To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors ACR Chappell, DW Greenow, DC Taylor and WJ Walling.

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;-

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.

Councillor KS Guthrie declared a prejudicial interest in Agenda Item No 5, Minute No 102.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

There were no announcements from the Chairman.

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

For:      Mercia Waste Management Ltd per Axis, 5 Camellia House, 76 Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5BB

Ward: Pontrilas

The Head of Planning and Transportation advised the Committee that the application needed to be considered in relation to national, regional and local policy background and he outlined what these were.  He said that there were a number of complicated and technical issues regarding the scheme which had led to a lengthy consultation process with the statutory consultees, professional bodies and interested parties.  The application had led to a considerable amount of public interest in the proposal and the special meeting had therefore been arranged.  Public speaking time had also been increased from three minutes to ten minutes per slot to reflect the fact that it was being treated as a major application.  The Committee had undertaken a site inspection to the application site and also visited an operational site near Pershore. He advised that the Committee needed to carefully consider the policy issues and material considerations and give appropriate weight to the various factors involved with the application.  If the Committee decided to grant permission the proposal would require an Environmental Permit from the Environment Agency and this could only be granted if the site was capable of complying with a number of stringent regulations.

The Principal Planning Officer (Minerals and Waste) presented the report of the Head of Planning and Transportation and highlighted some of the key issues relating to the application which included:-

§         the proposal was for an open windrow composting facility exclusively for treating garden cuttings, no treatment of any other waste types was proposed as part of this application;

§         the applicant had investigated some twenty-one other sites but this was the first site that the applicant had deemed suitable and available;

§         a full Environmental Statement was not required but the application included full and comprehensive environmental assessments. As previously indicated, the requirements of the Environment Agency would need to be met before the scheme became operational and if it did, it would be the subject of careful monitoring by the Environment Agency;

§         Herefordshire generated some 7,000 tonnes of green waste per year and this was estimated to grow to around 12,000 tonnes per year by 2027, the application proposed utilising spare capacity by initially supplementing Herefordshire's garden waste from Worcestershire if and when necessary;

§         vehicular access would be from the A49 (T) along a recently constructed track linked to a permitted sand and gravel extraction site on adjoining land at St. Donats Farm, the access also provided the sole access to Upper House Farm and associated poultry units;

§         the parish boundary between Burghill and Moreton crossed the site at the point where the proposed access road would enter the development site;

§         the sealed wastewater lagoon would have capacity to account for a 1:1000-year extreme event plus climate change and this was welcomed by the Environment Agency;

§         the hardstanding process area would be raised and kerbed to ensure adequate drainage to the lagoon;

§         the stockpiles and windrows would be up to 3 metres high, with landscaped earth  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.

For:            Herefordshire Council and Hereford Diocesan Board of Finance per James Spreckley, MRICS FAAV, Brinsop  House,  Brinsop, Hereford, Herefordshire, HR4 7AS

To consider an application which has been referred to the Committee because it involves Council premises

Ward: Sutton Walls

The Central Team Leader said that the application had been referred to the Committee because the application site involved Council owned property.  He advised that the scheme was for the conversion of the existing redundant school buildings into a pair of semi-detached dwellings, comprising a 3-bedroom unit and a 2-bedroom unit. There would also be three new dwellings comprising a semi-detached pair of 3-bedroom cottages on the eastern side orientated to front onto the Bodenham Road and a detached 4 bedroom dwelling fronting onto the unclassified road.  He said that a further letter had been received from Sutton St Nicholas Parish Council. This requested that some or all of the S106 funding should be directed towards the creation of a pavement between St Michael’s Church and the crossroads in the centre of the village, which is a project identified as a priority by the community.  He advised that the Heads of Terms set out in the report listed the various contributions which had been calculated in accordance with the S106 Supplementary Planning Document.  It was proposed that some £8,600 would be allocated to highway/transportation work. The proposed pavement was likely to be a considerable project and some of the contribution could be directed towards this because it would fall within “localised highway improvements” and “safe routes to school” which were included within the Heads of Terms.  He felt that due to the change in the levels between the site and the unclassified road, it would be appropriate to impose a further condition requiring details of the levels to be submitted and he suggested the addition of Standard Condition I51 – Details of slab levels.

Councillor KS Guthrie the Local Ward Member referred to the concerns raised by the local parish council about flooding to Bodenham road and the need to ensure that the new dwellings did not overlook those nearby.  The Central Team Leader said that the Highways department had raised no objection to the proposal and that the properties would be screened at ground level by fencing.  The windows had been orientated at first floor level not to overlook and there would be a condition preventing any new windows being installed in the gable ends. 

The Head of Planning and Transportation congratulated the applicants on the quality of the scheme which would bring redundant buildings into use and include new dwellings which would be in keeping with the existing ones. The Committee decided that the application should be approved.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted 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.      B07 (Section 106 Agreement).

Reason: In order to provide [enhanced sustainable transport infrastructure, educational facilities, improved play space, public art, waste recycling and affordable housing] in accordance with Policy DR5 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan 2007.

3.      B01 (Development in accordance with the approved plans).

Reason. To ensure adherence to the approved plans  ...  view the full minutes text for item 103.

3rd April 2009