be a material consideration that should be given weight in
setting aside the current adopted policy. The Parish Council have confirmed their
support of this proposal which if approved will provide 10 new dwellings in Walford
Heath when combined with application reference 13/00057/OUT. Provided the
proposals are assessed as meeting the requirements of Policy CS4 (i.e.is of a
scale appropriate to the settlement, makes sufficient community contribution and is
sympathetic in scale and design, and satisfies Policy CS6), then it is considered
that the proposal can be supported in principle, as a departure from Policy CS5.
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
6.1.4
Walford Heath is a small settlement comprising approximately 25 dwellings situated
around the crossroads along the B 5068 Baschurch to Shrewsbury road. Although
some residents are concerned that this development will result in an unacceptable
intensification of this small settlement it is considered that the scale is appropriate
in addition to the 6 already allowed on the Nursery site opposite. This site
represents a natural extension to the village situated adjacent to existing properties
and is not the first phase of a much larger scheme. Any future applications in
Walford Heath will be considered on their own merits at the time of submission.
6.1.5
The applicant has confirmed that they are willing to enter into a S106 agreement to
secure the relevant Affordable Housing Contribution, as required by Policy CS11
and the Housing SPD, and the development will also be liable for a Community
Infrastructure levy. The scale and design of the proposal will be considered in the
following paragraphs and it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in
principle ahead of the adoption of the SAMDev.
6.2
6.2.1
Scale, layout and design
This proposal is Outline for residential development of the site for 4 dwellings with
all matters reserved for later approval. However an indicative layout plan has been
submitted that indicates two semi detached dwellings (plots 1 and 2) and two
detached dwellings on larger plots (3 and 4). It is considered that the indicative
layout is acceptable and that the scale, mix and density of the proposed
development is acceptable and appropriate to the existing settlement pattern and
that the site can satisfactorily accommodate four dwellings.
6.3
6.3.1
Highways
Access is reserved for latter approval and full details including the visibility splays
will be submitted at this stage. The indicative site layout has been amended in
accordance with the Highways Officer’s recommendations and indicates a single
access moved further to the south-east and visibility splays to a minimum
acceptable standard. Local residents are concerned that the speed of vehicles
using this stretch of road will make access from the proposed site dangerous.
However the Highways officer has no objection to the proposal as amended subject
to full details of the access being submitted at the reserved matters stage. The
revised layout indicates adequate visibility for emerging traffic in both directions and
the additional dwellings on both sides of the road should have a calming effect on
speeding through traffic rather than exacerbate this existing problem.
6.4
6.4.1
Other Matters
As the layout of the site is only indicative at this stage the impact of the proposal on
the neighbouring property to the North West cannot be fully assessed. However
due to the distance of this house from the site boundary it is not considered that the
proposal would have any significant adverse impact on the occupiers of this
dwelling and there is no right to a view. Landscaping, including waste storage and
collection, and drainage of the site will be considered at the reserved matters stage.
7.0
CONCLUSION
The proposal is a departure to the development plan in that the site is situated
within open countryside and is contrary to CS5. However there are other material
considerations that should be given weight in setting aside the adopted policy. The
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
site is supported by the Parish Council and is being put forward as a ‘Cluster’ within
the emerging ‘Site Allocations and Management of Development’ document
(SAMDev), and the proposal is considered acceptable ahead of the adoption of this
DPD. The density of the development is considered to be an appropriate scale
sympathetic to the locality and the proposal would have no highway safety
implications, and a S106 will secure the payment of an AHC. The proposal
therefore accords with Shropshire Council LDF Policies CS4, CS6 and CS11.
In arriving at this decision the Council has used its best endeavours to work with
the applicant in a positive and proactive manner to secure an appropriate outcome
as required in the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187.
