Apologies were received from Councillors PA Andrews, JG Lester, G Lucas, RI Matthews and PJ Watts.

In accordance with paragraph 4.1.23 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillors TM James, P Rone, JA Hyde and WLS Bowen attended the meeting as substitute members for Councillors PA Andrews, JG Lester, G Lucas and RI Matthews.

7. N120896/F, N121877/F & N121981/F - TYRRELLS COURT, STRETFORD, LEOMINSTER, HEREFORDSHIRE HR6 9DQ.

Councillor DW Greenow, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is a Member of the River Lugg Internal Drainage Board.

7. N120896/F, N121877/F & N121981/F - TYRRELLS COURT, STRETFORD, LEOMINSTER, HEREFORDSHIRE HR6 9DQ.

Councillor FM Norman, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is a Member of the River Lugg Internal Drainage Board.

7. N120896/F, N121877/F & N121981/F - TYRRELLS COURT, STRETFORD, LEOMINSTER, HEREFORDSHIRE HR6 9DQ.

Councillor J Hardwick, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is a Member of the River Lugg Internal Drainage Board.

7. N120896/F, N121877/F & N121981/F - TYRRELLS COURT, STRETFORD, LEOMINSTER, HEREFORDSHIRE HR6 9DQ.

Councillor WLS Bowen, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is a Member of the River Lugg Internal Drainage Board.

8. S121083/F & S121084/L - BROCKHAMPTON COURT, BROCKHAMPTON, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4TQ.

Councillor J Hardwick, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor knows the applicant and is also a Member of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

8. S121083/F & S121084/L - BROCKHAMPTON COURT, BROCKHAMPTON, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4TQ.

Councillor JA Hyde, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is a Member of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

8. S121083/F & S121084/L - BROCKHAMPTON COURT, BROCKHAMPTON, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4TQ.

Councillor PGH Cutter, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor is Vice-Chairman of the Wye Valley AONB Joint Advisory Committee.

8. S121083/F & S121084/L - BROCKHAMPTON COURT, BROCKHAMPTON, HEREFORDSHIRE, HR1 4TQ.

M Robinson (Officer), Non-Pecuniary, The Officer knows the applicant in a professional capacity (The Officer chose to leave the meeting for the duration of the item)

10. S120972/CD - OUR LADY'S PRIMARY SCHOOL, BOYCOTT ROAD, HEREFORD, HR2 7RN.

Councillor JA Hyde, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor was previously the Cabinet Member for Children's Services.

10. S120972/CD - OUR LADY'S PRIMARY SCHOOL, BOYCOTT ROAD, HEREFORD, HR2 7RN.

Councillor P Rone, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor knows the Public Speaker.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 19 September 2012.

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting held on 19 September 2012 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Head of Neighbourhood Planning advised Members that there was a Planning Enforcement Session planned for the 30 October 2012 and that this session was open to all Members.

He also advised that the next meeting of the Planning Committee, scheduled for 7 November 2012, would be an all-day meeting.

The Chairman notified the Committee that Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes, a long standing Member of the Planning Committee, was being moved to the newly formed Health Scrutiny Committee and that she would be replaced by Councillor A Powers from the next meeting. He thanked her for her hard work and contribution over the previous years.

Change of use of building 1 from agricultural building to storage; change of use and adaptation of old factory building (building 2) from offices and storage to offices, storage and manufacturing.

Provision of a sprinkler system comprising the erection of a water tank and pump room building.

Erection of a 26 metre stack together with the provision of ducting and other associated infrastructure, together with the removal of roof mounted fans from production plant (building 3).

The applications were 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.

He advised that there were three separate applications that had been presented to the Committee in one composite report. The first application had been deferred previously by the committee due to further information being required regarding odour and traffic issues. As a result of the deferral the applicant had now agreed to amend the traffic management plan which was subject of an earlier application to require all HGV’s to leave the site in a Northerly direction. In respect of the odour issue related to the production of popcorn, the Principal Planning Officer drew members’ attention to the comments of the odour consultant.

He advised Members that the second application was a retrospective application for a water tank and pumphouse for a sprinkler system on the site. He added that the primary concerns in respect of the application appeared to be the visual impact of the water tank, although he was of the opinion that this had been addressed through condition 2 of his recommendation.

The third application was for a 26 metre high chimney stack which had been identified as a consequence of an earlier permission requiring the applicant to reduce odour resulting from the production of potato chips. He advised Members that the three year commencement condition should be replaced with a condition requiring the chimney stack to be completed within a specified period.  Upon consultation with the applicant, a period of eight months was considered to be reasonable, and an appropriately worded condition to reflect this was suggested. He also drew Members’ attention to the Committee Update Sheet and noted that there had been two letters received regarding odour from the manufacture of popcorn and not one letter as previously stated.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Ms Ford and Mr Block, two of the neighbouring residents, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Worrall, representing the applicants, spoke in support.

