To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors H Davies, DW Greenow and G Lucas.

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

The following named substitutes were appointed:-

Councillor KG Grumbley for Councillor GW Greenow.

Councillor R Mills for Councillor G Lucas.

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.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 26th September, 2008.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 26th September, 2008 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of the name of Councillor Mrs JD Woodward in the list of those present.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

Reeves Hill Wind Turbine Planning Application

The Chairman was of the view that the recent site inspection to Reeves Hill and Corwen had proved to be most informative.  The Head of Planning and Transportation said that the forthcoming briefing for Members on 27th November about wind turbines would be very helpful in providing background information regarding the planning application when it went to the Planning Committee on 9th January.

To receive the attached report of the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee meetings held on 24 September & 22 October 2008.

RESOLVED: That the report of the meetings held on 24th September and 22nd October, 2008 be received and noted.

To receive the attached report of the Central Area Planning Sub-Committee meetings held on 1 October and 5 November.

RESOLVED: That the report of the meetings held on 1st October and 5th November, 2008 be received and noted.

To receive the attached report of the Southern Area Planning Sub-Committee meeting held on 15 October 2008.

RESOLVED: That the report of the meeting held on 15th October 2008 be received and noted.

To determine a response to the updated Phase Two Revision of the Regional Spatial Strategy in the light of the proposed revised housing allocations published on 7 October 2008.

The Planning Policy Manager presented the report of the Head of Planning and Transportation about a proposed response to the updated Phase Two Revision of the Regional Spatial Strategy, in the light of the proposed revised housing allocations published on 7 October 2008.  He advised that the current version of the RSS was issued by the Government in 2004 and was followed by a phased review.  The first phase, which dealt with the Black Country, had been completed and the second phase had reached an advanced stage.  It dealt with housing, employment, the role of town centres, waste and some aspects of transport.  The third and final phase had begun in November 2007 and covered rural services, gypsy and traveller sites, culture, minerals and environment policies.  The Regional Assembly had worked closely with regional stakeholders in preparing the Phase Two Revision, and strategic planning authorities such as Herefordshire Council had submitted advice to the Assembly in 2006.  Consultation was undertaken on Spatial Options which were considered by Cabinet in February 2007.  A preferred option had been approved by the Assembly’s Regional Planning Partnership in October, and submitted to the Secretary of State in December. It was reported to Planning Committee on 23 May 2008 and considered by Cabinet on 29 May 2008.  Cabinet had offered general support to the Revisions subject to a number of issues regarding the infrastructure requirements of Hereford if growth was to be achieved; the peripheral expansion of market towns, housing targets and growth; retail floor space requirements; office development; waste policies and transportation issues.  These matters were set out in the report of the Head of Planning and Transportation. 

It was noted that throughout the process of preparing the revisions, the Government had been concerned about the need for a greater amount of affordable housing.  It had taken advice from the National Housing and Planning and Advice Unit (NHPAU). The NHPAU had studied population and household formation trends at national and regional levels and had concluded that more housing was required. The Regional Office for the West Midlands had commissioned a study by Nathaniel Lichfield Partners (NLP) into the options for delivering a higher housing allocation, together with the impact that this would have within the regions.  The NLP report had concluded that it was possible to deliver higher levels of housing without undermining the urban renaissance strategy for the Region.  The examination in public into the Phase 2 Revision would not now commence until 28 April 2009 and that the proposals included an additional 1,200 dwellings for Herefordshire which would be allocated to the rural areas.  Consultees had been given until 8 December 2008 to finalise their comments about the Phase 2 Revisions.  The Phase 2 Revisions, included the revised figures and formed the starting point for the Council’s Local Development Framework. and It was therefore essential to define the Council’s position on the RSS document and the NLP study to establish a basis for the Core Strategy spatial options. 

The Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

To consider the Annual Monitoring Report for 2007-2008.

