Apologies were received from Councillor CR Butler, DW Greenow and WC Skelton.

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

Councillor JA Hyde substituted for Councillor WC Skelton and Councillor J Stone for Councillor CR Butler.

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

Agenda item 10: 173843 - Hinton Community Centre, Ross Road, Hereford

Councillor Kenyon declared a schedule 2 interest, as defined in the Councillor Code of Conduct, as a trustee of the Centre, and left the meeting for the duration of this item.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meetings held on 17 January 2018.

RESOLVED:   That the minutes of the meetings held on 17 January 2018 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

None.

Reserved matters application for 414 dwellings, vehicular access and associated works. 

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, with an additional condition as set out in the schedule of updates.

(Reserved matters application for 414 dwellings, vehicular access and associated works.)

(Councillor FM Norman fulfilled the role of local ward member and accordingly had no vote on this application.  Councillor JLV Kenyon had not been present during the presentation and had no vote on the application.)

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.

He highlighted that the update included a memorandum of understanding between the applicant and the local planning authority that established a programme for monitoring air quality to ensure in compliance with condition 15 of the outline planning permission that the development did not exacerbate air pollution levels.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr C Burke, of Leominster Town Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr CA Webb-Davies, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr G Godwin, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

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

She made the following principal comments:

·        There had been a lack of communication by the applicant with the local community.

·        The quality of the proposed housing was poor, although it was noted that the plans had now been amended so that bedrooms now met the minimum size used as a guide in the Council’s Amenity Standards Document, having originally been significantly smaller.

·        There was poor connectivity with the Town.

·        There were no community facilities, provision for which had been made in the initial plans.

·        The housing mix and provision of public open space had been somewhat improved.

·        A significant number of trees were to be removed, missing an opportunity to enhance the development.  The Conservation Manager (Trees) objected to these proposals.  Trees would also help to reduce the air pollution problems.

·        Whilst some concerns had been addressed and some improvements made to the original proposals it remained a mediocre proposal that could be much better.

·        Issues of particular concern to the community and to the Civic Society and Campaign to Protect Rural England, as detailed in their submissions, included the lack of an environmental assessment, the impact on the landscape and the loss of trees, and especially the environmental impact of the significant increase in traffic the development would generate.

·        Outline permission had been granted some 12 years ago.  Circumstances had changed during that time and a new application should have been required.

·        The proposal did not fulfil the aims of policy LD1, demonstrating that character of the landscape and townscape had positively influenced the design, and maintain and extend tree cover.

·        It also did not fulfil policy LD2 which required that development proposals should conserve, restore and enhance the biodiversity provide for therestoration and enhancement of existing biodiversity and geodiversity features on site and connectivity to wider ecological networks.

·        Nor did it comply with policy LD3, which required proposals to protect, manage and plan for the preservation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128.

Reserved matters following 132924/o for landscaping, appearance, layout and scale.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s revised recommendation as set out in the schedule of updates.

(Reserved matters following 132924/o for landscaping, appearance, layout and scale.)

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.

The update included comments from the Transportation Manager and recommended additional conditions.  The PPO explained that compliance with one condition would mean that the proposed lay-by in front of plots 1 and 2, designed to meet a request from the Parish Council, could not be delivered.  This was unfortunate, however, officers considered that the scheme would be acceptable without the lay-by.  It was therefore recommended to delegate authority to named officers in the scheme of delegation to approve the application subject to the submission of an amended layout plan.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr D Moore, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Chairman reported that the local ward member, Councillor MJK Cooper, was unable to attend the meeting but had informed him that the Parish Council and he accepted the officer recommendation.  No Parish Council representative would therefore be attending to speak.

Members were generally supportive of the application, welcoming the way in which the applicant had worked with the local community and the parish council to seek to deliver a scheme of good quality.

Some concern was expressed about the removal of affordable housing from the scheme, noting amongst other things that the Housing Officer did not support this approach. The report stated that the District Valuer had concluded that on the basis of the provision of affordable housing and the S106 contribution the scheme was not viable. Following discussions with the applicant the Parish Council had indicated that it would support the payment of S106 contributions rather than the provision of six affordable housing units.  Given the agreement of the Parish Council, Members in the main considered this an acceptable approach, but made clear that they would not wish this to set a precedent potentially undermining the delivery of much needed affordable housing.

The PPO confirmed that a condition attached to the grant of outline planning permission required land drainage issues to be addressed.

The Lead Development Manager commented that the District Valuer scrutinised the viability of schemes carefully. The proposal was in accord with the parish council’s wishes. There had been some recent affordable housing development elsewhere in Weobley.  Regard would be had to the need to make additional provision for affordable housing in the housing market area

Councillor Powers proposed and Councillor Seldon seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the printed recommendation with additional conditions as set out in the update sheet.  The motion was carried with 13 votes in favour, 1 against and no abstentions.

RESOLVED:  That subject to the completion of a Deed of variation to the Section 106 agreement under the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 129.

Proposed erection of an agricultural workers' dwelling (part retrospective).

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

(Proposed erection of an agricultural workers' dwelling (part retrospective).)

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

Retrospective car parking area with new hedge including ecological and biodiversity improvements.

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

(Retrospective car parking area with new hedge including ecological and biodiversity improvements.)

(Councillor Kenyon declared an interest, left the meeting and was not present during consideration of this application.)

The Development Supervisor/Enforcement Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr R Wooderson, a Trustee of Hinton Community Association Limited, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, one of the two local ward members, Councillor ACR Chappell, spoke on the application.  He praised the work of the Centre and supported the application, explaining the circumstances that had led to a retrospective application being made.  He noted there had been only two objections both of which had expressed concern about traffic. 

The Committee considered that the provision of an overflow car park would help to avoid problems arising from unwelcome roadside parking

The Lead Development Manager clarified that an area of hardstanding had been created as permitted development associated with nearby building works.  The view had been reached that it would be beneficial to retain this area as a car park.  Rather than removing the hardstanding a retrospective application had therefore been made.

Councillor Edwards proposed and Councillor Stone seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the printed recommendation.  The motion was carried with 13 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions.

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

1.         G11 Landscaping scheme - implementation

INFORMATIVE:

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 – 20 February 2018

Date of next meeting – 21 February 2018