Self-build detached dwelling at Waste Transfer Station Whitgreave Manor Holding, Whitgreave

The site and surroundings

The site is a small holding outside the settlement hierarchy, surrounded by open fields, with two dwellings nearby and the A34 about 100 metres away.

“REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE The development raises unusual issues of planning policy within the meaning of paragraph 3.7.1 (ii) of the Scheme of Delegation. Context Site and surroundings 1.1 The application site comprises a parcel of land off Whitgreave Lane, which appears to be in use as a small holding associated with Whitgreave Manor. There are two dwellings north of the site, Whitgreave Manor Cottage and Whitgreave Manor.”

“The site is outside of the designated settlement hierarchy and is therefore within the ‘open countryside’ for planning purposes. TPSB policies SP7 and C5A contain criteria that relate to new housing development. Policy SP7 on the location of new housing development recognises that outside of the identified settlement boundaries, development will be supported where it is consistent with the objectives of the Council’s spatial principles in supporting rural sustainability.”

Officer report

Planning history

No relevant planning history was recorded for the site.

“25/40389/OUT - 10 Relevant Planning History None Recommendation Refuse due to the following reasons: The application site, given the limited transport choices and service provision, is considered an unsustainable location for the proposed residential development which would conflict with the objectives of the spatial strategy set out in Policies SP3, SP7, E2 and C5, of The Plan For Stafford Borough 2011-2031, as well as Paragraphs 110 and 115 of the National Planning…”

Officer report

Why refusal was recommended

Officers considered the site unsustainable because residents would rely on private cars, and its limited housing benefit would not outweigh the adverse impacts.

“25/40389/OUT - 4 2.10 Whitgreave does not benefit from any key services such as a school, GP surgery or grocery store. The site falls approx. 600m from the Stafford settlement boundary, and the nearest schools, GP surgery and grocery stores are located approx. 1-3 miles from the site.”

“In all the site is not considered to be located in a sustainable location in that occupiers would not have a ‘genuine choice’ of transport modes, and occupiers would be reliant on a private car to meet their day-to-day needs. As such the site represents an unsustainable location for housing having regard to Paragraph 110 and 115 of the NPPF.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The Highway Authority raised sustainability concerns but no highway objection, Forward Planning supported consent, and consultees required ecological, access and other safeguards.

“25/40389/OUT - 8 • Highways would require a plan showing the maximum visibility splay achievable from the centre of the vehicular access set back 2.4m rear of the edge of carriageway in each direction. All splays should be measured to the nearside kerb line/verge and be within land either under the control of the applicant or within highway land maintained by Staffordshire County Council.”

“Natural England: No objection subject to mitigation being secured District Newt Officer: We are satisfied with this ecological report and recommend a licence is secured to proceed with this development. Regulatory Services: No response received SBC Forward Planning: The proposed new housing development is classified as ‘non- major’ development at Whitgreave Manor Holding, Whitgreave Lane.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke in support of the application.

The committee debate

A councillor considered the site sustainable and proposed approval, while officers set out conditions and legal obligations if permission was granted.

“25/40389/OUT - Waste Transfer Station, Whitgreave Manor Holding, Whitgreave Lane (Recommend: Refuse). Considered the report of the Head of Economic Development and Planning regarding the matter. Public speaking on the proposal was as follows: M Stevens spoke in support of the application. Councillor R A James proposed that the application be approved due to the application site falling in a sustainable location.”

“Councillor R A James proposed that the application be approved subject to the conditions as described above including the removal of permitted development rights, and the legal agreement to secure the Cannock Chase SAC contribution. This was seconded by Councillor S N Spencer. On being put to the vote the proposal to approve application 25/40389/OUT was carried.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved subject to the stated conditions and a legal agreement securing a contribution to the Cannock Chase SAC.

“RESOLVED:- that planning application 25/40389/OUT be approved subject to the conditions set out above and a contribution to the SAC being secured by a legal agreement PC35 Application…”

Minutes