To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 11th August, 2004.

RESOLVED:   That the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 August 2004 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor BF Ashton.

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

The following declarations of interest were made:

To note the contents of the attached report of the Head of Planning Services in respect of appeals for the northern area of Herefordshire.

The report of the Head of Planning Services was received and noted.

To consider and take any appropriate action in respect of the planning applications received for the northern area of Herefordshire, and to authorise the Head of Planning Services to impose any additional and varied conditions and reasons considered to be necessary.

Plans relating to planning applications on this agenda will be available for inspection in the Council Chamber 30 minutes before the start of the meeting.

Agenda items NUMBERS are applications deferred for site inspections at the last meeting and items NUMBERS are new applications.

The Chairman decided to take the agenda items in the following order

For:            Salters Hill Charity Ltd per R J Durrell, The Corner House, 2 Hambrook St, Charlton Kings, Cheltenham, GL52 6LN

Ward: Ledbury

Councillor DW Rule, the Local Ward Member expressed concerns about the volume of traffic using Falcon Lane, particularly heavy vehicles during the soft fruit season and asked the officers to approach the Highway Department to ascertain whether their was a possibility of additional passing places being established.

RESOLVED:            That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

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 -     H13 (Access, turning area and parking)

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

4 -     No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for provision of foul drainage work has been approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, before the use commences.

         Reason:  To prevent polution of the water environment.

5 -     There shall be no external illumination of the building without the prior written approval of the local planning authority.

         Reason:  In the interests of visual amenity.

For:     Mr M Clarke per Wall, James & Davies, 19 Hagley Road, Stourbridge, West Midlands,  DY8 1QW

Ward: Bringsty

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Wattis of the Local Residents Association spoke against the application and Mr Jolly, the applicants agent spoke in favour.

Councillor TW Hunt, the Local Ward Member explained why in his opinion it would be preferable for residential development take place on the site which was presently a derelict eye sore with little prospects of any future light industrial use.  He felt that the proposed development would protect and enhance the character of the area where there was a need for good quality residential development.  He explained the policies which he felt that it complied with and the various criteria which he felt would be met.  The Sub-Committee supported the views of Councillor Hunt and also decided that the site also presented the opportunity for the inclusion of affordable housing on the.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)               The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to approve the application subject to any conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, including conditions for the inclusion of affordable housing; provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee;

and

(b)               If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to approve the application subject to such conditions referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     Mr A Goodwin at above address.

Pembridge & Lyonshall with Titley

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Wall, the agent acting on behalf of the applicant spoke in favour of the application. 

Councillor RJ Phillips, the Local Ward Member was of the view that the application should be approved because the proposed dwelling was of a design which was in keeping with the existing farm buildings and was proposed for use in connection with the agricultural business.  He felt that as such it was essential for the farm.  The Sub-Committee supported this view and felt that the size of the dwelling was not excessive for the provision of family sized accommodation for an agricultural worker and his family. They also took the view that the dwelling could be tied in with the existing farm and that permitted development not rights removed.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)               The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to approve the application subject to the conditions listed below and subject to any conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee;

1)      no permitted development rights;

2)      the dwelling being tied to the agricultural business

and

(b)               If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to approve the application subject to such conditions referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     S D & J M Wicks per Stephen Funge Architechural Design, Dartmoor View, Queen Street, Winkleigh, Devon, EX19 8JB

Ward: Mortimer

The receipt of a further letter of objection was reported.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Jackson of Leintwardine Parish Council and Mr Kerr spoke against the application.

Councillor Mrs LO Barnett, the Local Ward Member expressed grave reservations about the application, taking the view that it did not comply with the Village Design Statement, the Leominster Local Plan or the emerging Unitary Development Plan.  She was concerned that three dwellings would comprise over development of the site, the design was not in keeping with the adjoining conservation area and highway safety issues.

