To receive apologies for absence.

No apologies for absence were received.

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

GUIDANCE ON DECLARING PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS AT MEETINGS

The Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct requires Councillors to declare against an Agenda item(s) the nature of an interest and whether the interest is personal or prejudicial.  Councillors have to decide first whether or not they have a personal interest in the matter under discussion.  They will then have to decide whether that personal interest is also prejudicial.

A personal interest is an interest that affects the Councillor more than most other people in the area.  People in the area include those who live, work or have property in the area of the Council.  Councillors will also have a personal interest if their partner, relative or a close friend, or an organisation that they or the member works for, is affected more than other people in the area.  If they do have a personal interest, they must declare it but can stay and take part and vote in the meeting. 

Whether an interest is prejudicial is a matter of judgement for each Councillor.  What Councillors have to do is ask themselves whether a member of the public – if he or she knew all the facts – would think that the Councillor’s interest was so important that their decision would be affected by it.  If a Councillor has a prejudicial interest then they must declare what that interest is and leave the meeting room.

The following declarations of interest were made:

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 5th March, 2008.

RESOLVED:   That the Minutes of the meeting held on 5th March, 2008 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To note the contents of the attached report of the Head of Planning Services in respect of the appeals received or determined for the southern area of Herefordshire.

The Sub-Committee noted the Council’s current position in respect of planning appeals for the southern area of Herefordshire.

For the efficient transaction of business, the Chairman decided that the order of business should be changed as follows:

Agenda item 8, 6, 9, 5, 7, 10.

Erection of 4 no. single storey hotel accommodation suites.

Erection of 4 no. single storey hotel accommodation suites.

The Chairman felt that determination of the application should be deferred due to the change of recommendation and also to the significant number of updates reported by the Southern Team Leader.

RESOLVED

THAT determination of the application be deferred.

Erection of agricultural storage building.

Erection of agricultural storage building.

Councillor H Bramer, the local ward member, noted the comments from the Parish Council in respect of the ongoing enforcement issues on the site. He asked the Principal Planning Officer for an update on the matter.

In response to the question from the local ward member, the Principal Planning Officer advised members that the compliance time had passed and that discussions were to be held with Legal Services with regard to a prosecution to secure compliance with the enforcement notice. In response to a further question from Councillor JG Jarvis the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that approximately six months had passed since the deadline for compliance.

Councillor RH Smith, who advised members that he had declared a personal interest in respect of the application, noted that construction was under way on the site. He also sought clarification as to whether the farm building had been sold or was currently up for sale.

The Principal Planning Officer said that he understood the farm was currently up for sale.

Councillor RH Smith had concerns regarding the water supply on the site, He also felt that the application should be refused due to insufficient evidence that the site was going to be used for an agricultural or horticultural enterprise. The Southern Team Leader confirmed that Condition 6 would limit the site to agricultural use only and would therefore address the concerns raised by Councillor RH Smith.

Members discussed the issues regarding previous enforcement matters on the site. They felt that if planning permission was to be granted then the site would have to be monitored closely to ensure that the recommended conditions were adhered to. They noted that enforcement matters could be costly to the authority and could also be time consuming for officers.

Councillor JG Jarvis felt that the applicant could address the outstanding enforcement issues on the site prior to the current application being determined. He proposed that determination of the application be deferred pending this action.

RESOLVED

That the determination of the application be deferred.

Erection of two dwellings.

Erection of two dwellings.

The Principal Planning Officer reported the following updates:

• A letter accompanied by revised plans had been received from the applicant.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Colvin, a neighbouring resident, spoke against the application and Mr Pickering, the applicant, spoke in support.

Councillor JG Jarvis, the local ward member, advised members that the application had caused a great deal of concern to the residents of Goodrich. However he felt that the drainage concerns had been addressed through appropriate conditions and noted that the current application was for outline planning permission only. He also felt that the design issues could be addressed when a full application for planning permission was submitted at a later date. Finally he advised members that Goodrich Parish Council were currently preparing a Village Design Statement and he hoped their views would be noted throughout the planning process.

