Outline application (access for consideration comprising formation of two vehicular accesses off A4169 road) for the development of (up to) 1,000 dwellings; retirement village; employment land comprising classes B1(A), B1(C), B2 and B8; retail and other uses comprising classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1 and D2; allotments, sports pitches, a railway link, leisure uses, primary/nursery school, a park and ride facility, walking and cycling routes, and associated landscaping, drainage and infrastructure works

The Principal Planner introduced the outline application (access for consideration comprising formation of two vehicular accesses off A4169 road) for the for the development of (up to) 1,000 dwellings; retirement village; employment land comprising classes B1(A), B1(C), B2 and B8; retail and other uses comprising classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1 and D2; allotments, sports pitches, a railway link, leisure uses, primary/nursery school, a park and ride facility, walking and cycling routes, and associated landscaping, drainage and infrastructure works and explained that the application and drew Members attention to the information contained in the schedule of late representations.

The Principal Planner explained the reason the application had been brought back to Committee and outlined the proposed amendments to the scheme as listed at paragraph 2 of the Officer’s report.

Mr David Turner made a statement against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr Simon Heath made a statement against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr Stephen Mulloy made a statement against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr James Healey made a statement against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Cllr Lorraine Pratt made a statement on behalf of Buildwas Parish Council against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Cllr Sue Jones made a statement on behalf of Leighton and Eaton Constantine Parish Council against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Cllr Duncan White made a statement on behalf of Much Wenlock Town Council against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor Claire Wild, local Ward Councillor made a statement against the application in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees. 

Councillor Dan Thomas, adjacent Ward Councillor, made a statement against the application in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees

Stuart Ashton spoke in support of the proposal on behalf of the applicant in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In response to matters raised by the speakers Officers advised

·         That the Viability Assessment confirmed that development of greenfield site was required to make the project viable and that without it the project would not proceed

·         Sustainability issues were covered in the proposed conditions and that full details would be covered at the reserved matters stage

·         Call in request to the Secretary of State remains active and if the proposal was approved, they would be notified and that he would consider his decision.to call in based on the information available.

·         With regards to the First Homes Initiative the Council’s Housing Enabling Officer had confirmed that the 30% reduction in price was eligible to be considered as an affordable home.

·         With regard to the levels of bus subsidy, Officers happy with what was being offered

·         Highways concerns expressed at Buildwas were acknowledged and measures to address these would be out in place

·         Officers were committed to working with all parishes through the liaison group to monitor highways matters

·         The construction management plan would include a traffic plan which would cover many of the concerns raised

During the ensuing debate Members comments included: -

·         The new proposal addressed some of concerns raised at the last meeting but concern that these were being met by taking money from elsewhere within the proposals.

·         The Affordable Housing percentage still falls short of policy and does not meet the needs of people in the area.

·         Members accepted the principle of developing the site but were not sure that the proposals before them were the right ones.

·         Proposed highways improvements would probably not come forward without the funding from the development.

·         Proposals do not address the needs of young people in the area with regard to suitable affordable housing and employment.

Officers stated that it may be possible to add conditions to ensure that the scheme encouraged the recruitment of local people, and that any additional funding for affordable housing prioritised the needs of young people.

          After further discussion it was proposed, seconded and RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted as per the Officer’s recommendation subject to:

•     The conditions set out in Annex 2, Appendix 1 and the amended legal agreement schedule set out in the Officer’s report;

•     Amendments to Condition 19 and 20 as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Letters;

•     An additional condition to require a scheme to be submitted to show how any additional Affordable Housing prioritises young people, wording of the condition to be delegated to the Assistant Director of the Service; and

•     An additional condition to require a scheme to be submitted to prioritise local people in relation employment on the site, wording of the condition to be delegated to the Assistant Director of the Service.