8.0
RISK ASSESSMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES APPRAISAL
8.1
Risk Management
There are two principal risks associated with this recommendation as follows:
 As with any planning decision the applicant has a right of appeal if they disagree
with the decision and/or the imposition of conditions. Costs can be awarded
irrespective of the mechanism for hearing the appeal, i.e. written
representations, hearing or inquiry.
 The decision may be challenged by way of a Judicial Review by a third party.
The courts become involved when there is a misinterpretation or misapplication
of policy or some breach of the rules of procedure or the principles of natural
justice. However their role is to review the way the authorities reach decisions,
rather than to make a decision on the planning issues themselves, although
they will interfere where the decision is so unreasonable as to be irrational or
perverse. Therefore they are concerned with the legality of the decision, not its
planning merits. A challenge by way of Judicial Review must be made a)
promptly and b) in any event not later than three months after the grounds to
make the claim first arose.
Both of these risks need to be balanced against the risk of not proceeding to
determine the application. In this scenario there is also a right of appeal against
non-determination for application for which costs can also be awarded.
8.2
Human Rights
Article 8 gives the right to respect for private and family life and First Protocol
Article 1 allows for the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. These have to be
balanced against the rights and freedoms of others and the orderly development of
the County in the interests of the Community.
First Protocol Article 1 requires that the desires of landowners must be balanced
against the impact on residents.
This legislation has been taken into account in arriving at the above
recommendation.
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
8.3
Equalities
The concern of planning law is to regulate the use of land in the interests of the
public at large, rather than those of any particular group. Equality will be one of a
number of ‘relevant considerations’ that need to be weighed in Planning Committee
members’ minds under section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1970.
9.0
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are likely financial implications if the decision and / or imposition of
conditions is challenged by a planning appeal or judicial review. The costs of
defending any decision will be met by the authority and will vary dependent on the
scale and nature of the proposal. Local financial considerations are capable of
being taken into account when determining this planning application – insofar as
they are material to the application. The weight given to this issue is a matter for
the decision maker.
10.
Background
Relevant Planning Policies
Central Government Guidance: NPPF
Core Strategy and Saved Policies: CS4, CS5, CS6 and CS11
11.
Additional Information
List of Background Papers: File 13/00847/OUT
Cabinet Member (Portfolio Holder): Cllr M. Price
Local Member: Cllr John Everall
Appendices
APPENDIX 1 - Conditions
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
APPENDIX 1
Conditions
STANDARD CONDITION(S)
1.
Details of the access, layout, scale, external appearance and landscaping (hereinafter
called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried
out as approved.
Reason: The application is an outline application under the provisions of Article 1(2) of
the Town and Country Planning General Development (Procedure) Order 1995 and no
particulars have been submitted with respect to the matters reserved in this permission.
2.
Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority
before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country
Planning Act, 1990.
3.
The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of two years from
the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.
Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990.
4.
The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans and
drawings.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in
accordance with the approved plans and details.
5.
As part of the reserved matters application full details to show how the surface water
runoff will be managed and to ensure that the finished floor level is set above any known
flood level shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the
development.
Reason: To minimise the risk of surface water flooding.
6.
As part of the reserved matters application full details of the surface water drainage to
include percolation tests and the sizing of soakaways and that prevents surface water
runoff onto the highway, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local
Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first
occupation of the development.
Reason: To ensure that soakaways, for the disposal of surface water drainage, are
suitable for the development site and to ensure their design is to a robust standard to
minimise the risk of surface water flooding.
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257
th
Central Planning Committee: 25 April 2013
7.
As part of the reserved matters application details of the means of access, including the
layout, construction and sightlines, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The agreed details shall be fully implemented before the use
hereby approved is commenced or the building(s) occupied.
Reason: To ensure the formation and construction of a satisfactory access in the
interests of highway safety.
8.
This permission does not purport to grant consent for the layout shown on the deposited
plan submitted with this application.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to consider the siting of the
development when the reserved matters are submitted.
Contact Tim Rogers on 01691 677257