For:      South Shropshire Housing Association, Savills Commercial Ltd, Caxton House, 1 Fore Street, Birmingham, B2 5ER

Ward: Kington Town

The principal Planning Officer reported on the following matters:

The draft heads of Terms should read in paragraph 4 that ..’detailed provision shall be as follows: 6 affordable housing units for rent and 6 for shared ownership’.

The draft Section 106 agreement reflects this and also makes clear reference to the local connection of residents who would purchase or rent these dwellings.

It is also considered that the report does not provide enough emphasis on the fact that this development will provide a mix of shared ownership and social rented properties and that all occupants would be subject to meeting the criteria set out in the Section 106 regarding a local connection to Kington or one of the surrounding parishes. These parishes have been specified as: Huntingdon, Rodd Nash and Little Harpton, Brilley, Eardisley, Lyonshall and Titley.

An ecological survey has been submitted and the Councils Ecologist has made the following comments:

I have received the ecological survey report by Carter Ecological Limited as a result of their survey of the site on 30/05/2007.

I welcome the thorough assessment of habitats on the site.

I note that a significant amount of evidence of use of the buildings by bats was found. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the species using the buildings and how mitigation will be incorporated into the new development. Different mitigation and compensation measures are required for different species of bat. Bat activity surveys are recommended in the report, and should be undertaken now to determine the species and numbers present. Confirmation of whether there is a maternity roost present (and if they are brown long-eared bats) in the water tower is also needed, although I appreciate that this will not be affected by the main development. The presence of lesser horseshoe bats also needs to be clarified. It will need to be shown how the mitigation and compensation measures can be incorporated before development can take place.

Reptile surveys will be required at an appropriate time of year. If they are found to be present, it should be possible to accommodate them on the undeveloped part of the site, but they may need to be excluded from certain areas.

A nesting bird mitigation strategy will also be required, including provision of nest boxes for swallows and house sparrows. I note that no evidence of badgers was found on the site.

An additional condition is recommended to ensure that the recommendations of the survey are undertaken prior to commencement of development. This would read as follows:

Prior to the commencement of development on the site the recommendations set out in the ecological report by Carter Ecological Limited as a result of their survey of the site on 30/05/2007 shall be undertaken and details of mitigation and findings submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: to protect the ecological interests of the site.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Jones and Mrs Smith, objectors, spoke against the application. 

Councillor TM James the Local Ward Member said that there were a number of local concerns about the application.  These included concerns about the narrow approach road and fact that the site fell outside the natural  settlement boundary. of the village in open countryside in an elevated position.  A smaller development of the site would be much more in keeping with the character of the settlement and there was already an adequate provision of affordable housing approved for other areas of Kington.  Further provision could affect the rural fabric and community balance of the town because of the lack of employment opportunities for those living there.  This had already led to newcomers leaving other new developments.  He therefore felt that the application should be refused on the grounds of location, access and type of occupancy.

Councillor RJ Phillips was disappointed with the design of the proposed development which was not in keeping with the character of the Village.  In view of the objections raised, Councillor Mrs JP French suggested that there was some merit in the application being deferred so that the applicants could do further work to address them.

RESOLVED:

that consideration of the application be deferred for the applicants to (i) do more work on the design of the scheme which should be in keeping with the character of the village; and (ii) provide more alternatives on the type of social housing that would be provided.