The Chairman referred to the recent sad loss of former Councillor PG Turpin and those present stood in silent tribute to his memory.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors PGH Cutter and WJ Walling.

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

Councillor R Smith was appointed named substitute for PGH Cutter.

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.

There were no declarations of interest made at the meeting.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 14th December, 2007.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 14th December, 2007 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the deletion of the declaration of interest by Councillor Mrs J Pemberton in Minute No. 56.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

The Chairman welcomed Councillor RI Matthews to his first meeting since his return to good health.

The outcome of a recent panning appeal in respect of Pennoxstone Court, Kings Caple regarding the erection of polytunnels without planning permission was reported.  The main issues were:

i)                    The effect of the polytunnels on the natural beauty of the landscape and the countryside of the Wye Valley Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

ii)                  The effect of the polytunnels on the setting of the listed Church of St John the Baptist, Kings Caple

iii)                 The weight to be attached to the benefits of the polytunnels in terms of the quantity and quality of the soft fruit produced, the contribution made to the rural economy and the substitution of locally grown fruit for imported fruit.

The appeal was dismissed in respect of the larger part of the site and upheld in respect of a relatively small area.  A Draft Supplementary Planning Document about the planning aspects of polytunnels would be submitted to the meeting in April, 2008.

To receive the attached report of the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee meeting held on 12th December, 2007

RESOLVED: That the report of the meeting held on 12th December, 2007 be received and noted.

To receive the attached report of the Central Area Planning Sub-Committee meeting held on 19th December, 2007.

RESOLVED: That the report of the meeting held on 19th December, 2007.

To receive the attached report of the Southern Area Planning Sub-Committee meeting held on 9th January, 2008.

RESOLVED: That the report of the meetings held on 9th January, 2008 be received and noted.

To give views to Cabinet about the Supplementary Planning Document which sets out the Council’s policy on the use of planning obligations.

Cabinet deferred consideration of this item at its meeting on 13th December, 2007 so that it could receive the views of the Planning Committee.

The Forward Planning Manager presented the report of the Head of Planning services about the Draft Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which had been published for consultation purposes in March 2007.  He advised that the document was included within the Council’s Local Development Scheme and was being produced as part of Herefordshire’s Local Development Framework. It would set out the Council’s policy and approach to dealing with planning obligations and securing developer contributions and provide additional information and guidance in support of policies and proposals in the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan. The SPD was aimed at making clear to all interested parties the Council’s policy stance on the subject. Once adopted, it would become a material consideration in the determination of planning applications where contributions were required.  The aims of the SPD were to:

·         provide as much certainty as possible to landowners, prospective developers and other interested parties;

·         ensure a uniform application of policy;

·         ensure the process is fair and transparent;

·         enable developers to have a ‘one stop shop’ approach to establishing likely contributions expected; and

·         facilitate a speedier response from the authority to development proposals.

The SPD would assist in pre-application discussions and provide a clear and accountable procedure for the way in which planning obligations were negotiated and secured.  The Forward Planning Manager and the Team Leader Local Planning outlined the results of the consultation process and explained the modifications proposed to the SPD as a result.  They also drew attention to the crucial need for a Section 106 Monitoring Officer to ensure clarity of documentation, help to audit the arrangements and also to ensure the tracking of obligations so that they were secured and fulfilled.  A further role for the Officer would be to co-ordinate the programmes and schemes over a five-year rolling period for which developer contributions would be sought.  There was also a need to review the current procedures for agreeing obligations and make appropriate changes to the Scheme of Delegation to Officers.

The Committee considered the proposals and directed a wide-ranging number of questions to the Officers.  The Cabinet Member (Environment and Strategic Housing) further explained the views that had been received about the proposals by correspondence and in meetings and said that the next stage would be to report the matter, including the views of the Committee, to Cabinet.  He said that the aim was to have flexible arrangements in place which could be adapted as necessary.  Councillor RI Matthews asked about the thresholds which had been set in the document, particularly in relation to the requirement that obligations would be sought from all housing schemes. Councillor Matthews was of the view that it was essential to set the threshold at the correct level because it would have a significant impact on the rural social infrastructure, housing and economy.  He asked about the impact that the new arrangements would have on the work of the officers and the way in which targets were met.  The Development Control Manager explained the likely affects  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

For:      CNG Developments Ltd per Mr L F Hulse, 19 Friars Gardens, Ludlow, Shropshire  SY8 1RX

This application was deferred at the previous meeting for further information.

Ward: Leominster North

The Northern Team Leader said that the application had been deferred at the last meeting because of concerns about the requirement for vehicles to pass across a well-used public footpath and the responsibility for its maintenance.  He said that the applicants had submitted a detailed schedule of works for the treatment of the public footpath and that the Rights of Way Officer was satisfied with the proposals.  The applicants had indicated that provision would be made in the deeds of the new properties requiring the house owners to maintain the track, and not to obstruct or park on the footpath. They had also suggest the erection of s sign to advise that parking was not permitted on the footpath, and proposed the inclusion of a letter in the house information packs to notify the owners that it was an offence to park on a public right of way.

Councillor RC Hunt, a Local Ward Member, still had a number of concerns about the proposals.  Notwithstanding the views of the Environment Agency, he said that a previous property on the land had been prone to flooding.  He also had reservations about the fact that wildlife had been removed from the site prior to the ecological study having been undertaken and that a false reading had consequently been given.  Despite the proposals put forward by the applicants about the path, he felt that it would be difficult to enforce them and that the safety of pedestrians would be compromised on a well-used thoroughfare which because there would be no provision for a separate footpath in the access road.

The Committee discussed the merits of the application and shared the concerns of the Local Ward Member.  The Development Control Manager and the Northern Team Leader explained that the concerns could be met by appropriate conditions and informatives and that the application was in accordance with the Council’s planning policies.  Notwithstanding this, the Committee was not satisfied with the arrangements for vehicular access over a public right of way and decided that the application should be refused.

RESOLVED

That the application be refused because of the proposed method of vehicular access to the site and its likely impact on the public footpath.

For:      Border Oak Design & Construction Ltd   

To consider an application that was deferred at the previous meeting for further information.   

Ward: Golden Cross with Weobley

The Northern Team Leader reported the receipt of further correspondence from the applicants in support of their application.  He said that at the previous meeting the Committee had decided to defer the application for further information about affordable housing in Weobley.  The Housing Needs and Development Manager said that the Housing Needs Survey published in 2007 had revealed that ten households required affordable rented housing within the village, and that a further three preferred shared ownership accommodation. In addition, Home Point, the affordable housing waiting list, contained twenty-nine households in Weobley, which required affordable housing there.  Nineteen of these had a need to move to more suitable accommodation which was affordable and seven of the nineteen were inurgent housing need.  She advised that the housing stock in the village had a reasonable turnover but that more than 50% of turnover in the last five years had been in respect of accommodation for those over fifty-five.  Of the remaining lettings, only fifteen homes were let to local families.

Councillor JHR Goodwin, the Local Ward Member, noted the views of the officers but reiterated that there was considerable local support for the scheme.  He felt that although the proposal did not meet the requirements for affordable housing, there were a number of key factors that needed to be taken into consideration which could meet the requirements of planning policies DR1, H5 and HBA6.  Following the rejection of the original application because its access was through Chapel Orchard, the applicants had gone to considerable lengths to prepare a scheme in keeping with the area and its setting near to an ancient monument.  A revised access directly from Hereford Road had resulted in less land being available for development and he felt that a higher density would be detrimental to the setting of the site and not be in keeping with the historic village.  He said that the village already had a good provision of affordable housing on other sites and questioned the need for more at this location. 

The Northern Team Leader reiterated why the proposal did not fulfil the Council’s planning policies and said that the scheme needed to be comprised of twelve dwellings, including four affordable.  The Forward Planning Manager said that the site had been identified in the UDP for the inclusion of affordable housing and that this had been confirmed by the Planning Inspector at the UDP Inquiry.  The Development Control Manager was of the view that a reduction to six units with no affordable housing could not be justified.  Any affordable units built in Weobley would be prioritised for local families and this would be secured through a S106 Agreement which would form part of the Planning Permission.  Such an agreement would ensure that the properties remained affordable and for local people in perpetuity.  There was also the fact that an unwelcome precedent would be set if a developer was allowed to undermine the UDP by halving the number of units to be provided, and excluding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

For:            Herefordshire Council per Hunter Page Planning Ltd, Thornbury House, 18 High Street, Cheltenham GL50 1DZ

Ward: Ross-on-Wye East

The Southern Team Leader provided the Committee with the following updates:-

The final Framework Travel Plan was received from Pinnacle Transportation Limited on behalf of the applicants on 9^th January 2008.

The Highways Agency have issued a revised TR110 directing that any planning permission which the planning authority may grant shall include the following conditions for the reasons given:

No development within the application area shall be undertaken until the proposed site access shown on drawing number Figure 3.1 Rev A, including any subsequent revisions has been completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority after consultation with the Highways Agency.

No part of the development shall be occupied until a Travel Plan has been agreed by the developer and the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highways Agency (Acting on behalf of the Secretary of State). Such a Travel Plan shall be implemented through delivery mechanisms and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highways Agency. 

Reason for the direction given:

To ensure the A40 trunk road continues to be an effective part of the system of routes for through traffic in accordance with Section 10(2) of the Highways Act 1980 to protect the interest of road safety on the Trunk Road.

To satisfy the aims of PPG13 in reducing reliance on the use of private motor vehicles in order to promote sustainable transport choices to and from the site.

Note to applicant:

The highway proposals associated with this consent involve works within the public highway, which is land over which you have no control. The Highways Agency therefore requires you to enter into a suitable legal agreement to cover the design and construction of the works. Please contact Mr Colin Gimblett of the highways Agency’s Area 2 S278 team, at an early stage to discuss the details of the highways agreement, his contact details are as follows, telephone number 0117 372 8239 or Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6HA.

The view of the Officers was that the response from the Highways Agency resolved the outstanding highway matters.

The Southern Team Leader presented the details of the application which had been submitted to the Committee because it involved Council owned land.  The Committee welcomed the proposals for the creation of vital additional employment land in the area which would considerably help the local economy, and thanked the Officers for their hard work in arriving at such a satisfactory scheme.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1       The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2    Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority before  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

To consider an application which has been referred to the Committee because it is from a Member of the Council.

Ward: Hope End

The Northern Team Leader presented an application which had been submitted to the Committee because it was from a Member of the Council.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking and the Council’s Planning Code of Conduct, Dr Swinburne presented her application and then withdrew from the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That planning permission be approved 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 (Samples of external materials )

            Reason: To ensure that the materials harmonise with the surroundings.

3 -        H13 (Access, turning area and parking )

            Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the free flow of traffic using the adjoining highway.

4 -        E31 (principal use as holiday accommodation )

            Reason: The local planning authority are not prepared to allow the introduction of a separate unit of residential accommodation, [due to the relationship and close proximity of the building to the property known as Stanley Hill court in this rural location.

5 -        Prior to commencement of development a bat mitigation strategy shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The strategy shall have been implemented prior to use of the building.

            Reason: To ensure compliance into policies NC1, NC6 and NC7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Informatives:

1 -        N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC

2 -        N19 - Avoidance of doubt

29th February, 2008

11th April, 2008

29th February, 2008

11th April, 2008