In response to the comments from the local ward member, the Principal Planning Officer advised members that two schemes had recently been refused in Goodrich due to design grounds.

RESOLVED

That subject to being satisfied regarding the access the officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be authorised to approve the application subject to the following conditions and any additional conditions considered necessary by officers:

1       A02 (Time limit for submission of reserved matters (outline permission))

         Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2       A03 (Time limit for commencement (outline permission))

         Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3       A04 (Approval of reserved matters)

         Reason: To enable the local planning authority to exercise proper control over these aspects of the development.

4       A05 (Plans and particulars of reserved matters)

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

5       H11 (Parking - estate development (more than one house))

         Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the free flow of traffic using the adjoining highway.

6       H01 (Single access - not footway)

         Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

7       H03 (Visibility splays)

         Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

8       H05 (Access gates)

         Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

9       H06 (Vehicular access construction)

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

10     H29 (Secure covered cycle parking provision)

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate provision for secure covered cycle accommodation within the application site, encouraging alternative modes of transport in accordance with both local and national planning policy.

11     W01 (Foul/surface water drainage)

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

12     W02 (No surface water to connect to public system)

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.

13     W03 (No drainage run-off to public system)

Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

A)            Alterations and refurbishment of 27 Brookend Street and demolition of the separate detached rear commercial premises.

B)            Alterations and extensions to 27 Brookend Street including new shop front and extension to retail unit and 4 no. existing flats.  Demolition of the detached commercial building to the rear and erection of 9 no. new build residential dwelling apartments.

A)            Alterations and refurbishment of 27 Brookend Street and demolition of the separate detached rear commercial premises.

B)            Alterations and extensions to 27 Brookend Street including new shop front and extension to retail unit and 4 no. existing flats.  Demolition of the detached commercial building to the rear and erection of 9 no. new build residential dwelling apartments.

The Senior Planning Officer reported the following updates:

• A further letter of objection had been received from Mr TH Stowell of 4 Wallace Court, Station Street, Ross-on-Wye.

Councillor PGH Cutter, the local ward member, thanked members for attending the site inspection. He noted the concerns of the residents of Wallace Court in respect of overlooking. He expressed concerns regarding the drainage and flood issues on the site but noted that Welsh Water were looking into these issues in an effort to finally resolve the problems. Finally he noted that the proposed section 106 agreement had requested a contribution towards a bus shelter, he felt that a pedestrian crossing on Station Road would be more beneficial to the local residents.

Councillor JA Hyde advised members that although she was unable to attend the site inspection she had visited the site on a separate occasion. She echoed the views of the local ward member in respect of a pedestrian crossing on Station Road. She added that she was aware that a number of concerns had been raised in respect of the dry access route to Wallace Court and felt that this needed to be preserved.

Councillor JG Jarvis noted that the application had been submitted before the Council had adopted the Supplementary Planning Guidance in respect of Planning Obligations, therefore the applicant could only be asked to make a voluntary contribution.

The Development Control Manager advised members that any proposed contribution would have to relate to the application site and that it would be difficult to request a contribution from the applicant in order to address an existing problem in the area.

Members discussed the merits of the application and on balance felt that that applicant should be requested to make a voluntary contribution to help fund a pedestrian crossing on Station Road. They agreed to defer the application in order for further discussions to take place between the planning officer and the applicant in respect of this matter.

RESOLVED:

That determination of the application be deferred pending further discussions with the applicant in respect of a voluntary contribution towards a pedestrian crossing on Station Road.

Erection of terrace of four cottages, construction of new car park and associated works.

Erection of terrace of four cottages, construction of new car park and associated works.

The Senior Planning Officer reported the following updates:

• An amended plan detailing the parking layout and turning area had been received. The Traffic Manager had made a number of observations in respect of the parking spaces and insufficient cycle parking. These comments had been relayed to the applicant’s agent and a reply was awaited.

Councillor AE Gray, one of the local ward members, said that she had not received any representations from local residents in respect of the application. She advised members that she did have concerns about the turning area and parking issues and felt that she could not support the application until these matters were resolved.

