To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Catherine Gennard and Charlotte Taylor.

Councillor Matthew Engel participated in the meeting as a local ward member (application 240468) only.

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

Councillor Elizabeth Foxton acted as a substitute for Councillor Taylor

Councillor Justine Peberdy acted as a substitute for Councillor Gennard

Councillor Harvey acted as a substitute for Councillor Engel.

To receive declarations of interests in respect of items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2025.

RESOLVED:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2025 be approved.

Proposed residential development of 8 no. dwellings with associated access, parking and landscaping.

Application approved with a change to conditions.

The senior planning officer provided a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr. Cook, spoke on behalf of Longtown Parish Council, Mr Arthur, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr John, applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained that the application was set in a sensitive and beautiful landscape and proposed housing that was of an inappropriate scale. The proposed development followed a number of unsuitable developments in the village. The Longtown neighbourhood development plan (NDP) was open to new housing but was keen that provision should be provided locally for old and young people. The houses proposed in the application were of a scale and density that would impact upon views of Hatterall Ridge which posed an unacceptable impact on the landscape. Longtown was disadvantaged in that it did not have adequate supply of bungalows for old people or affordable homes for young residents. It was recognised that an earlier application for the site was rejected and dismissed at appeal, based on the scale and mix of the houses proposed. The application had been amended to reduce the number of three and four bedroom units in the proposal but there was still an inadequate proportion of smaller houses proposed. The density of housing proposed in the application was excessive with the majority of the space given over to the larger three bedroom houses. The six smaller houses were provided with only a third of the existing space on the site. Longtown was adversely affected by problems with water including: a wastewater treatment works that was 50 years old; flooding; and fluctuating water pressure. The addition of further houses would place a greater burden upon the water infrastructure locally and a holistic resolution to water problems in the locality was required which should be conditioned as part of all local planning applications. The parish council had unanimously objected to the application. A change to the application to provide more 2 bedroom houses on the site would overcome the problems of excessive housing density. The application would have an unacceptable impact on existing properties and did not respond to local needs as required by the national planning policy framework.

The committee debated the application. There was division among the members of the committee regarding the acceptability of the application.

It was the contention of some members that the application did not provide the type of houses required in Longtown and the development would put an unacceptable impact on the local wastewater infrastructure.

It was the contention of other members of the committee that the applicant had changed the housing mix of the application following the dismissed appeal and without a five year land housing supply the application was tilted in favour of approval. It was noted that the site was earmarked for housing and the application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Proposed installation and operation of a renewable energy generation station comprising ground-mounted photovoltaic, inverter/transformer units, control room, substations, onsite grid connection equipment, site access, access gates, internal access tracks, security measures and other ancillary infrastructure.

Application approved 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.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs Fenton spoke on behalf of Weston Beggard Parish Council, Mr Breeze, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Clements, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained there were significant local objections to the application and if approved it would contravene the neighbourhood development plan (NDP). Such a contravention of the NDP would undermine its worth and credibility. The application was recommended for approval due to the benefit to the environment but the site would have an adverse impact on the landscape. Yarkhill Parish Council and Weston Beggard Parish Council both objected to the application. The current application related to a site of almost 30 hectares. Recently a similar solar farm application had been refused on an area of 10 hectares. The application was refused as the proposal would install a number of uncharacteristic structures across the landscape. This was upheld on appeal due to the harmful impact on the landscape. The area in which the current application was proposed was already inundated with solar panels. The application did not represent the protection of the environment but rather an adverse impact on the environment and landscape.

Councillor Dave Davis left the meeting at 11:45 a.m.

The Committee debated the application. There was division among the members of the committee regarding the acceptability of the application.

It was the contention of some members that there was a need for the development to contribute towards energy security and the application site was in an ideal location with other solar farms nearby and access to National Grid infrastructure.

It was the contention of other members that the scale of the site was excessive and posed an unacceptable impact on the landscape. Furthermore, it was felt the application represented an inappropriate use of vital agricultural land required for food security.

The committee queried:

-        whether conditions could be used to mitigate the impact of the development on the landscape, in particular the screening of the substation and inverter and the protection of the riverbank vegetation along the 9 metre easement to the north of the site;

-        whether a noise impact assessment had been undertaken on the application; and

-        whether concerns regarding the impact of the development on local heritage sites had been resolved;

-        the temporary nature of the proposal and if measures were in place to ensure the development could be removed before the 40 years if it was no longer in use; and

-        what assurance could be provided that the construction of the development didn’t impact upon or increase surface water flooding.

The principal planning officer provided the following clarification:

-        screening and protection of riverbank vegetation could be included in the landscape strategy;

-        a noise assessment hadn't  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

Proposed erection of 31 no. key worker dwellings, including access from Clubtail Drive with associated infrastructure and landscaping.

Application deferred.

The principal planning officer provided a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Hubbard, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Rawlings, applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution, the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained there had been a number of objections from local residents and the local parish council. Holmer and Shelwick Parish Council objected to the application for the following reasons: it contravened the NDP; it proposed inadequate provision of spaces; the scale of the development was felt to be overbearing and overshadowing of existing houses in the area; and there was not a drainage strategy to address flooding issues on the site; the new development would overlook existing properties due to its elevated position and height which posed concerns regarding the loss of light and the undermining of privacy; there was concern that flooding would increase from water runoff, contrary to core strategy policy SD 3(5); there was a history of problems with water runoff in Clubtail drive; the development was not in keeping with existing houses. The development reduced plans for the park and choose facility to the north of Hereford and additional traffic would be generated by the development which would have an unacceptable impact on existing residents’ amenity. There was concern over the security of the proposed development due to the individuals who would be housed.

The committee debated the application.

There was concern across the committee regarding the tight and constrained site for the development. The site represented intensive development and the significant density of housing and lack of parking spaces was problematic. Tarmac and concrete was predominant across the proposed site and there was a lack of space for landscaping features to ameliorate the stark appearance of the building and immediate surroundings. The application posed an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and on the local environment and landscape. The committee felt that changes were required to the application and plans before the scheme could be considered for approval. The committee discussed the deferral of the application based on the need to amend plans to include additional mitigating landscaping and landscape features to address the appearance of intensive overdevelopment. It was understood that the introduction of landscaping measures to mitigate the appearance and impact of the site on the landscape and residential amenity could result in changes to the scale and design of the buildings proposed on the application site.

The local ward member was given the chance to close the debate. In summary, he reiterated concerns about the development and explained that the narrow and limited access point needed to be reconsidered along with concerns about security.

Councillor Stef Simmons proposed and councillor Richard Thomas seconded a motion that the application be deferred to: enable a reconsideration of the plans and the introduction of additional landscaping measures to mitigate the appearance of intensive overdevelopment on the site; and consideration of any consequent changes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Proposed extensions to the existing primary school to provide 2 additional classrooms and associated learning resource and support spaces, extension of the existing car park area, relocation of 2 no. storage sheds, and associated hard and soft landscaping and biodiversity improvements. 

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

The senior planning officer provided a presentation on the application and updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, she explained that it was a council own application with no objections from the public. Sports England had objected to the application due to the loss of a small area of playing field, which was approximately a 10% reduction. Extra provision was needed for children with special education needs (SEND), there was a shortfall of SEND provision in Herefordshire. The development at Hampton Dean would help to improve facilities for children with SEND.

The committee debated the application. It was recognised that the loss of playing fields was unfortunate and that Sport England had an important role protecting playing fields but there was an overriding need for SEND provision that outweighed the modest loss of playing fields.

There was support across the committee for the application.

The ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate. In summary, she explained that there remained adequate area at the school for sports.

Councillor Bruce Baker proposed and councillor Richard Thomas seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The motion was put to the vote and was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:

The Planning & Regulatory Committee resolve to approve the proposal subject to the following list of conditions and any other further conditions considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers and that the application is referred to the Secretary of State under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2024.

Unless Sport England subsequently remove their objection, the Local Planning Authority shall not grant planning permission until the expiry of a period of 21 days beginning with the date which the Secretary of State tells the authority in writing they have received notification and if, before the expiry of the 21 day period, the Secretary of State has notified the authority that they do not intend to issue a direction under section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of that application, the local planning authority may determine the application.