To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors LO Barnett, WLS Bowen, ME Cooper and RC Hunt.

The chairman welcomed Councillor PJ McCaull, recently elected Member for Leominster South, to his first meeting of the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee

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.

6.         DCNW2008/1741/F & DCNW2008/1742/L - OLD WESLEYAN CHAPEL, HARPYARD, HIGH STREET, KINGTON, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR5 3BJ.

            Ricky Clarke; Personal and Prejudicial.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2008.

Councillor A Seldon advised the committee that he had requested a detailed and accurate report into the condition of the Bromyard waste plant. He also stated that he had advised the sub-committee that permission had been granted for 18 dwellings near to the site. He asked that the minutes for item 53 be amended to include these points.

RESOLVED: that subject to the amendments detailed above, the minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 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 appeals for the northern area of Herefordshire.

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

Proposed redevelopment of site with 8 flats

Proposed redevelopment of site with 8 flats

The Senior Planning Officer reported that two e-mail letters had been received from the applicant relating to drainage from the site. The applicant confirmed the following:

With respect to proposed new development, none of the storm water or rainwater from the site would go into the sewer and the volume of foul water would be reduced. At the present time storm/rainwater goes into the public sewer. This water would be taken by soakaways in the new development.

The new development would remove and not increase the load on the public sewer during rainfall and storm. Calculations confirmed by Welsh Water showed that the volume of foul water from the proposed development would be reduced from output that was produced by the nursery (i.e. the last / previous use) on site.

The proposed development would result in a reduction of water in the sewers in the area, both foul and rainwater. Appreciate the concerns of Councillors and local people with regard to drainage but happily the proposed development would make some contribution in reducing the problem.

The proposed development would result in a 72% reduction in outflow demands on the public sewer when compared to the previous / last use of the site.

The Senior Planning Officer said that this confirmed the reason why Welsh Water had no objections to the proposed development.

Councillor B Hunt, one of the Local Ward Members, felt that many of the Town Council’s reservations were addressed by the officer’s report. He noted that the Petty Bridge pumping station was at capacity although a recent press release from Welsh Water had claimed that the station was adequately sized. He said that there was no joined up thinking on the issue between Welsh Water and the Environment agency and he felt that they should be encouraged to cooperate more effectively. In summing up he felt hat it was unfair to punish the applicant for the drainage issues and said that along with fellow Local Member Councillor Seldon, he would seek meetings to establish a way forward regarding the longer-term drainage arrangements in Bromyard.

Councillor A Seldon, the other Local Ward Member, said that he agreed with the comments made by Councillor Hunt. He stated that the pumping station was not adequate for all of the foul drainage needs of the town. Finally he said that it was commonplace for foul drainage to be discharged into the local river and that the Environment Agency were aware of this and had given their consent for it to happen.

After considering all the issues, members felt that on balance the application should be approved. It was noted that the sub-committee felt strongly that there would need to be a significant amount of work done, in consultation with various agencies, the local members and the chairman of the sub-committee, in order to progress the issue of foul drainage capacity in Bromyard.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Proposed conversion into nine apartments, including new stair tower  

Proposed conversion into nine apartments, including new stair tower 

The senior planning officer reported that additional information had been received from the applicants. The applicants wished to confirm a copy of a letter has been sent to Kington Town Council explaining the justification for the proposed development. This letter included justification and consideration with regards to refuse and bicycle storage area, proposed access stairs, disabled access, car parking and issues with regards to Harp Yard, affordable housing and land within their ownership adjacent to the site.

The applicants also wished it to be known that the hole in the wall, as observed by members of the planning sub-committee, during their site visit, was already in place when they purchased the site from Herefordshire Council.

Councillor TM James, the Local Ward Member, felt that there was a clear need to redevelop the site as its current condition was unacceptable. He added that the application for nine one bedroomed apartments was over dense for a listed building of such historical importance.  He pointed out that a similar scheme was suggested when the building was owned by Herefordshire Council and that this was not given planning permission. He felt that the development would benefit from fewer larger apartments as Kington already had approximately 40 vacant apartments of which a high proportion had one bedroom, as well as a very high proportion of rented property throughout the town. He moved refusal of the application as he felt that the proposed development would result in over intensification of the site.

Councillor RJ Phillips said he agreed that the development would result in the listed building becoming over developed and he shared Councillor James’ concerns. He commended the planning officer for finding out what was proposed for the adjacent site and added that he felt it was important the two sites were viewed collectively.  He said any development would have to be sensibly designed and be sympathetic towards the historic nature of the chapel.

Several members commented that the proposal did not take account of the architectural or historic value of the chapel. They also expressed the view that the fewer units in the development would make it more suitable for the area.

The Southern team leader advised Members that the application had the support of the Conservation Manager and that if they were to refuse it on the grounds of over intensification, they would need to attach a form of harm to their reasons for refusal. He added that this position would be difficult to defend on appeal.

Members also raised health and safety concerns particularly with regard to access, overcrowding and evacuation arrangements on the site. Members agreed that a garden would be valued by locals and without community support, any development would have little viability.

The Southern Team Leader said that from the course of the debate, it would appear that Members were in agreement that a lack of amenity space should form the grounds to refuse the application and that this was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Change of use and re-development to provide 2 new 1 bed residential units, 3 no. A1 commercial units and 1 no. A3 unit.

Change of use and re-development to provide 2 new 1 bed residential units, 3 no. A1 commercial units and 1 no. A3 unit.

The Senior Planning Officer reported the following updates to the sub-committee:

Herefordshire Council’s Environmental Health Officer (Pollution) had no objections, but asked for an additional condition.

Discussions with Herefordshire Council’s Building Control Surveyor regarding drainage had taken place.

The Surveyor considered that the proposed scheme would have a water use requirement comparable with the existing demands of the current permitted use (butchers, abattoir and two 2 bedroom flats). With regard to surface water runoff, much rainwater would be collected on the external roof, which apart from the addition of the proposed restaurant element, is not altering in terms of size.  Collected rainwater, as per the current and historic situation, would be channelled into the existing drains.

Given all of the above there were no express concerns regarding surface water drainage within this site or by virtue of the proposals.

Councillor PJ Watts, one of the Local Ward Members, said that he had visited the site and was happy for the application to proceed. He said that there were many narrow alleyways in Ledbury town centre, which added to its rural charm and this development would reinvigorate a forgotten area of the town centre. He requested that the applicant should undertake additional landscaping measures in order to protect the views of the adjoining priory gardens.

RESOLVED

In respect of DCNE2008/1492/F:

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.      Prior to the commencement of the hereby approved development, full written details and samples (where appropriate) of the following shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval:

          Bricks

          Roof tiles

         Slates

         Rainwater goods, including finish

         All external timber elements, including finish

         The proposal shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved plans and thereafter maintained as such.

         Reason: To preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building and conservation area, in accordance with Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan policies DR1, HBA1, HBA4 and HBA6.

3.      The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved 'Window Schedule', scales 1:50 and 1:20, received 31st July 2008, and thereafter maintained as such.

         Reason: To preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building and conservation area, in accordance with Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan policies DR1, HBA1, HBA4 and HBA6.

4.      External lighting for the development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details, namely 'Eliarange' Grande four sided lantern(s) finished in 'black' as per specification details received 31st July 2008, and thereafter maintained as such.

         Reason: To preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building and conservation area, in accordance with Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan policies DR1, HBA1, HBA4 and HBA6.

5.      The external  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

Proposed development of reed based wetlands sewage solution and car park extension

Proposed development of reed based wetlands sewage solution and car park extension

The Principal Planning Officer circulated an amended site plan to the sub-committee.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Crampton, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Messrs Painter and McCollin, the applicants, spoke in support.

Councillor RV Stockton, one of the Local Ward Members, said that the proposed water system was not a new or experimental system and that there were several examples of such systems in the county. He said that no bad smells had been reported from any of these sites and that as two hundred people at the school needed to be catered for, which was more than the population of the Bosbury village, he supported the application.

