Response from the Parish Council re the new Woodcote Variation planning application

A copy of the response sent to Shropshire Council is below:-

RE: Planning application 20/05097/VAR and 20/05098/VAR
Woodcote Hill, Bloomsbury, Shropshire , TF11 8RS
Variation to condition 6a . Increase in tonnage from 250,000 to 400,000

This is the formal response and objection of Sheriffhales Parish Council to the above planning application for the reasons set out below

Sheriffhales Parish Council (SPC) and a significant number of residents raised objections to the planning applications made in respect to Woodcote Quarry in 2018. Many of the concerns and objections raised related to Highway matters, environmental impact and disturbance and the potential for negative impacts on surrounding communities and environments.
Despite these objections Shropshire Council (SC) granted approval and applied a series of conditions and legally binding obligations to the permission. In addition, the applicant gave various commitments in respect to the planning consent.

Following the granting of planning permission SPC have sought on numerous occasions clarification from SC as to what precisely the planning conditions, and or legally binding obligations applied to the planning consent by SC were and equally what the commitments made by the applicant in obtaining planning approval were. In respect to both these cases SPC has specifically sought clarification on these matters as relating to Highway safety, Traffic Management and Environmental Impact.
The clarification sought by SPC has never been provided by SC and SPC is of the view that many of these planning conditions, legally binding obligations and commitments by the applicant have not been delivered. This position is reaffirmed by the statements made in paragraphs 4.3 and 4.4 of the Design and Access statement that accompanies the current application (20/05097/VAR)

In paragraph 4.3 the applicant’s agent suggests the current T-junction access arrangements to the site off the A41 was the local preferred preference. SPC strongly contests this statement.

In paragraph 4.4 the applicant’s agent suggests a number of highway improvements have been delivered as part of the implementation of the 2018 planning consent. These include:
1. Improved signage and line markings on the A41 approaches to the B4379 junction
2. Match funding for improvements to the A41/ B4379 junction
3. A hard verge on available highway land extending to the immediate south of the A41/B4379 junction to improve southbound visibility exiting from the B4379.

SPC believes none of these obligations or commitments have been delivered.

In addition to the above the applicant’s agent states that the current application would result in the number of daily two way traffic movements increasing from 88 to 134, an increase of approximately 53% SPC believe such an increase would merely make a currently unacceptable highway position significantly worse.

As a result of the above SPC wishes to object to the current application in the strongest terms based in summary on:
1 The failure of the applicant to discharge existing legally binding planning obligations and commitments
2 An unacceptable increase in traffic movements which would only exacerbate an existing unsatisfactory highway safety situation.

In addition SPC would wish to formally request this application is referred to the relevant Planning Committee for determination and that SPC exercise their right to make representations to that Committee.