Apologies were received from Councillors KS Guthrie, EL Holton, MD Lloyd-Hayes, AJW Powers, NE Shaw and WC Skelton.

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

Councillor TL Bowes substituted for Councillor AJW Powers, Councillor PE Crockett for Councillor EL Holton, Councillor AW Johnson for Councillor NE Shaw, Councillor J Stone for Councillor KS Guthrie and Councillor D Summers for Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes.

To receive declarations of interests in respect of Schedule 1, Schedule 2 or Other Interests from members of the committee in respect of items on the agenda.

None.

To receive any announcements from the Chairperson.

None.

Application for approval of reserved matters following outline permission 161771 (site for proposed replacement of a fire destroyed dwelling plus the erection of 2 dwellings (total 3 dwellings)).

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

(Application for approval of reserved matters following outline permission 161771 (site for proposed replacement of a fire destroyed dwelling plus the erection of 2 dwellings (total 3 dwellings)).

The Senior 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.

Outline planning permission had been granted in 2016.  A reserved matters application had been refused.  Both these decisions had been made under delegated powers.  An appeal against refusal of the reserved matters application had been dismissed.  A further reserved matters application was now before the Committee.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs M Bowen spoke on behalf of Orcop Parish Council in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr M Shaw, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Dr C Down, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

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

He made the following principal comments:

·        There were almost 40 local objections.

·        The area was known for poor drainage and the issue of smells around the Copy Well was discussed at almost every Parish Council meeting.   The Committee had refused a recent application at Newcastle Farm nearby principally because of drainage issues.

·        The development would affect the visual amenity of residents of Wilkes Row given the rooflines.

·        A development of three houses was too large.

·        Several water sources were within 50m of the proposed filtration systems: a well in the garden of Lark House, Copy Well and a spring in the Grounds of Bramble Cottage.  This was contrary to the advice of Natural England in its response set out at section 4.1 of the report.

·        The size of the development would overload drainage capacity.

·        He detailed a number of criticisms that had been made about the drainage engineer’s report, as reflected in the schedule of updates, questioning whether the testing that had been conducted complied with standards and Regulations.  In conclusion, there were serious concerns in Orcop about pollution, smells and health risks. Further rigorous tests should be undertaken before any approval was considered.

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

·        The principle of the development had been established with outline permission having been granted.

·        The drainage issues were a concern.  It was important to ensure that the tests had been carried out properly.

The Development Manager confirmed that no condition had been attached to the outline permission requiring a foul and surface water drainage scheme and that it was not a reserved matter.  It was not one of the matters the Inspector had considered when determining the earlier application.  Having regard to the reasons for the Committee’s refusal of the Newcastle Farm application on 15 May 2018, additional information on drainage issues had been sought, in conjunction with the applicant, going beyond the applicant obligations in terms of the type of application submitted and this had been supplemented by advice  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

Proposed development of three dwellings with garages and new access.

The application was refused contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed development of three dwellings with garages and new access.)

The Senior 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, Mrs S Glover, Clerk to Little Birch Parish Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme, Mrs K Dillon, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr R Pryce, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

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

He made the following principal comments:

·        There was considerable local opposition to the scheme.

·        The proposal was for three large dwellings.  The community wanted affordable homes for young local families.

·        The proposal was not in keeping with the area. The proposed dwellings would dominate the skyline.

·        It was a greenfield site.  The Neighbourhood Development Plan was at examination stage. Other areas of the Parish were far more appropriate for development as provided for in the NDP.  There was concern that approval of the application would lead to the village spreading through subsequent infill development and to suburbanisation.

·        The local road network was in poor condition.  The proposed site was poorly located on a bend opposite a farm and was not in a sensible place to build.

·        The roads were used by walkers, cyclists and horse riders and safety had to be considered.

·        The application was for the wrong type of homes in the wrong location and should be refused.

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

The proposed site was not identified for development within the NDP. It was a greenfield site in the open countryside.  There were other preferred sites for development.

The size and scale of the properties was inappropriate, contrary to policy LD1.

Both Little Birch Parish Council and Much Birch Parish Councils opposed the proposal.  There were also numerous objections from the local community.

Accessibility was poor.  It would be necessary to drive to access services and the proposal was therefore contrary to policy MT1.  The site was also not really sustainable, contrary to policy SS1.

A contrary view was that Little Birch was a settlement identified for development in policy RA2.  The application was for outline planning permission.  There did not appear to be grounds for refusal.

