Apologies were received from Councillors PJ Edwards, DW Greenow, KS Guthrie, JA Hyde, and AJW Powers.

To receive details of any Member nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the Committee.

Councillor J Stone substituted for Councillor JA Hyde and Councillor D Summers for Councillor AJW Powers.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

Agenda item 5 – 151121 – Land off High Street, Leintwardine

Councillor WC Skelton declared a non-pecuniary interest as the applicant was a client of a former employer for whom he had previously carried out work.

Agenda item 6 – 151627 – Land Adjoining Bryants Court Cottage, Goodrich

Councillor PGH Cutter declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

Councillor J Hardwick declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

Councillor EJ Swinglehurst declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

Proposed demolition of existing dwelling together with its detached garage and accommodation over to facilitate a purpose designed residential  apartment building (8 flats) together with associated car parking, cycle/bin stores and associated communal grounds.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, with amended conditions.

(Proposed demolition of existing dwelling together with its detached garage and accommodation over to facilitate a purpose designed residential apartment building (8 Flats) together with associated car parking, cycle/bin stores and associated communal grounds.)

The Acting Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor Mrs MD Lloyd-Hayes, spoke on the application.

She made the following principal comments:

·        She had received a significant amount of correspondence on the application.

·        The site was in a conservation area.  The proposal was detrimental.  It was out of keeping with the character of the area and contrary to policy HBA6.

·        The scale of the development was out of proportion.  It was three storeys high and overbearing.

·        The modern design was incompatible with the Edwardian and Victorian buildings along Bodenham Road.

·        The side of Bodenham Road where the site was situated had not been subject to modern development.

·        The density of development with eight apartments proposed was too intensive and again out of keeping with the area.

·        The eight apartments proposed would generate additional traffic.  Bodenham Road was already facing increased pressure as a result of the new link road.

·        It was questioned whether the 9 car parking spaces proposed would be sufficient.  There was no on street parking available. The proposal was contrary to policy H16.

·        The existing building was much lower than that proposed.  The proposal would have an adverse effect on the light and amenity value of an adjoining property and the street.

·        Reference was made in the report to the protection of trees on the site during construction work.  Assurance was sought that these trees would be retained through Tree Preservation Orders.

·        The Waste Management Service had commented that it was likely that the contractor would refuse to collect refuse from the bin store as currently located on the plans.

·        Hereford City Council had objected to both the original and amended plans.

·        Paragraph 5.2 of the report summarised the representations made in the letters of objection that had been received.

·        The area was an attractive part of the City.  Any development in such an area should be required to benefit and enhance it.

·        There was some question about a drain crossing the application site.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·        The Acting Principal Planning Officer commented that the proposed building would not have an unduly overbearing or overshadowing impact on adjoining properties.  She confirmed that Tree Preservation Orders would protect trees on the site.  The provision of 9 car parking spaces met highway standards.  Cycle storage was also provided.  There was restricted parking on Bodenham Road.  In considering the application of policy HBA6 regard had to be had to paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  The benefit of the development in a sustainable location outweighed any harm for the reasons  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

Proposed residential development of 10 no dwellings.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed residential development of 10 no dwellings.)

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr M Collins, of Leintwardine Group Parish Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr A Stewart, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor CA Gandy, spoke on the application.

She commented that the access to the site was expected to be via the access created for the doctor’s surgery and would mean residents of the new dwellings driving through the surgery car park.  The surgery was used by a number of elderly people and she was concerned that this would present a risk to safety.  Some form of traffic management together with signage would be needed to ensure that traffic travelling to and from the dwellings had to slow down.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·        It was observed that the development contained no affordable housing.  The Development Manager commented that the density of the development was equivalent to 25 dwellings per hectare.  He added that Leintwardine had achieved its allocation of affordable housing and there was no current need to be met.  . 

·        Some members expressed concern about the shared access.  The Development Manager commented that the application was an outline application.  The Committee therefore only needed to consider the principle of development.  Access and other transportation matters including pedestrian access would be considered at the reserved matters stage. The Transportation Manager had no objections to the application.

·        The intention to provide bungalows within the development was welcomed.

·        The size of the development was comparatively modest and more acceptable than some other proposals that had come before the Committee.

·        Note should be taken of the concerns expressed by the Parish Council that the settlement would have an adverse affect on the setting of the village.

·        If approved the developer should be required to build to the highest achievable standards.

·        Account should be taken of the comments of the Conservation Manager – Landscape regarding the siting of house plots number 6 and 10 and their proximity to the hedgerow.

The Development Manager commented that the development represented organic growth and it was to be hoped that concerns raised by Members could be addressed at the reserved matters stage.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate and reiterated her concerns about the safety of the access.

RESOLVED: That Subject to the completion of a Section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 obligation agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report (subject to the deletion of paragraph 4), officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers are authorised to grant outline planning permission, subject to the conditions below and any other further conditions considered necessary.

1.         A01 Time  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

Proposed erection of two detached cottages with new vehicular access.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed erection of two detached cottages with new vehicular access.)

The Acting Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.  He reported that Goodrich Parish Council no longer objected to the proposal.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Ms R Chatterton, a local resident, spoke in objection to the scheme.  Mr P Smith, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor PD Newman, spoke on the application.

·        He made the following principal comments:

·        The Parish Council had objected to the original application.  A revised scheme, reduced in size, had been submitted and the Parish Council had withdrawn its objection to the development.  He supported the Parish Council’s view. The development respected the integrity of the village and was appropriate.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·        Members noted the Parish Council’s support for the development.

·        The Development Manager confirmed that a high quality of design was expected within the AONB and that design of the scheme would be considered at the reserved matters stage.

·        In relation to objections that had been expressed about the impact on amenity and privacy of adjoining dwellings the Acting Principal Planning Officer commented that these were some 37 and 24 metres away on the opposite side of the highway, and separated from the proposed development by landscaping.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He had no additional comments.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.         A02 Time limit for submission of reserved matters

2.         A03 Time limit for commencement (outline permission)

3.         A04 Approval of reserved matters

4.         A05 Plans and particulars of reserved matters

5.         Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site.

            Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

6.         No surface water shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

            Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.

7.         H03 Visibility splays – should meet HC design guide for single private drives.

8.         H06 Vehicular access construction

9.         H09 Driveway gradient

10.       H12 Parking and turning - single house

11.       H17 Junction improvement/off site works

12.       H21 Wheel washing

13.       H27 Parking for site operatives

14.       H29 Secure covered cycle parking provision

15.       G03 Retention of existing trees/hedgerows: scope of information required

16.       G04 Protection of trees/hedgerows that are to be retained

17.       G09 Details of Boundary treatments

18.       G10 Landscaping scheme

19.       G11 Landscaping scheme – implementation

20.       I16 Restriction of hours during construction

INFORMATIVES:

1.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

Proposed installation of gate into field.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed installation of gate into field.)

The Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

2.         B01 Development in accordance with the approved plans

3.         H05 Access gates open inwards

INFORMATIVES:

1.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations, including any representations that have been received. It has subsequently determined to grant planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Date of next site inspection – 27 October 2015

Date of next meeting – 28 October 2015