The Principal Planning Officer pointed out that the application complied with the Councils planning policies and Government housing density guidelines and that the Highways Department was satisfied with the access proposals.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)   The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application subject to the following reasons and any reasons felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services;

1)      over development;

2)      not in keeping with the setting of the village

(b)   If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to refuse the application for the reasons referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     Mr & Mrs Davies per Border Oak Design & Construction, Kingsland Sawmills, Kingsland, Leominster, Herefordshire, HR6 9SF

Ward: Golden Cross with Weobley

Councillor JHR Goodwin expressed support for the application because the proposed dwelling was for the farmers son in connection with the agricultural business, was not excessively large, was in keeping with the other cottages in Weobly and commensurate with an established agricultural need.  The Sub-Committee agreed with the views of Councillor Goodwin.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)               the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to approve the application subject to the conditions listed below and subject to any conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee;

1)     no permitted development rights;

2)     the dwelling being tied to the agricultural business

(b)               If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to approve the application subject to such conditions referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     Mr C Lutton per Mr N La Barre  Easters Court Leominster Herefordshire  HR6 0DE

Leominster South

The Northern Team Leader explained that further consideration of the application by the Highways Department had led to it recommending refusal on highway safety grounds in respect of the original proposed access.  He advised that the applicants were proposing a revised access and he felt that this would be acceptable and therefore suggested that the officers be given delegated authority to approve the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs Morgan of Bishops Frome Parish Council spoke against the application.

The Local Ward Member, Councillor RM Manning objected to the application because access to the proposed development was from a fast and dangerous road which had seen a number of fatalities in the past.  There were problems with sewage disposal in the vicinity and he did not feel that the applicants had provided sufficient detail about how this would be dealt with in their proposed development.  He felt that the proposed dwellings were not in keeping with the village and would have a detrimental impact upon it.  He also had reservations that highway safety could be further compromised by the hedges within the proposed dwellings which could have an effect on visibility.  The Sub-Committee concurred with his views that the application should be refused.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)               The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application for the following reasons and any further reasons felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee;

1)      insufficient detail about disposal of sewage;

2)      visual impact;

3)      highway safety

(b)               If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to refuse the application subject to such reasons referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     J & G Developments per Gurney Storer & Associates, The Stables, Martley, Worcestershire,  WR6 6QB

Ward: Bringsty

RESOLVED:            That:

NC2004/0569/F

planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

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.      The development hereby approved shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the amended plans received by the local planning authority on 11th May, 2004.

         Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the amended plans.

        Informative:

1.     N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC

NC2004/0571/L

listed building consent be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.      C01 (Time limit for commencement (listed buildings)

         Reason:  Required to be imposed by Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.      B01 (Samples of external materials )

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

3.                     The development hereby approved shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the amended plans received by the local planning authority on 11th May, 2004.

         Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the amended plans.

           Informative:

1.      N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC

For:     Mr J Williams per Mr J C Ashton, The Orchard Office, Union Place, Off Northwick Road, Worcester, WR3 7DX

Ward Bringsty

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Hawkins spoke against the application. 

The Sub-Committee concurred with views of the Local Ward Member, Councillor TW Hunt that the application should be refused because the proposed dwelling would be out of keeping and have an adverse impact upon the setting of the adjoining hamlet.

RESOLVED:            That

(a)               The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application subject to the following reasons and any conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee;

1)      Scale, setting and impact on the local environment

(b)               If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers be instructed to refuse the application subject to such conditions referred to above.

(Note: - The Northern Divisional Planning Officer said that given that the Sub-Committee had considered the planning policies, he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)

For:     Mr M Howe per RRA Architects, Packers House, 25 West Street, Hereford, HR4 0BX

Ward: Frome

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Williams spoke in favour of his application.

Councillor TW Hunt, the Local Ward Member felt that the application should be refused on the grounds of highway safety because of the dangers that manoeuvring heavy goods vehicles in and out of the premises would have.  The Senior Planning Officer said that this aspect had been investigated by the Highways Department which was satisfied that access to and egress from the premises could be achieved by heavy goods vehicles without needing to manoeuvre on the adjoining highway.  In view of this the Sub-Committee felt that it could not support the views of Councillor Hunt.

Councillor B Hunt requested that the Highways Department supply Members with a written note of the criteria used in making recommendations regarding planning applications.

RESOLVED:            That planning permission be granted subject to the following condition:

1.         No more than two heavy goods vehicles shall be allowed to park in the yard area.

Reason:  In order to define the permission and in the interests of highway safety.

For:     Teme Valley Youth Project Ltd.

Ward Mortimer

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs Simpson spoke in favour of the application. 

The Northern Team Leader said that further conditions would be attached to any permission granted and alterations would be made to condition 1 set out in the agenda.

RESOLVED:            That planning permission be granted subject to the following condition:

1.         That Condition 7 of permission 98/0046/N, issued on 4th August, 1998, be deleted and replaced by the following new condition:-

            1.  The premises shall not be open for use outside the following hours:

                  0700 - 2200 on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays

                  0700 - 1800 on Fridays and Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays

            Reason:  In the interests of the amenities of local residents