To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors H Davies and AP Taylor.

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

There were no named substitutes present at the meeting.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

9. DMS/102345/F - UPPER HOUSE FARM, MORETON ON LUGG, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR4 8AH..

Councillor JW Hope MBE, Personal, Member of the River Lugg Drainage Board.

9. DMS/102345/F - UPPER HOUSE FARM, MORETON ON LUGG, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR4 8AH..

Councillor KS Guthrie, Personal, Member of the River Lugg Drainage Board.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2010.

RESOLVED:   That the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2010 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

The Chairman introduced all of the Officers who were present at the meeting.

He also read out a letter received from Mr and Mrs Jones, Falcon Brook, thanking the committee for the manner in which they dealt with their recent planning application.

To be noted.

The Committee noted the report.

To update the Council’s Planning Enforcement Policy.

Members noted the report and thanked the planning enforcement team for their recent enforcement seminar.

RESOLVED:

The Committee noted the report and requested that the Cabinet Member, Environment and Strategic Housing, approve the policy.

Proposed construction of 20 new dwellings and new access road and associated works.

The Team Leader (North) gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided; the schedule of committee updates is appended to these minutes. During his presentation the Team Leader (North) addressed the key issues regarding the application, these included the principle of development; the loss of the playing field; the density and design of the development; the transportation issues; the foul drainage and surface water issues in the area; affordable housing; ecology and landscaping.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Ashton, representing Colwall Parish Council, and Mr Hamilton, representing a number of local residents, both spoke in objection to the application, and Mr McCann, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor RV Stockton, the Vice-Chairman, speaking in his capacity of local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

• The application had been two years in the making and was submitted following a considerable amount of work from the applicants.
• There were traffic concerns during the morning and late afternoon due to school drop offs and collections, these were no different than any other school.
• The school was trying to improve the situation through a travel plan.
• The site was an allocated housing site under the 2003 Herefordshire Council Unitary Development Plan.
• The drainage concerns were being resolved by Severn Trent.
• The Malvern Hills were subject to flooding problems due to their nature.
• Colwall needed more housing.

The local ward member also read an additional statement from his fellow ward member who echoed the views expressed.

Members discussed the application and had concerns regarding the loss of school playing fields as well as concerns regarding traffic movements in the area. Therefore they felt that a site inspection would be beneficial.

The Head of Development Management advised Members that the site was an allocated housing site under the Unitary Development Plan. He also advised members that they may wish to consider visiting the site during the morning school drop off time in order to gauge the highways issues.

Councillor Stockton was given the opportunity to close the debate in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

RESOLVED

THAT a site inspection be undertaken on the following grounds.

            The character or appearance of the development itself is a fundamental planning consideration;

            a judgement is required on visual impact, and;

            the setting and surroundings are fundamental to the determination or to the conditions being considered, and cannot reasonably be made without visiting the site in question.

Proposed poultry units extension:- 3 no replacement units, 3 no additional units.

The Principal Planning Officer (Minerals and Waste) gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided; the schedule of committee updates is appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Young, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Foxley, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor KS Guthrie, the local ward member and Councillor SJ Robertson, the neighbouring ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

• There were concerns regarding the cumulative traffic movements to and from the site.
• Need to be mindful of the high levels of traffic using the A49 on a daily basis.
• AmeyMouchelle figures were considerably higher than the figures quoted in the report for traffic movements on the A49.
• Concern had been raised in respect of the night time food deliveries, could these be mitigated.
• There were concerns regarding odours from the site.
• The Planning Officer was thanked for arranging a visit to a similar operation in the County.
• It was noted that older poultry sheds did suffer from worse odour problems than the new ones.
• Could the roofs be coloured in such a way to negate the visual impact.
• Mature tree planting would be welcomed when screening was considered.

In response to a number of questions raised by the local ward member, the neighbouring ward member, and the two public speakers, the Principal Planning Officer made the following comments:

·         There had been no objections raised by the Highways Agency or the Council’s Traffic Manager regarding the A49.

·         The only time that a noticeable odour would emit from the sheds would be during ‘turnout time’, this occurred for approximately 4 hours once every 6 weeks.

·         The proposed sheds would be further away from the objector’s home.

·         Landscaping and the finished colour of the sheds could be agreed in consultation with the local ward member and the Chairman.

·         Delivery times could not be restricted to normal business hours.

·         Ammonia levels were considerably lower under the new proposal than the current levels.

Members had some concerns regarding the impact the application would have on the highways infrastructure and felt it imperative that sufficient traffic control measures were put in place. Concerns were also raised in respect of the nature of the screening proposed, Members noted that the screening could be agreed at a later date but wished it to be recorded that the use of mature trees would be welcomed in order to mitigate any possible visual impact.

Despite these concerns Members noted that the poultry farming techniques were developing and that there was a need for modern poultry sheds. They noted the comments from the Principal Planning Officer regarding the improvement to animal welfare standards that the new sheds would offer.

Councillors Guthrie and Robertson were given the opportunity to close the debate in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. Councillor Guthrie requested that as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

Erection of 2 dwellings, construction of new vehicular access and associated works.

The Team Leader (South) gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided; the schedule of committee updates is appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr McLachlin, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Smith, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor PGH Cutter, one of the local ward members, commented on a number of issues, including:

• The application came before Committee in October when it was deferred pending discussions with the applicant regarding the possibility of reducing the development to one dwelling.
• The concerns regarding the traffic concerns had not been resolved.
• All dwellings in the area were detached or linked properties, there were no semi detached properties in the area.

Members discussed that application and had serious concerns regarding the impact the application would have on the highways infrastructure in the area. They also felt that the application would result in over intensification of the site and felt that it was inappropriate for the area.

In response to a question the Team Leader (South) confirmed that all monies secured through the section 106 agreement would be used to contribute towards projects within the vicinity of the site.

Councillor Cutter was given the opportunity to close the debate in accordance with theCouncil’s Constitution but chose to make no further statement.

RESOLVED

THAT the application should be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons:

1.         The proposal by reason of its scale, form and prominent location would result in an unacceptable over development of the site that would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area contrary to Policies S1, DR1 and H13 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

2.         The proposal would result in the intensification of the use of the access onto Court Road which by reason of the limited visibility, unrestricted on-street parking and the well trafficked nature of the estate road would be detrimental to highway safety and contrary to Policies DR3 and T8 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

Date of next site inspection    - 14 December 2010

Date of next meeting               - 15 December 2010

The Committee noted the date of the next meeting.