To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Polly Andrews, Sebastian Bowen and Tony Johnson.

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

Councillor Kevin Tillett acted as a substitute for Councillor Polly Andrews

Councillor Tim Price acted as a substitute for Councillor Sebastian Bowen

Councillor John Stone acted as a substitute for Councillor Tony Johnson

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.

Councillor Mark Millmore declared a schedule one, pecuniary interest in respect of agenda item no. 7, application 214046 – Land at Lyde Court and would leave the meeting room during consideration of the item.

Councillor Dave Boutler declared an other interest in respect of agenda item no. 7, application 214046 – Land at Lyde Court and agenda item no.9 – Magnolia Farm; the agent for both applications was a known associate.

Councillor Jeremy Milln declared an other interest in respect of agenda item no. 7, application 214046 – Land at Lyde Court and agenda item no.8 – Ladygrove Cottage; applications 212673/212674 – the applicants for both applications were known associates.

Councillor John Hardwick declared an other interest in respect of agenda item no. 7, application 214046 – Land at Lyde Court and agenda item no.8 – Ladygrove Cottage; applications 212673/212674 – the applicants for both applications were known associates.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 24 May 2022.

RESOLVED:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 May 2022 be approved.

Proposed residential development of 6 no. dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping.

The development manager, majors team gave a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda as provided in the update sheet and appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Jones spoke on behalf of Longtown Parish Council, Mr Arthur, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Ms Sgueglia, planning agent, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. He explained that the redirection of the application had been undertaken due to the level of public interest. The Longtown Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) would be tested by the application; the NDP had established what development the local community required to thrive and grow. The current application was not in accordance with the requirements as set out in the NDP; the houses were of the wrong height and wrong size. The sustainability of the application was questioned and it was noted at the local school was oversubscribed. Issues concerning the capacity of the sewage treatment works were raised and problems with the water supply and water pressure in the village generally. Both issues required resolution prior to any development in Longtown, similar to that proposed in the current application.

The committee discussed the application.

The local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate. He explained that the application was speculative development and not in-keeping with the locality, contrary to the NDP. The capacity of the local sewage treatment works was inadequate and the problems affecting the water supply to the village should be dealt with comprehensively rather than focused singularly on the proposed development site. The committee was urged to refuse the application in its current form.

A motion that the application be refused due to: unacceptable housing mix and scale of development proposed in the application (contrary to RA2 of the core strategy and LGPC2 of the Longtown NDP) was proposed by Councillor Yolande Watson and seconded by Councillor John Hardwick. The motion was put to the vote and was carried by a simple majority.

Resolved - that planning permission is refused due to: unacceptable housing mix and scale of development proposed in the application (contrary to RA2 of the core strategy and LGPC2 of the Longtown NDP).

(Councillor Mark Millmore left the meeting at 11:11 a.m.)

(Councillor Tim Price left the meeting at 11:11 a.m.)

(There was an adjournment at 11:11 a.m.; the meeting reconvened at 11:28 a.m.)

Proposed change of use of land, as an aerodrome consisting of the continued use of a grass airstrip, re-use of an existing barn as hangarage and for maintenance and associated landscaping.

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.

The chairman outlined a change to the procedure for public speaking. He explained that he had used his discretion to allow extra time and speakers for the parish councils, objectors and supporters. In accordance with this change to the criteria for public speaking Mr Cooper, spoke on behalf of Holmer and Shelwick Parish Council, Mr Marron spoke on behalf of Wellington Parish Council and Mr Paske, spoke on behalf of Pipe and Lyde Parish Council. Dr Williams and Mr Hanks spoke in objection to the application. Mr Waring, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. She explained that the application had been redirected due to the high level of public interest. It was noted that work on the site had already started. There was significant concern in the local communities and the application did not comply with a number of core strategy policies including SS7, SS6 and SS4. A high number of objections to the application had been received including from the six surrounding parish councils. The report contained 41 summarised concerns and issues raised in the objections. It was noted there were also 25 letters of support. The need to exercise judgement and balance in consideration of the application was highlighted.

The committee discussed the application.

The local ward member closed the debate and explained although it was considered that the application would only result in minimal impacts on local communities it was still unacceptable.

A motion that the application be approved consistent with the case officer's recommendation and with the addition of a condition requiring a logbook to be kept and to be made available for inspection by the council was proposed by Councillor Paul Rone and seconded by Councillor Kevin Tillett. The motion was carried by a simple majority.

RESOLVED – that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions, the addition of a condition requiring a logbook to be kept and the be made available for inspection by the council and any other further conditions/amendments considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers:

212673/FH and 212674/L – Proposed repair and renovation of Ladygrove Cottage and attached outbuilding to form an extended residential dwelling.

Approval pending, subject to the submission of further detail and conditions to be agreed with the Chairman, proposer and seconder, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Councillor John Hardwick left the committee to act as local ward member for the next application)

The senior planning officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Tucker, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. He explained the applicant had lived locally for a long time and had renovated many houses. The applicant had sought advice from experts and officers and his proposal was a sound conservation project to preserve a building in Herefordshire's vernacular Style. The applicant had the support of the local parish councils.