In response to a question raised by Councillor H Bramer, the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that letters were sent to the residents of Brookmead advising them of the application. He also confirmed that an advertisement detailing the application was published in the local press. In response to a further question by Councillor H Bramer, the Development Control Manager confirmed that although Brookfield House was a grade 2 listed building, listed building consent was not required as the proposed application did not involve any physical alterations nor was it attached to it.

RESOLVED

That subject to receipt of amended plans showing an acceptable parking layout and turning area, Officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be authorised to approve the application subject to the following conditions and any conditions considered necessary by officers:

1.         A01 (Time limit for commencement (full permission))

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.         B01 (Samples of external materials)

            Reason: To ensure that the materials harmonise with the surroundings.

3.         C04 (Details of window sections, eaves, verges and barge boards)

Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this building of architectural or historical interest.

4.         C10 (Details of rooflights)

Reason: To ensure the rooflights do not break the plane of the roof slope in the interests of safeguarding the character and appearance of this building.

5.         G04 (Landscaping scheme (general))

            Reason: In order to protect the visual amenities of the area.

6.         G05 (Implementation of landscaping scheme (general))

            Reason:  In order to protect the visual amenities of the area.

7.         G09 (Retention of trees/hedgerows)

            Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area.

8.         W01 (Foul/surface water drainage)

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

9.         W02 (No surface water to connect to public system)

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.

10.       W03 (No drainage run-off to public system)

Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

Informative(s):

1.         W01 - Welsh Water Connection to PSS

2.         N19 - Avoidance of doubt

3.         N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of Planning Permission

Erection of 87 dwellings and associated garages, new access and linear park.

Erection of 87 dwellings and associated garages, new access and linear park.

The Principal Planning Officer reported the following updates:

• Further comments had been received from the Highways Agency in respect of condition 17. They felt that they could not permit building contractors vehicles to access the development from the A40 until the access roundabout had been completed.

• Comments were reported from the Traffic Manager who noted that the proposed pedestrian/cycle links to the town via Tanyard Lane were far from Ideal due to safety concerns and the condition of the private road. He felt that the proposed pedestrian/cycle route to Ledbury Road was considered the best way forward provided that further assurance could be given regarding the timing of the link. Finally he noted that no further development phases should be permitted on the site until an alternative pedestrian/cycle route to Tanyard Lane had been provided.

• Revised drawings detailing the layout and three house types had been received by the applicant’s agent. The applicant’s agent also gave details of the pedestrian/cycle link to Tanyard Lane, as well as details of a ‘Grampian’ style planning condition preventing occupation of more than 50 dwellings on the site until the link to Ledbury Road was open for use.

• A further letter of objection had been received by a neighbouring business expressing concerns in respect of the notice time given for the committee meeting. They also felt that their legitimate interests had not been taken into account and that bias was being shown in favour of the developer.

• The receipt of two further letters were reported regarding concerns in respect of the maintenance of the hedge along the north-west boundary of the site.

The Principal Planning Officer made the following comments:

·         The applicant could provide a link for pedestrians and cyclists to Ledbury Road via Arundel Close but has decided against this in view of concerns raised by local residents.  The consequence is that only Tanyard Lane would be available for walkers and cyclists.  However a link via the sawmill and laundry sites would be practicable and the intention is to progress this option as soon as practicable in conjunction with residential development of these sites.  Whilst there may be a gap between completion of some of the houses and the opening of the link the applicant would accept a condition requiring completion and opening within one year of commencement of Phase 1.  Furthermore the condition would limit occupation to no more than 50 houses, should the development proceed more quickly.  This number would ensure a start on the affordable units (8) and the Section 106 Agreement would need to allow for this possibility.  This solution to the problem of links to the town is not objected to by the Traffic Manager and is recommended to the Committee, subject to an appropriate condition.

·         The applicant’s intention is that boundary hedge and adjoining planting would be within the curtilages of the adjoining houses and maintenance would therefore be the responsibility of the occupiers.  I  ...  view the full minutes text for item 147.