To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Toni Fagan and John Hardwick.

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

Councillor David Summers acted as a substitute for Councillor John Hardwick. Councillor Trish Marsh acted as a substitute for Councillor Toni Fagan.

To receive declarations of interests in respect of Schedule 1, Schedule 2 or Other Interests from members of the committee in respect of items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 1 September 2021.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 September 2021 be approved.

Application for removal of Condition 5 and the variation of condition 16 following Application No: 163902/F. (Demolition of 5no. existing redundant agricultural outbuildings to facilitate expansion of existing restaurant and following events facilities: Function Suite, Fine Dining Restaurant and Lounge, Conference Space and 16no. Accommodation Suites.

The application was refused, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

The senior planning officer gave a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda as provided in the update sheets and appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking a statement was read on behalf of Mr R James, Whitbourne Parish Council; Mrs L Kershaw, a local resident, spoke in opposition to the application; and Mr B Greenaway, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the Council's constitution the local Ward member spoke on the application. In summary he explained that the reasons for the original condition 5 had not been explained therefore a decision to remove the condition could not be taken. Condition 16 preserved local residential amenity by ensuring there was a cut-off of 11:00 p.m. The noise assessments that had been undertaken were not sufficiently robust to justify the removal of the condition. In order to protect local residential amenity the committee was asked to consider the refusal of the application on the basis of National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 7, 8, 126-135, (specifically 130 f) and 185 and RA6 of the Local Plan.

The committee discussed the application.

The legal adviser to the committee explained that there was doubt regarding the imposition of condition 5 and there were not felt to be any exceptional circumstances to justify the continuation of the condition.

The Local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate and explained the relevant planning policies which would support the refusal of the application.

A motion to refuse the application due to unacceptable impacts on residential amenity (with reference to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 7, 8, 126-135, (specifically 130 f) and 185 and RA6 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy) was carried.

RESOLVED: that planning permission be refused due to unacceptable impacts on residential amenity (with reference to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 7, 8, 126-135, (specifically 130 f) and 185 and RA6 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy). 

(There was an adjournment at 11:14 a.m.; the meeting reconvened at 11:26 a.m.)

Proposed demolition of farm buildings and construction of 14 dwellings with associated access.

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

(Councillor John Stone left the committee to act at the local ward member for the next application)

The principal planning officer gave a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda as provided in the update sheets as appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking a statement in objection to the application was read on behalf of Mr M Thomas, a local resident and Ms A McCann, citizen housing, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the Council's constitution the local Ward member spoke on the application. In summary he explained application was an exception site outside the Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP). The application did not prioritise housing for local families. There was concern about the impacts on local highways of the development. Concern was raised regarding the pressure on the local sewage system. The open space proposed on the development appeared insubstantial. The legal agreement highways England imperative to redirect traffic on to the A49.

The committee discussed the application.

The principal planning officer explained that no highways objection had been received on the application and further details were awaited from the applicant to respond to the issues raised by National Highways.

The local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate and explained that the application could overload the sewage system and clarity was required regarding the access to the A49. There was not support locally for the application, it was felt the benefits of the development did not outweigh the disadvantages.

A motion that the application be approved in line with the officer’s recommendation was carried.

RESOLVED – That:

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

That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 obligation agreement, in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report and National Highways confirming either no objection or no objection subject to conditions they require, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers are authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions below and any other further conditions considered necessary

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

Regulatory Conditions

Application for change of use from agriculture to siting two Yurts for holiday use with the accompanying conversion of one garage bay (of a pair of garage bays plus workshop) to provide two bathrooms and two dishwashing facilities at Willey Lane Farm.

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

The planning officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs G Turner and Mrs J Stock, local residents, spoke in objection to the application. Mr M Murray, applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council’s constitution the local Ward member Councillor Carol Gandy spoke on the application. In summary she commented that the application was located in a very rural area. Drainage and sewerage on-site was a concern, particularly the septic tank. There was doubt concerning the appearance of the yurts. The impact on the Dark Skies policy from external lighting which would be necessary to light the way to the toilet was raised. Planning enforcement in such a rural location was a challenge.

The committee discussed the application.

The local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate and explained that the application was in a very remote area, a large proportion of local residents had objected to the application. Assurance was sought that if your application was approved conditions would be enforced effectively.

A motion to approve the application in accordance with the officer recommendation was carried.

RESOLVED – That

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

Erection of 1 no. dwelling of and associated works including access, landscaping, outbuildings, infrastructure, lake creation and other engineering works.

The application was refused, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

The senior planning officer gave a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda contained in the update sheets appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr G Blackmore spoke on behalf of the Ocle Pychard Group Parish Council and Mr M Tompkins, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local Ward member spoke on the application. In summary he explained that the development was an intrusion on the landscape and open countryside. The design was out of keeping and did not respect local buildings. The application should be refused consistent with Core Strategy policies SS1, SS2, LD 1, LD4 and the neighbourhood development plan.

The committee discussed the application.

The development manager major teams commented that under section 80(e) of the national planning policy framework the current application should meet the highest standards of architecture and enhance it's immediate surroundings.

The local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate and explained that a number of objections have been raised by people in the local community due to the applications intrusion on the Landscape. The argument that the development represented a decrease in phosphate pollution as it replaced agricultural use of the Land was not accepted.

A motion that the application be approved was lost.

A motion to refuse the application (with reference to SS1, SS2, LD1, LD4 and RA3 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy) was carried.

RESOLVED: that planning permission be refused (with reference to SS1, SS2, LD1, LD4 and RA3 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy).