Apologies were received from Councillor G Lucas.

In accordance with paragraph 4.1.23 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor JA Hyde attended the meeting as a substitute member for Councillor G Lucas.

7. DMN/111770/F - LAND ADJACENT TO 4 VALENTINE COURT, CANON PYON, HEREFORD, HR4 8NZ.

Councillor DW Greenow, Personal, The Councillor knows the farmer who farms the land [amended at Planning Committee 1 February 2012].

8. DMS/111711/F - LAND AT LOWER LYDE (PARCEL 7209), SUTTON ST NICHOLAS, HEREFORD, HR1 3AS.

Councillor JLV Kenyon, Personal, The Councillor knows the applicant.

9. DMS/112643/F - WESTHOLME, FOWNHOPE, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4NN.

Councillor J Hardwick, Personal, The Councillor is a Member of the Wye Valley AONB Board; owns land adjacent to the site; and knows the applicant..

9. DMS/112643/F - WESTHOLME, FOWNHOPE, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4NN.

Councillor JA Hyde, Personal, The Councillor is a Member of the Wye Valley AONB Board.

9. DMS/112643/F - WESTHOLME, FOWNHOPE, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4NN.

Councillor PGH Cutter, Personal, The Councillor is a Member of the Wye Valley AONB Board.

10. DMS/112675/F - THE HEREFORD ACADEMY, MARLBROOK ROAD, HEREFORD, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR2 7NG.

Councillor ACR Chappell, Personal, Council Representative on the Acadamy Board.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 December 2011.

RESOLVED:   That the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 December 2011 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman advised the Committee that the Council were undertaking a trial webcast of the forthcoming Planning Committee scheduled to take place on 1 February 2012.

The Development Manager (Enforcement) advised the Committee that the appeal at Losito Stud was an appeal based on non-determination and not refusal of planning permission as stated in the report.

The Planning Committee noted the report.

Erection of 14 no. affordable homes on greenfield site including required access and services.

Deferred pending a Site Inspection.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Drew, representing Pyons Group Parish Council, and Mrs McLeod, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application and Miss Wright, the applicant, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor AJM Blackshaw, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         That for the first time since he had been elected he was not in agreement with the case officer’s recommendation for an application in his ward.

·         The concept of affordable housing in Canon Pyon was supported.

·         The Parish Council were against the application, emerging legislation outlined in the Localism Act gave considerably more weight to the views of Parish Councils.

·         There was an alternative site which was deemed more acceptable.

·         The application was contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy DR1 as there was an alternative site available.

·         Members should undertake a site inspection prior to making a decision in respect of the application.

The Committee felt that there was a need for affordable housing throughout Herefordshire but noted the concerns expressed by the Parish Council, the local residents and CPRE. A site inspection was proposed on all three grounds as set out in the Council’s Constitution.

RESOLVED:

THAT the determination of the application be deferred pending a site inspection on the following grounds:

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

2.         A judgement is required on visual impact.

3.         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.

Siting of temporary living accommodation for agricultural worker.

Refused contrary to the case officer’s recommendation.

The Development Manager (Enforcement) gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet.

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

·         The site visit, undertaken the previous day, had proved extremely beneficial.

·         Sutton St Nicholas Parish Council had now expressed similar concerns to Pype and Lyde, and Holmer and Shelwick Parish Councils.

·         More weight was being given to Parish Councils as part of the Localism Act, their concerns should be taken seriously.

·         The Planning Inspector had upheld previous refusals of planning permission on the site.

·         The application was contrary to Policy H7 and H8 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan.

·         There was no need for the applicant to reside on the site.

·         There was concern in respect of the visibility splay proposed.

·         If the large shed on the site is being used for incubation purposes would a change of use be required?

The debate was opened with members voicing concern in respect of a number of aspects of the application. It was felt that the business case had not been sufficiently met and that the application could also be viewed as contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy E11. Concern was also expressed in respect of the site location, the site access and the size of the proposed dwelling. Members also discussed certain areas of the site including the incubation shed and the man-made pools and requested clarification as to whether planning permission had been obtained, or was required, for these.

Other Members of the Committee however were in support of the application and noted that the site was well screened from the public highway. It was also felt that the need issue had been addressed at paragraph 6.5 of the Development Manager’s report. Members discussed the previous refused applications on the site and noted that the Planning Inspector had upheld the Council’s decision as the functional need tests had not been met, however it was felt that this issue had been addressed in the current application. Members also noted that the application was temporary and would give the applicant an opportunity to establish his business.

Further concern was expressed in respect of the access and egress to the site with full details of the visibility splay requirement requested from the Development Manager (Enforcement). Further clarification in respect of the requirements of PPS7 was also requested. Members also requested clarification in respect of the usage of the site and asked for confirmation that the usage was not deemed as commercial.

In response to a number of questions raised by the Committee, The Development Manager (Enforcement) provided the following information:

·         If the shed was to be used for intensive livestock purposes it could require the benefit of separate approval

·         The 400m rule was not an exclusion zone. Any development for the use of a building for livestock inside 400m of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

Proposed erection of two dwellings.

Deferred pending a Site Inspection.

The Development Manager (Hereford and Southern Localities) gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Rowles, representing Fownhope Parish Council, and Mr Jolley, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Jamieson, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor J Hardwick, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         That the planning history on the site, and in particular the existing Section 106 agreement needed to be considered.

·         The site was at the gateway to the village and was therefore an important site to the people of Fownhope.

·         The application was contrary to UDP Policies HBA6 and HBA9 as it failed to improve or enhance the conservation area.

·         The trees on the site needed to be protected, the encroachment on the root zone of one of the trees on plot 1 was a concern.

·         Members should undertake a site inspection prior to making a decision in respect of the application.

The Committee discussed the benefits of undertaking a site inspection and decided that it would be beneficial and was in accordance with the criteria for site inspections as set out in the Council’s Constitution.

Members requested that further information in respect of the root protection areas of protected trees and the existing Section 106 agreement on the site be provided when the application was bought back to the Committee at a later date.

RESOLVED

THAT the determination of the application be deferred pending a site inspection on the following grounds:

1.         A judgement is required on visual impact.

2.         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.

Variation of Condition 21 of Planning Permission DCCW0009/0958/F to allow for use of the floodlights to the all-weather pitch only to be extended to Saturdays and Sundays between the hours of 0900 and 2000.

Approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor ACR Chappell, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         The all-weather pitches would give the local community the opportunity to use the academy’s new facilities.

·         The local community currently has the opportunity to use the academy’s sports hall outside of school times.

·         The lighting is needed to enable the pitches to be hired into the evening.

·         The Academy’s directors were happy with the application.

Members discussed the application and had concerns in respect of the condition allowing the floodlights to be used until 2000 on Sunday evenings. Some members were of the opinion that 1600 or 1800 would be a more acceptable terminal hour. Concern was expressed regarding the possibility of antisocial behaviour occurring as a result of groups of youths congregating in the vicinity. It was felt that floodlighting could exacerbate this issue.

Councillor ACR Chappell was given the opportunity to close the debate. He reiterated her opening remarks and made additional comments, including:

·         The hours requested were reasonable and should be supported.

·         In the Olympic year the possibility of encouraging people to partake in outside sports should be supported.

·         Groups of youths would be welcomed to the site to take part in sporting activities.

RESOLVED:

That condition 21 of the planning permission DCCW0009/0958/F be varied as follows :

1.         The permission hereby granted is an amendment to planning permission DCCW0009/0958/F dated 18 August 2011 and, otherwise than is altered by this permission, the development shall be carried out in accordance with that planning permission and the conditions attached thereto.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to comply with the requirements of Policy DR1 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

2.         The floodlighting hereby permitted for the MUGA shall not be switched on outside of the following times: - 0900 - 2200 Mondays to Fridays nor at any time on Saturdays, Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays

Reason: To minimise the impact of the floodlights and to protect the residential amenity of nearby dwellings so as to comply with Policy DR14 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

3.         The floodlighting hereby permitted for the All  Weather Pitch shall not be switched on outside of the following times: - 0900 – 2200 Mondays to Fridays and 9.00 and 20.00 on Saturdays, Sundays nor at any time on Bank or Public Holidays.

Reason: To minimise the impact of the floodlights and to protect the residential amenity of nearby dwellings so as to comply with Policy DR14 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

4.         This permission shall expires on 11 January 2014, after which time, the use of the MUGA and all weather pitches shall refer back to the restrictions imposed by Condition 21 of  Planning Permission DCCW0009/0958/F unless otherwise agreed in writing (planning permission) by the local planning authority.

Reason: To  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.

Date of next site inspection -  31 January 2012

Date of next meeting -            1 February 2012