Decision: That, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed development, through the close proximity and the associated dangers of the A49, River Corve and the railway, noise from road traffic and train movements, and the potential for an increased number of train journeys in the future would detract from the living conditions and be detrimental to the amenities and safety of residents.  The site has poor accessibility and is considered to be an unsuitable location for residential development contrary to Policy CS6 Sustainable Design and Development Principles of the Council’s adopted Core Strategy and Paragraph 17 (point 4) of the NPPF.  These adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits in terms of the site contributing to the supply of housing land in Shropshire.

Decision: That planning permission be granted as a departure subject to:

• Satisfactory agreement being reached on a Section 106 Agreement relating to affordable housing provision;
• Contributions to the Travel and Movement Strategy for Shifnal and reduction of speed limit on a section of the A464 Wolverhampton Road;
• Provision and maintenance of the open space by an appropriate body;
• Satisfactory amendments being made to the Great Crested Newt mitigation strategy;
• The conditions as set out in Appendix 1 to the report; and

Development to commence before the expiration of two years from the date of permission.

Decision: That, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

• The Bishop’s Castle community had overwhelmingly rejected sites on this side of the town for housing development during a rigorous SAMDev consultation exercise because of access problems to the town’s hinterland.  Other more appropriate sites had been identified;
• A need for affordable housing had been identified in the area and the contribution of this application to the affordable housing stock would be minimal; and
• This proposal would exacerbate the already significant traffic problems that exist along Kerry Lane.  To exit the proposed development site and the town, traffic would have to use Kerry Lane, which, in places is a single track road, has no footpath in places, has five junctions within close proximity, and is already unsuitable for existing residents and businesses. The deficiencies in the local road network would not achieve a good standard of amenity for existing occupants of the area and the occupants of the proposed dwellings.

Accordingly, the proposed development would be contrary to paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Core Strategy policy CS6 whereby the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

Decision: That, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed development would have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the Oldbury Conservation Area and its setting through the erosion of the rural character of the north eastern approach to the village by built development on this site, and the loss of a visually prominent section of roadside hedgerow and trees.  The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Shropshire Core Strategy policies CS6 and CS17 and paragraphs 131, 135 and 138 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and these adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits in terms of the site contributing to the supply of housing land in Shropshire.

Decision: That planning permission be granted as per the officer’s recommendation and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

Decision: That planning permission be granted as per the officer’s recommendation, subject to:

• A Section 106 Agreement to control the occupation of the residential units;
• The conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report; and

An additional condition to ensure the location of the communal bin storage area be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the first occupation of the dwellings.

Decision: That, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, subject to and in consultation with the Chairman, appropriate conditions being added relating to:

• A Section 106 Agreement relating to an affordable housing restriction;
• Landscaping;
• Fencing;
• Ground levels;
• Ecology;
• Drainage; and

Design and materials.

Decision: That, contrary to the officer’s recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

• The proposed development, by reason of the full gable roof form, large expanse of roof and ridge height which would exceed that of the adjacent bungalow to the east, would result in a dwelling which would be an overdevelopment of the site, detracting from the amenities of the adjacent properties through having an overbearing impact, and detracting from the character and appearance of the streetscene.  The proposal would therefore be contrary to Shropshire Core Strategy policy CS6 and paragraphs 56 to 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Decision: That planning permission be granted as per the officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.