The Team Leader Strategic Planning presented the report of the Planning Policy Manager about the Annual Monitoring Report 2007 – 2008.  He said that The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 had introduced new provisions and requirements for development planning. The regular review and monitoring of Development Plans through mandatory Annual Monitoring Reports (AMR’s) was a fundamental feature of the new planning system.  AMR’s were based on the period from 1st April to 31st March and had to be submitted to the Secretary of State by no later than the following 31st December.  He advised that the AMR’ were required to assess the impact of the Councils planning policies and framework

The Committee considered the contents of the AMR and the Team Leader Strategic Planning highlighted the main features and outlined the extent to which the objectives of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan (UDP) policies were being met.  He advised the Committee of the key findings which had revealed the following:-

(I)            housing – between 01-02 and 04-05 completions were below the rate anticipated.  Recent releases of UDP sites had resulted in an increase in the rate of housing completions in the County with 829 dwellings being completed in 2007-8 (gross).  The levels of housing supply in the County had suggested that the UDP housing target was likely to be achieved by 2011, however, the downturn in the housing market may well impact upon the rates of completions in the next few years.  The percentage of housing completions on previously developed or brownfield land at 73% (606) had again exceeded regional and national targets.  In terms of affordable housing, 141 units were completed in 07/08, an increase over the previous year (120 units).  Moreover, the number of planning permissions for affordable housing and such housing likely to be delivered on allocated UDP sites suggested that the rate of completions over the remaining UDP period would increase.  In addition, the preparation of the Local Development Framework provided an opportunity to review the effectiveness of the UDP affordable housing policies;

(II)          employment - The amount of land developed for employment uses over the monitoring period was 8.66ha ha, significantly less than the almost 25ha developed during 2006-7 but still above the average recorded since the 1980’s.  Around 59% of the completions in the year were located on previously developed (brownfield) land; and

(III)         in the remaining areas of transport, town centres and retail, recreational and leisure, minerals, waste, development requirements, natural historic heritage and renewable energy, findings generally demonstrated that targets were being met or that there had been progress towards meeting targets or monitoring requirements during the 07-08 monitoring period.

The Committee discussed the main aspects of the report, recognised the importance of developing policies for renewable energy and climate change, and agreed with the approach proposed by the Team Leader Strategic Planning.

RESOLVED THAT:

the Annual Monitoring Report 2007-8 be endorsed and commended   to the Cabinet Member (Environment and Strategic Housing) for submission to  Cabinet.

To inform members of the comments received to the Draft Polytunnels Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) published for consultation purposes in June 2008 and to consider appropriate changes. 

The Team Leader Local Planning presented a report about the comments which had been received to the draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which had been prepared to provide planning guidance about polytunnel development.  He said that it aimed to supplement and expand upon the policies which were contained within the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan. The document had been under preparation for some time and had involved a considerable amount of consultation and information gathering. The process had started In July 2007 when the Council had published an Issues Report and had sought the views of Parish Councils, statutory undertakers, interested organisations, growers and stakeholders about the form that the document should take. This was followed by structured consultation events with representatives from the farming/growing community and with local individuals and representatives from interested lobby groups. The consultation process followed the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement and the comments which had been received had helped to shape the draft SPD. 

The draft SPD was endorsed by the Committee in April and approved for consultation purposes by Cabinet in June.  Consultation took place from 26th June to 8th August 2008.  The Team Leader Local Planning said that a summary of all the comments which had been made to the draft was set out in the report and that an additional letter of representation had been received from a local resident.  In summary the request was for the reference to the zone of tranquillity being retained, because the buffer zone would not be as effective. The resident was of the view that a fifty-metre zone did not afford enough protection to a dwelling and should be increased to seventy-five metres from the boundary of a dwelling, which would better follow DCLG advice in respect of delegated powers on the proximity of polytunnels, and that the seventy-five metres would remain a viable piece of land for accepted agricultural use and be a truly useful tranquil buffer zone.

The Team Leader Local Planning advised that the SPD was aimed at assisting all those involved about the requirements and issues to be addressed in any polytunnel development through:

·               helping to clarify the forms of development that would require planning permission;

·               setting out the planning issues associated with the erection of polytunnels;

·               setting out the UDP policies that will need to be addressed;

·               make clear the additional information that would need to accompany an application; and

·               set out the Council’s pre-application planning guidance.

The draft SPD had prompted many and varied comments from parish councils, residents groups, growers, statutory bodies, support groups, environmental groups, researchers and the local public. Many comments had been made with specific reference and knowledge of current local situations.  All the proposed changes were shown in the final version of the SPD at Appendix 1 in the report. All written comments received had been summarised along with a Council’s response in Appendix 2. The summary would be included in a full Consultation Statement to be published with the adopted SPD and an accompanying  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

To inform members about development control performance for the first six months of 2008/09.