The committee discussed the application.

The local member closed the debate.

A motion to delegate to officers to approve both the applications pending the submission of further detail and conditions to be agreed with the chairman, proposer and seconder was proposed by Councillor Felicity Norman and seconded my Councillor Elizabeth Foxton. It was considered that the public interest/benefit in the restoration of the Cottage outweighed the 'less than substantial' harm to the building as raised by the heritage buildings officer. The motion was put to the vote and carried by a simple majority.

Resolved – that the applications are delegated to officers to approve pending the submission of further detail and conditions to be agreed with the chairman proposer and seconder. The public interest/benefit in the restoration of the Cottage outweighed the 'less than substantial' harm to the building as raised by the heritage buildings officer.  

(There was an adjournment at 1:40 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 1:45 p.m.)

(Councillor John Hardwick resumed his seat on the committee)

Proposed variation of condition 2 and 4 following grant of planning permission. 183083/f (change of use of agricultural buildings and land to residential development (use class c3). Including demolition, conversion and extensions of agricultural buildings to form 3 no. dwellings).

Approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

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

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs Fortescue, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Thomas, planning agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member provided a statement which was read to the committee. In the statement the local ward member explained that the application sought to increase the size of the units on the application site. It was noted that a future application concerning the landscaping of the site was likely to come to committee. The current application had been redirected to committee due to the level of public interest. Local objections to the application concerned the potential over-development of the application site. There were concerns locally about the retention of the Dutch barn on site and the potential for its conversion into extra accommodation. The objectors urged the committee to uphold the original, approved scheme and reject the proposed variation.

The committee discussed the application.

The local ward member closed the debate and referred to the Landscape scheme which was likely to be considered by the committee at a later date.

A motion to approve the application consistent with the case officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor John Hardwick and seconded by Councillor Paul Andrews. The motion was put to the vote and carried by a simple majority.

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

1.         The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans (drawing nos. 339.21.LD 01 Rev B, MG-FM-21-01 C, MAG-FM-21-04 Rev B, MAG-FM-21-3 Rev D, MAG-FM-21-02 Rev D, MAG-FM-21-07 Rev E, MAG-FM-21- 08 Rev E) and the schedule of materials indicated thereon.

Reason: To ensure adherence to the approved plans in the interests of a satisfactory form of development and to comply with Policy SD1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.         Unless otherwise approved by this permission, the materials to be used externally on walls and roofs shall be in accordance with the approved details submitted and discharged under reference P212020/XA2.

Reason: To ensure that the materials harmonise with the surroundings so as to ensure that the development complies with the requirements of Policy SD1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.         The finishes to be used for all external joinery, timber, plaster and masonry surfaces shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details submitted and discharged under reference P212020/XA2.

Reason: To ensure that the work is finished with materials, textures and colours that are appropriate to the safeguarding of the special architectural or historical interest of the building and to comply with the requirements of Policy LD4  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Proposed agricultural access off A4112.

Refused contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

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

The senior planning officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Rollings, spoke on behalf of Kimbolton Parish Council, Mr Ferguson, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Duggan, applicant, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. He explained that permission for an entrance to the field had been granted in 2014 which had now lapsed. There were now significant differences since 2014 including the implementation of the neighbourhood development plan, a significant number of objections regarding the new proposal and highway safety concerns. There was concern that the new access increased the risk to safety on the highway and that the proposed hardstanding presented a flooding risk to nearby residential dwellings through water runoff. It was noted that the field, to which the new access would be attached, had not been used for agricultural purposes for a lengthy period of time and the future use of the field was questioned. The proposal posed an unacceptable impact on the landscape through the removal of the hedgerow.

The committee discussed the application.

The local ward member closed the debate and explained that the loss of the hedgerow and subsequent impact on local wildlife was a significant concern. The impact of the new entrance on highway safety was a concern and it was felt that the current access to the field was safer than that proposed in the application.

A motion that the application be refused due to the unacceptable impact of the proposal on the Landscape, in particular the removal of the hedgerow, was proposed by Councillor Jeremy Milln and Seconded by Councillor Felicity Norman. The removal of the hedgerow was contrary to: the council's declaration of a climate and ecological emergency; policies LD1 LD2 and LD3 of the core strategy; and policy K10 of the Kimbolton neighbourhood development plan. The motion was put to the vote and carried unanimously.

Resolved – that planning permission is refused due to the unacceptable impact of the proposal on the Landscape, in particular the removal of the hedgerow. The removal of the hedgerow is contrary to: the council's declaration of a climate and ecological emergency; policies LD1 LD2 and LD3 of the core strategy; and policy K10 of the Kimbolton neighbourhood development plan.

Date of next site inspection – 26 July 2022

Date of next meeting – 27 July 2022

Noted.