The Development Manager commented that the weight to be given to relevant policies needed to be carefully considered.  The NDP could only be given moderate weight.  The application was for outline permission for three dwellings.  In relation to the scale of the proposed properties, size in terms of number of bedrooms would be a matter for consideration as part of a reserved matters application.  It was however appropriate to consider the visual impact of the scale of the development at this stage.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated that the proposal was contrary to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

Construction of an external 3g artificial turf pitch (atp) with fencing, floodlighting, a storage container.

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

(Councillor Norman had left the meeting and was not present during consideration of this application.)

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr S Kerry, of Hereford City Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr M Williams, the applicant, spoke in support.

It was reported that the local ward member and the adjoining local ward member had indicated that they supported the application.

Several members expressed their support for the scheme and the benefits it would bring for young people.

Having regard to some concerns that had been expressed about the material to be used for the proposed playing surfaces it was requested that clubs should ensure they had policies and guidance in place on their use.

Councillor Greenow proposed and Councillor Williams seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the printed recommendation The motion was carried unanimously with 12 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and any other conditions considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers:

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

2.         B02 Development in accordance with approved plans and materials

3.         Use of the development shall not commence until:

a) Certification that the Artificial Grass Pitch hereby permitted has met FIFA Quality Concept for Football Turf – FIFA Quality or equivalent International Artificial Turf Standard (IMS) and,

b) Confirmation that the facility has been registered on the Football Association’s register of Football Pitches

Such details to have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Sport England.

            Reason: To ensure that the development is fit for purpose and sustainable, provides sporting benefits and to accord with policy OS3 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy.

4.         Use of the development shall not commence until a community use agreement prepared in consultation with Sport England has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and a copy of the completed approved agreement has been provided to the Local Planning Authority. The agreement shall apply to the proposed Artificial Grass Pitch and associated ancillary facilities and include details of pricing policy, hours of use, access by priority groups/community users other than the host club, management responsibilities and a mechanism for review). The development shall not be used otherwise than in strict accordance with the approved agreement.

            Reason: To secure well managed safe community access to the sports facility/facilities, to ensure sufficient benefit to the development of sport and to accord with policy OS3 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy.

5.         Prior to the commencement of any construction work details of the type of infill materials to be installed into the 3G artificial grass pitch surface which may comprise of recycled SBR with adequate chemical testing evidence in compliance with REACH findings, or EPDM, or TPE, or Encapsulated SBR or natural  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

Construction of an external 3G artificial turf pitch with fencing and a storage container.

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

(182950 - Construction of an external 3g artificial turf pitch (atp) with fencing and a storage container at Ted Powell building.)

(Councillor Norman had left the meeting and was not present during consideration of this application.)

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 S Kerry, of Hereford City Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr S Willmot, Chairman – Herefordshire Football Association, spoke in support.

It was reported that the local ward member supported the application.

Members indicated their support for the scheme. 

Having regard to some concerns that had been expressed about the material to be used for the proposed playing surfaces it was requested that clubs should ensure they had policies and guidance in place on their use.

Councillor Greenow proposed and Councillor James seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the printed recommendation The motion was carried unanimously with 12 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED:  That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and any other conditions considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers:

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

2.         B02 Development in accordance with approved plans and materials

3.         Use of the development shall not commence until:

a) Certification that the Artificial Grass Pitch hereby permitted has met FIFA Quality Concept for Football Turf – FIFA Quality or equivalent International Artificial Turf Standard (IMS) and,

b) Confirmation that the facility has been registered on the Football Association’s register of Football Pitches

            Such details to have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Sport England.

            Reason: To ensure that the development is fit for purpose and sustainable, provides sporting benefits and to accord with policy OS3 of the Development Plan.

4.         Use of the development shall not commence until a community use agreement prepared in consultation with Sport England has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and a copy of the completed approved agreement has been provided to the Local Planning Authority. The agreement shall apply to the proposed Artificial Grass Pitch and associated ancillary facilities and include details of pricing policy, hours of use, access by priority groups/community users other than the host club, management responsibilities and a mechanism for review). The development shall not be used otherwise than in strict accordance with the approved agreement.

            Reason: To secure well managed safe community access to the sports facility/facilities, to ensure sufficient benefit to the development of sport and to accord with policy OS3 of the Development Plan.

5.         Prior to commencement of any works approved under this decision notice a fully detailed surface water management and Sustainable Drainage Scheme (SuDS) shall be supplied and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

Date of next site inspection – 22 January 2019

Date of next meeting – 23 January 2019