To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Dave Boulter, Clare Davies, Tony Johnson and Ann-Marie Probert.

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

Councillor Nigel Shaw acted as a substitute for Councillor Johnson.

Councillor John Stone acted as a substitute for Councillor Probert.

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 15 March 2023.

RESOLVED:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2023 be approved.

To receive any announcements from the Chairperson.

The Chairman explained that due to the receipt of additional information the application under agenda item no. 9, application 220783 – Little Bush Pitch, Bush Pitch, Ledbury, Herefordshire, HR8 2PX had been deferred from consideration at the current meeting.

Outline planning application for up to 6 dwellings. All matters reserved apart from access.

Application approved with a change to conditions.

Councillor John Hardwick left the committee to act as the local Ward member for the following 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 sheet and appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Watkins, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Foley, the applicant, 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 site visit had been useful in order to see the site in context and in particular its relationship to local heritage buildings and the church. The site had been allocated for development in the neighbourhood development plan (NDP). The Landscape report produced for the NDP had recommended that development was restricted to a maximum of six houses in the Southeast of the site; the application sought outline permission for the development but it was felt that the proposed dwellings were further to the North than had been intended. The reserved matters application should return to the committee to determine and should include detail of how the application responds to concerns about the impact on heritage assets and contain more detail of the housing mix as required by the NDP.

The committee debated the application. There was concern regarding the impact of the proposed tarmac footpath which connected the development to the A438 and its impact on the rural character of the area. It was understood that the local highways authority would not adopt the path unless it was constructed of tarmac but it was felt that the surface of the path should be sympathetic to the local environment. In a change to the conditions the committee requested that a management agreement should be undertaken with the applicant to maintain the footpath which should be constructed in a material other than tarmac.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.

The Development Manager North Team explained that a change was required to condition 7 to make reference to a management agreement with the landowner for the footpath from the site to the A438.

A motion that the application be approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation and a change to condition 7, to include a requirement for a management agreement to be undertaken with the landowner for the maintenance of the footpath from the development to the A438, was proposed by Councillor Polly Andrews and seconded by Councillor Paul Andrews. The motion was put to the vote and was carried by a simple majority.

RESOLVED - That:

Subject to the completion of a Section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 obligation agreement to secure the purchase of the requisite Phosphate Credits to mitigate for the effects of the development upon the River Lugg / River Wye Special Area of Conservation and a change to condition 7, to include  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

Reserved matters following outline approval 191541 (Outline for three or four bedroom dwelling on a plot of land currently part of Hillcrest's garden).

Application deferred.

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 sheet and appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Chatwin spoke on behalf of Eaton Bishop Parish Council, Ms Wall, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Pryce, 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 there were two significant matters to be resolved after the outline permission had been granted; drainage and access. There had been 10 local objections to the application which was significant given the size of the community in Ruckhall. The report referred to a solution by the drainage engineer which included a drainage channel and soakaway however neither of these elements appeared on the plans. The report also did not explain where the drainage channel would be connected to the local drainage network. During construction there would be very limited parking for site operatives, access to the site along narrow lanes would be problematic and mud on the road would cause a problem to local residents.

The committee debated the application. There was significant concern regarding drainage and the impact of construction on the local community.

The local Ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate. He explained that clarification was required concerning the drainage channel.

A motion that the application be deferred in order that further detail regarding: drainage and flood mitigation; and the construction management plan, including parking for site operatives and access for vehicles delivering construction material; be submitted was proposed my Councillor Yolande Watson and seconded by Councillor Felicity Norman.The motion was put to the vote and was carried by a simple majority.

RESOLVED – that:

Consideration of the application is deferred and further detail regarding: drainage and flood mitigation; and the construction management plan, including parking for site operatives and access for vehicles delivering construction material; be submitted.

Proposed alterations and development of existing equine facilities to form a new indoor arena, stabling and an essential worker's dwelling.

Application refused in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

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 sheet and appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Thomas, 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 occupational need for the development had been established but concern persisted about the potential impact of phosphates from horse manure upon the local river catchment. It was noted that the phosphate content of horse manure was relatively low compared to chicken manure. The proposed section 106 agreement would provide certainty around the management of manure and the application would establish development control on the operation of the equine facility. The application was supported.

The committee debated the application.

A motion that the application be deferred to allow the applicant more time to develop and agree the proposed section 106 agreement was proposed by Councillor Sebastian Bowen and seconded by Councillor Nigel Shaw. The motion was put to the vote and was lost by a simple majority.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate. He explained that the proposed section 106 agreement would achieve efficient manure management for the benefit of the catchment.

A motion that the application be refused in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Yolande Watson and seconded by Councillor Jeremy Milln. The motion was put to the vote and was carried by a simple majority.

RESOLVED – that:

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

Proposed detached garage to include garden room with home office above.

Application approved with a change to conditions.

The planning officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he supported the application subject to the parish councils request for a condition restricting the development being used as a separate dwelling and clarification of drainage measures.

The committee debated the application. There was concern that the development could become a separate dwelling and it was queried how the council could condition the permission to prevent this from occurring.

The Development Manager North Team explained that a condition could be attached to the permission to ensure that the development could not be sold or let separately to the main dwelling.

A motion that the application be approved in accordance with the case officers recommendation and a condition to restrict the sale or letting of the development as a separate dwelling was proposed by Councillor Paul Andrews and seconded by Councillor John Stone. The motion was put to the vote and was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED – that:

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions, an additional condition to restrict the sale or letting of the development as a separate dwelling and any other further conditions considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers:

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

INFORMATIVES: