Apologies were received from Councillors J Hardwick, MD Lloyd-Hayes, A Seldon. NE Shaw, WC Skelton and SD Williams.

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

Councillor EPJ Harvey substituted for Councillor A Seldon, Councillor EL Holton for Councillor J Hardwick, Councillor JA Hyde for Councillor SD Williams, Councillor PD Newman for Councillor WC Skelton and Councillor D Summers for Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes.

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

None.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meetings held on 22 August 2018.

RESOLVED:   That the minutes of the meetings held on 22 August 2018 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Chairperson.

None.

Proposed new health centre (use class D1) including ancillary pharmacy(use class A1), access, parking, landscaping and associated works.

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

(Proposed new health centre (use class D1) including ancillary pharmacy (use class A1), access, parking, landscaping and associated works.)

The Principal Planning Officer (PPO) 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 the light of the Transportation Manager’s ongoing concerns it was proposed that officers be given delegated authority to issue planning permission after further discussions about the travel plan and parking management.  A revised condition 4 was also proposed together with an advisory note.

She reported that a recent representation had been received from the Herefordshire and Gloucestershire Canal Trust expressing concern that it had been consulted.  She read this to the meeting.  It requested amongst other things that before making a decision the council should work with them to ensure there was a master-plan for the area to guide the successful delivery of the Canal Quarter.

The PPO commented that the Canal Trust was not a statutory consultee for the purposes of the application.  The protected line of the canal lay some way to the west.  There was no master plan for the canal quarter.  The request would be drawn to the attention of the Hereford Area Plan team.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr B Smaylen of Prime (UK) Developments Limited, the applicants, and Mr A Randera, the architect/agent, spoke in support of the application.

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

She made the following principal comments:

·          The proposal involved the creation of a health centre to replace five existing city-based GP surgeries.  These were currently housed in Georgian/Victorian houses that were not suitable for the provision of modern health facilities.  The proposal would provide much improved facilities.

·          With regard to concerns expressed about the landscape impact, the development was some distance from the grade 2 listed railway station.  Properties along the link road were mainly industrial buildings of little architectural merit. 

·          The proposed transport hub would provide easy access to the facility.

·          She supported the application, allowing for the proposed further discussions on transport matters.

The Chairman reported that Councillor DB Wilcox the adjoining ward member was unable to attend the meeting and had requested that the Committee be advised that he was overall in favour of the proposal and endorsed the recommendation.

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

·        The facility would be a benefit.

·        The parking provision including any charging regime was a concern.  Measures were needed to prevent people either before or after an appointment parking in the car park leaving their vehicles and then going into the city centre, preventing other patients from using the parking spaces for the purpose for which they were intended.  High charges were not, however, necessarily a solution.

·        Traffic management required careful consideration given the volume of traffic in particular at the bottom of Aylestone Hill and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

Request for Screening Opinion. Summary Description (see application form for Full application and Planning Case Statement): • Proposed new field accesses • Proposed maintenance tracks to serve Southern Link Road (application151314) • Revised drainage including revised storage provisions, drainage ditches, outfall pipes, replacement culverts • Temporary Haul Route (west and east of railway line) inc temporary diversion of cycleway • New bridleway

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

(Request for Screening Opinion. Summary Description (see application form for Full application and Planning Case Statement): • Proposed new field accesses • Proposed maintenance tracks to serve Southern Link Road (application151314) • Revised drainage including revised storage provisions, drainage ditches, outfall pipes, replacement culverts • Temporary Haul Route (west and east of railway line) inc temporary diversion of cycleway • New bridleway.)

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.

The update contained representations from Natural England and the Woodland Trust and proposed additional conditions in response to those representations.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor J Johnson was invited to speak on the application.  He indicated that he had no comments to make at the outset but would respond as appropriate at the debate’s conclusion.

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

·        It was asked if the proposed temporary roads could be put to a future use mindful of the cost incurred in their construction.

·        Planning permission had been granted for the southern link road and the proposals represented engineering works to enable the road’s development to be pursued.

·        A member commented, in summary, that:

·        As a council application it was imperative that the council demonstrated that it had followed correct processes.

·        Paragraph 2.6 of the report was incorrect in stating that the South Wye Transport Package (SWTP) acknowledged that whilst the SWTP was being promoted as a stand alone scheme there was the possibility that the Southern Link Road (SLR) would ultimately link to the western relief road and the application for the SLR had been considered with that in mind.

·        The SLR decision had been taken on the basis of it being a stand alone project. Future aspirations were not material planning considerations.

·        If the SLR was now being linked to the Hereford Transport Package and its western bypass proposal that invalidated consideration of the application before the Committee on its own merits. 

·        Reference to the public inquiry into the SLR was lacking.

·        The service of notice on landowners had not been carried out correctly.

·        The application was premature and the documentation and evidence base was incomplete.  There was no agricultural impact assessment, no waste management plan and the objection from the Woodland Trust had been overlooked and not included in the officer report.

·        It was premature and potentially unsafe if not unlawful to proceed to determine the application.

The Committee considered a motion that consideration of the application be deferred.

The Development Manager (DM) commented that he did not consider that there were grounds for deferral.  Paragraph 6.4 of the report referred to the public inquiry into the SLR.  Paragraph 6.66 of the report onwards concluded that in relation to the service of notice of the application on relevant landowners the initial inaccuracy in certificate B, did not preclude lawful determination of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

Date of next site inspection – 9 October 2018

Date of next meeting – 10 October 2018

The Committee noted the date of the next meeting.