Planning Report - 15 June 2011 to 18 October 2011

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Stafford Borough Council

Use of land for stationary residential caravans etc - Sandybank, Radmore Lane, Gnosall. CPRE objects on the grounds of intrusion, with substantial traffic objections. We note that commercial use is also involved and that a "plot-lands" site exists nearby, and a cumulative countryside detriment may be envisaged.

Newcastle Borough Council

Development of 2 Pump Bank, Keele. Approaches were made to CPRE by an adjoining resident concerned at the obtrusive nature of a permitted extension. CPRE examined the proposals but was reluctantly unable to support the complainant as in our view the extension was an improvement on what existed, minor in volume and in accordance with good design principles.

Lichfield District Council

- Agricultural building - Windmill Farm, Stocking Lane, Upper Longdon, Rugeley. CPRE concluded that despite its size, the location was relatively unobtrusive subject to dark colouring of the cladding to assist its assimilation into the landscape.

- Mobile Home for agricultural worker, three years permission - Fullbrook Nursery, Watery Lane, Lichfield. CPRE suggest that the LPA should confirm the agricultural worker claim and investigate the circumstances that would allow the temporary permission to be terminate. Otherwise refuse.

- Change of Use of land for keeping and breeding livestock and the erection of temporary dwelling - Haselour Hall, Harlaston. CPRE considers the use as reasonable rural diversification and also the temporary dwelling for a stockman. We object however to the design of the "log cabin" house as failing to reflect any Staffordshire vernacular, and ask whether it is demountable for removal. CPRE notes with pleasure the intention to pursue a tree and hedge planting programme.

- Removal of timber structures and erection of timber agricultural building in connection with existing poultry business - Gravelly Lane, Stonnall. CPRE finds advantages in removal of a clutter of hutted buildings and replacement by a single building thereby improving the openness of this Green Belt site. Recommend approval subject to dark staining of cladding.

- Change of use of former Mission Hall and builders yard to Class B1 Business Use - 176 Birmingham Road, Shenstone Woodend. CPRE points out that the proposal implicitly would involve no detriment to neighbours. No objection.

South Staffordshire Council

- Extension to Honey Pots, Dunston Heath, Stafford. Despite increase in height CPRE felt that the proposal was acceptable, although doubt existed whether its increase in volume may conflict with Green Belt limitations.

- Demolition of dwelling and replacement by four - Trysull. CPRE investigated a refusal by SSC of this application, but supported SSC in their decision. The complainant, a CPRE member, was advised to discuss the matter with the Chairman of the South Staffs District Group, and if he felt sufficiently strongly, support the applicant personally at appeal.

- Change of Use of agricultural buildings to light industrial/storage - Common Lane, Bednall. The change of use has already occurred. The site is approached along narrow inadequate lanes and CPRE objects on these grounds unless alternative access is provided. A landscaping condition would be needed.

East Staffordshire Borough Council

- 28 Holiday lodges at St Stephens Hill Farm, Admaston. The application site adjoins Blithfield Reservoir and would be highly visible and disruptive in the fine landscape of the reservoir surrounds. The landscape scheme for the site is superficial and constitutes "rural sprawl". Recommend refusal.

Cannock Chase District Council

- Proposed energy recovery facility - Kingswood Lakeside, Cannock. CPRE enters a strong objection to this waste-fired power station situated on high ground dominating views along a length of the M6 Toll Road. We question the security of supply of the feed stock, and the perpetuation of fossil-fuel (waste) rather than alternative greener recovery processes. Attention is drawn to its very large size and incongruities in its design. CPRE recommends refusal.

- Floodlighting - All weather pitch, Cannock Park. Following an approach by a member of the public, CPRE questioned this proposal on the grounds of its effect on surround properties. We commented further on the proposal after its approval, pointing out that certain conditions enabled adjustments to be made to the lighting to satisfy objections.

PLANNING PROPOSALS

East Staffordshire Borough Council LDF - Core Strategy - Prepublication Strategic Options

CPRE points out future global developments which do not seem to be taken into account in this Plan and recommends a process somewhat independent of national guidance, especially as it refers to population numbers. We contest the need to exceed natural increase numbers and challenge the definitions of sustainability.

We enlarge upon the housing projections and draw particular attention to affordable housing issues and also demographic forecasts. CPRE notes the extent of public concern over mixed development.

In brief we point out that permissions already existing, together with brownfield sites, provide an adequate housing supply and any inflation of these figures should await a 5 year review when future trends will become clearer.

Notwithstanding the above comments we remark upon the range of development sites put forward by the LPA.

High Speed Rail 2

CPRE has responded to the public consultation. We deplore the consultation process which extends to a decision in principle on the northern Y extension of HS2 when nothing is known of its routing, which could involve two lines through the County.

Our general objections range from reservations about the basic case for such a line with no access to intermediate cities en route, to concerns about its impact on landscapes and communities. We even challenge safety and security from acts of terrorism at 250mph. Of especial concern is effects on AONB and Green Belt eg the Meriden Gap.

Draft National Planning Policy Framework (DNPPF)

In response to the public consultation CPRE defends the present planning system whilst welcoming moves toward simplification. We deplore the default in favour of development as a return to the 1930s. "Development" is wholly qualified by the term "sustainable" in the DNPPF, and CPRE points out the unsatisfactory vagueness of this word and recommends a more rigorous definition. We also take issue with assumptions such as increase in rural housing, outstanding exceptional rural design.

We reiterate our longstanding views on achieving high quality design, and also recommend a concentration on the countryside as a whole rather than just exceptional classifications.