Councillor R Mills, the other Local Ward Member, said that Councillor Stockton had been Ward Councillor for a number of years and had good knowledge of the area so was able to make an accurate assessment of its needs. He said that the proposed system was highly sophisticated and that the Environment Agency’s guidelines were very strict for such arrangements.

Several Members agreed that examples of such systems in their own wards had not resulted in any problems due to odours and so were therefore in support of the application.

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 (Development in accordance with the approved plans)

Reason: To ensure adherence to the approved plans in the interests of a satisfactory form of development and to comply with Policy DR1 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

Pre-commencement requirements

3          Non Standard (Non Standard Condition)

Before the development begins, a scheme for the regular de-sludging of the effluent treatment system shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The scheme shall specify in particular:

i)          The parts of the system that will require de-sludging;

ii)         The means by which this will be achieved;

iii)        The likely frequency that de-sludging will be necessary for each of the areas identified at point i);

iv)        Odour prevention plan;

v)         Contingency measures including health and safety precautions;

vi)        Provision for review and revision as necessary.

The scheme shall be implemented as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing in advance by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure efficient management of the system and protect the environment in accordance with policies S2, DR1, DR4 and DR9 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan 2007.

4.         Non Standard (Non Standard Condition)

Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use, a Method Statement for inspection and monitoring of the system, at least for an agreed initial period, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The Method Statement shall include in particular:

i)          The appointment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

Residential development comprising 10 nos. Affordable housing units, car parking, shared access and landscaping

Residential development comprising 10 nos. Affordable housing units, car parking, shared access and landscaping.

The Senior Planning Officer reported the following updates:

Further comments were received from Herefordshire Council’s Senior Landscape Officer, who made the following points, reproduced in full:

·         The proposed development is located to the south-west of the settlement of Kingsland, in open countryside between, and adjacent to, an extension to the village (Kingsleane) and a dispersed collection of dwellings and farms, collectively known as West Town. The settlement has a linear character, principally due to recent additions to the north-west along the B4360, belying a former central focus on the church and ‘castle’. Substantial dwellings and farmsteads exist to the south-east of the central crossroads and it would, perhaps, be better to describe the settlement as ‘polyfocal’ – containing a number of centres of influence and interest, representative of historic phases of development. The village once commanded a strategic importance between the River Lugg to the north-east and the former Roman road to the west – that importance having caused the road to migrate towards the settlement and on to its current course (A4110). Archaeological investigation suggests the proposed development site has not previously been occupied by buildings.

·         Visually the settlement and application site are located in a landscape type described in the Herefordshire Landscape Character Assessment as ‘Principal Settled Farmlands’. This landscape type is defined by a mixed land use and distinct hedgerow boundaries. The site currently represents an example of unimproved lowland pasture, defined by mature and complex hedgerows; a locally distinctive element in the landscape, but one that is rapidly disappearing. In brief the development of this site would permanently remove a distinctive element from the landscape and bring about a negative change in the quality and character of the area.

·         The proposed design is bland and unimaginative and fails to respond to the character and constraints of the settlement and site. Whereas the adjacent ‘Kingsleane’ development recognises the ‘natural’ termination of the settlement and addresses the sharp bend in the road creating a quality, useable space to the south-east, the proposed development is founded on a standard highways turning head and radius (shamelessly leaving access to possible further development to the west) and utilises every available space for buildings and car parking.

·         The proposed layout results in 80% of the modest (9m x 8m) garden spaces being to the north of the buildings, resulting in most of them being in deep shadow for much of the year. Two of the proposed properties (plots 2 & 5) are accessed to the rear only via a path extending to 49 metres in length. This layout is dominated by car parking and roadway, completely contrary to the general character of the settlement.

·         The design and access statement claims that the ‘sensitive landscaping’ is at the core of the design; however, this is simply not evident. The much vaunted and ‘...generous...’ communal open space is modest in size, the product of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

19 November 2008

19 November 2008