The Committee noted the report of the Head of Planning and Transportation about the Councils Development Control performance in the first six months of 2008/09 and thanked the Officers for their achievements.

For:      Ms A. Cleverly per Hereford Travellers Support, Trefoil, Brinsop, Herefordshire,  HR4 7AS

To consider an application which has been referred to the Committee because the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee was mindful to refuse it contrary to recommendation. 

Ward: Mortimer

The Central Team Leader presented the report of the Head of Planning and Transportation.  He said that at its meeting on 24th September, 2008, the Northern Area Planning Sub Committee was mindful to refuse the application contrary to Council policy and officer advice.  He reported the receipt of a letter from the applicant’s agent which stated that no other person was living on the site, except for  occasional visitors, and the applicant had given assurances that a “party” which had been held there in August would not be repeated. The agent also referred to similar cases elsewhere in the country where “gypsy” status could be deemed to be a special circumstance when making a planning decision.  He also reported that aletter (e-mail) of objection had been received from J Fieldhouse, Pear Tree Farm. The grounds were that it would cause a nuisance (reference is made to a “rave” held in the summer to which many people were attracted and which caused noise disturbance), the site was unsanitary and unsightly and there was concern that more people would move onto it to the detriment of the village.  The Central Team Leader outlined the planning issues regarding the application and the need for such pitches within the County, at present there was a shortfall of some eighty-three pitches. He drew Members’ attention to a previous enforcement appeal for an adjoining site which had been allowed. He said that whilst the Committee should consider the application on its merits, the appeal was a material consideration.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Bailey spoke in objection to the application and Mr Baines, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

Councillor LO Barnett, the Local Ward member, said that the application would have been rejected if it had been for a house and she questioned the validity of a policy which allowed the siting of caravans in the open countryside.  She was of the view that there was a need for such pitches within the County but felt that the application site was in the wrong location and that it would have a detrimental effect upon the village and surrounding countryside.  She felt that such an application would be perfectly acceptable in the right location and pointed out successful sites which had been approved in Pencombe and in Aymestrey.  She added that the site in question benefited from one of the best views in Wigmore and that a more suitable location needed to be found.

The Chairman drew attention to paragraphs 6.2 and 6.7 of the report which clearly set out that the application fulfilled all the planning policy and legal requirements for approval.  Councillor KG Grumbley was of the view however that the Inspector had granted the original application as an exception to policy and that a stand could now be taken by refusing this application because of the adverse impact it would have on the local community and setting.  The Central Team Leader reiterated that in the absence of any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

For:      Cllr. M Hubbard, Castle Cliffe, 14-16 Quay Street, Hereford, HR1 2NH       

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

Ward: Central

The Central Team Leader presented the application and said that Listed Building Consent was sought for minor external and internal alterations to the property as follows:

1.      repositioning of existing foul drainage pipes on the northern elevation.

   Lower Ground Floor;

2.      use of the lower ground floor as a kitchen including installation of new floor to the utility and installation of gas fired stove.

   Ground Floor;

3.      removal of existing modern partitioning and kitchen units within the current kitchen to create an open lounge, installation of wood burning stove and removal of modern door to provide an access to lower ground floor.

   First Floor; and

4.      removal of existing bathroom from bedroom 2 and creation of new bathroom within 

               bedroom 1.

He said that further information and an amended plan had been received from the applicants. The amendment sought to retain the ground floor partitioning in the landing area and details of the proposed cowls, flue lining and stove details were also provided.  He also said that Hereford City Council had no objection to the proposals and was of the view that the additional information and the amendment were considered to be acceptable.  He advised that the consultation period had expired and the application could now be determined.

RESOLVED THAT:

Listed Building Consent be granted subject to the following conditions and any further conditions considered to be necessary by the officers.

1       D01 (Time limit for commencement (Listed Building Consent) )

         Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2       D06 (External finish of flues/cowls)

         Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out in accordance with the details that are appropriate to the safeguarding of the special architectural or historical interest of the building and to comply with the requirements of Policy HBA1 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

3       D11 (Repairs to match existing )

         Reason: To ensure that all of the works arising from the approved scheme are of an appropriate form in the interest of safeguarding the special architectural or historical interest of the building and to comply with the requirements of Policy HBA1 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

INFORMATIVES:

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

2       N19 - Avoidance of doubt - Approved Plans

09/01/09; 20/02/09 and 03/04/09.

09/01/09; 20/02/09 and 03/04/09.