Apologies were received from Councillors Butler, Greenow, Guthrie, James and Skelton.

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

In accordance with paragraph 4.1.170 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillors Hyde, Phillips, Andrews and Williams attended the meeting as substitute members for Councillors Butler, Greenow, James and Skelton respectively.

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

Councillor PJ Edwards declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item no. 6, application 164103, Claston Farm, Dormington; Councillor Edwards knew the applicant.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meetings held on 4 October 2017 and 1 November 2017.

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meetings held on 4 October and 1 November 2017 be approved as correct records and signed by the Chairman.

None.

Erection of 2 no. Additional broiler units on existing poultry site along with associated infrastructure.

The application was approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed erection of 2 No. additional broiler units on existing poultry site along with associated infrastructure)

(Councillor J Hardwick was fulfilling the local ward member role and accordingly had no vote on this application)

The Acting Development Manager (ADM) gave a presentation on the officer report relating to the application and the update sheet including an additional representation and a further condition concerning the use of external lighting, as attached to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr I Morley, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application and Mr E Thomas, the applicant, spoke in support.

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

Councillor Hardwick made the following principal points:

·         Applications concerning poultry units were emotive;

·         Environmental issues had been addressed in the completion of the application. The peer review conducted on the application had found that the impacts of the site would be within acceptable limits;

·         The landscaping proposed on the development would soften the impact of the structure on the surrounding countryside;

·         The attenuation pond would cope with runoff from the site and assist in the alleviation of local flooding issues;

·         The odour caused by the production cycle was usual in rural areas and the operation proposed on the site was consistent with a rural county.

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

·         The condition of the farm yard was referred to which was felt to be well-maintained. In response the ADM confirmed that maintenance of the farmyard was not a material planning consideration and no weight should be attached to its condition during decision-making;

·         It was felt that the technical issues in the report had been addressed by the consultants employed to peer review the application. The technical reports commissioned and the lack of objection from statutory consultees limited the grounds on which the application could be refused;

·         Sympathy was expressed for local residents who would be affected by smells from the site. Concern was expressed regarding the potential impact of the site upon the respiratory health of local residents caused by ammonia emissions.

·         The prevailing wind from the south west would carry the odour of the site away from Dormington and local residential areas. The inconsistency in the outcomes of the odour modelling, which claimed a slight impact on local residents, and the representations from the local community, which stated a severe impact was raised.

·         A query was raised regarding the length of time required for the planting scheme proposed in the landscaping scheme to reach maturity;

·         The proposed colour of the roof was queried and whether a shade to match the colour of the crops surrounding the development would be more appropriate. The ADM confirmed that the applicant was required to promote a scheme that the local planning authority would approve;

·         The right of way across the farm yard was raised and the need to safeguard the footpath. The ADM confirmed that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

Proposed mixed use development comprising 15 dwellings including 5 affordable, 2 live work units and associated roads and footpaths, junction improvements, sustainable drainage, informal public open space, hedgerow and tree planting.

The application was approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed mixed use development comprising 15 dwellings including 5 affordable, 2 live work units and associated roads and footpaths, junction improvements, sustainable drainage, informal public open space, hedgerow and tree planting)

(Councillor J Hardwick was fulfilling the local ward member role and accordingly had no vote on this application)

The Acting Development Manager (ADM) gave a presentation on the officer report, as attached to these minutes, relating to the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr R Pryce, applicant’s agent and Mr R Price, local resident, spoke in support to the application.

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

Councillor Hardwick made the following principal points:

·         The application had undergone significant revisions and the current proposal represented the best solution for the site;

·         There was an intention to include the site for development in the neighbourhood plan which was at an early stage of drafting;

·         The site did not merge the areas of Tarrington and Little Tarrington;

·         A TRO process for a 30 mph limit on the A438 close to the site had been commenced and an improvement to the junction onto the road would benefit the local area; and

·         The proposed footway on the site would improve pedestrian safety for people walking between Tarrington and Little Tarrington.

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

·         The development was felt to be sympathetic to the surrounding area. The layout of the site was commended and it was stated that the plan could be an exemplar for other developers. The inclusion of bungalows on the site was particularly welcomed.

·         The applicant had taken account of the concerns and issues of local residents in the production of the application. This was evident through the low density nature of the site and the proposed improvements to the nearby road junction;

·         A query was raised regarding the size of gullies and the capacity of the drainage system to cope with run-off from the site. Responsibility for the maintenance of the drainage system was raised and why this was not stated in the conditions. The ADM confirmed that, in an addition to the legal agreement, a management company would be established to maintain the drainage system;

·         A query was raised regarding the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) relating to the 30 mph speed limit and why this was not included in the conditions. The ADM confirmed that a contribution of £15,000 was included in the heads of terms and would be secured via a legal agreement;

·         It was important that the site made provision for wildlife and the work undertaken to ensure the site was wildlife-friendly following consultations was welcomed. The ADM confirmed that condition 12 made provision for habitat enhancement including provision for swift and bat nesting;

·         A concern was raised regarding consistency with planning policy and the potential to set a precedent for bad development in similar areas. A query was raised regarding the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Re-development of former council offices at bath street, hereford including change of use from b1 - business to c3 - dwellinghouses to provide a total of 75no.  Apartments (comprising 1 & 2 bed apartments).  Re-development includes partial demolition of existing buildings (as indicated on submitted drawings).

The amendment to the previous planning and regulatory committee resolution was approved in accordance with the officer’s recommendation.

 (To complete a section 111 agreement in respect of application 164024, former council offices at 39 Bath Street)

The Senior Planning, Highways and Regeneration Lawyer introduced the report as attached to these minutes. It was explained that following the decision of the committee regarding application 164024 a change to the resolution was required to authorise the local planning authority to enter into a section 111 agreement with Herefordshire Housing.

A motion was proposed by Councillor PJ Edwards and seconded by Councillor EJ Swinglehurst to agree the officer recommendation. The motion was carried unanimously.

Resolved – that subject to the completion of a Section 111 Local Government Act 1972 agreement, binding both parties into the unconditional completion of the Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 agreement and transfer of the land to Herefordshire Housing Limited, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers are authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out and attached to the original officer report to committee on 13 September 2017.

The meeting ended at 12.08 p.m.

Chairman

.