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

·         That he supported Tyrell’s as a brand and a company.

·         That Tyrell’s should not expand its existing site any further due to the impact it would have on the neighbouring residents.

·         Any proposal needed to be sustainable.

·         He had no objection to the water tank application subject to it being painted a suitable colour.

·         He could not support the second application as it was an expansion to the current enterprise.

·         He could not support the chimney stack application as there were more sustainable methods of filtration that had not been fully investigated. The stack would also have an unacceptable impact on the landscape.

A member of the Committee opened the debate by speaking in support of the three applications. He did however note that it was a difficult balance between the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

Proposed extension to residential care home, new nurses accommodation and sheltered housing units with garaging.

The application was approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Dr Allen, the applicant, spoke in support of his application.

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

·         The application was sustainable and was therefore in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

·         There had been extensive discussions between the planning department and the conservation team.

·         The additional 23 bedrooms would also result in additional employment.

·         The facility would offer specialist stroke care to NHS patients.

·         The methods of nursing adopted would result in less confusion and fear for dementia sufferers.

·         The home was nationally recognised and achieved an ‘excellent’ rating from the CQC.

Members noted that the application had been bought before them as the case officer considered it to be contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy H7. It was however the officer’s opinion that the application was in accordance with the majority of other saved UDP policies as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. The Committee considered that the benefits of approving the application would outweigh the policy issues at stake.

Members noted that there was a growing need for high quality care facilities throughout the County and also noted that applicants experience in this field. They welcomed the applicants approach to multi-staged care and were of the opinion that this would be beneficial to patients and should therefore be encouraged.

The Committee raised the issue of sustainability with some Members of the view that the development should be completed to a high level of energy efficiency. The Principal Planning Officer was unable to advise the Committee as to the level of efficiency that the development would be built to. One Member of the Committee felt that this was an important matter and should be included in future committee reports.

Councillor Durkin was given the opportunity to close the debate. He reiterated his opening remarks and requested that the application be approved.

RESOLVED

Subject to the completion of a S.106 Agreement, securing control over the future occupation of the sheltered and nurses’ accommodation, officers, named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers, be authorised to grant planning permission and listed building consent subject to the following conditions:

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

2.         B03 Amended plans

3.         C01 Samples of external materials

4.         F14 Removal of permitted development rights

5.         H30 Travel plans

6.         G04 Protection of trees/hedgerows that are to be retained

7.         G10 Landscaping scheme

8.         G11 Landscaping scheme - implementation

9.         The recommendations in the ecologist's report dated 1st November 2011 shall be followed.  Prior to the commencement of development a full working method statement based on these recommendations should be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and shall be implemented as approved.

Reason:

10.       Prior to the commencement of development, a habitat enhancement and management scheme should be submitted to and approved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.

Conversion of garage/workshop/office to holiday let.

The application was refused contrary to the case officer’s recommendation.

The 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 Davies, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application.

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

·         The application had been bought before the committee so all of the facts surrounding it could be examined fully.

·         The site had a chequered planning history as outlined in the Officer’s report.

·         The previous planning consent was raised in height with additional windows added and then had to be resubmitted for a retrospective approval which was only allowed on appeal.

·         If approved the application would be contrary to the condition imposed by the Planning Inspector at the previous appeal.

·         Significant weight should be given to the condition imposed by the Planning Inspector relating to the garage not being used for trade or business.

In response to a question from the Committee, the Planning Officer confirmed that the recently erected poultry unit was 53 metres away from that proposed dwelling. In response to an additional question she advised that the condition imposed by the Planning Inspector related to the usage as a domestic garage and would not be relevant if the change of use was permitted.

Members discussed the application and had concerns in respect of a perceived non-compliance of previous planning conditions. However their primary concern in respect of the application related to the close proximity of the holiday let and the existing poultry unit. For this reason the Committee considered the application to be contrary to Policy RST12 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Members also had concerns in respect of the possibility of a further change of use of the holiday let to enable it to be used as an additional farm dwelling. Although they noted that this was not a material planning consideration. They also had concerns in respect of the sustainability of the proposed holiday let due to its remote rural location.

Members continued to voice their concerns regarding a perceived failure to comply with planning conditions and requested clarification from the case officer as to whether enforcement action had been commenced or whether she could confirm that planning conditions had been complied with. In response she confirmed that she had visited the site and that the landscaping condition referred to by the neighbouring resident had been complied with, she added that as far as she was aware all conditions relating to the poultry unit had also been complied with.

The Development Manager advised Members that the points raised during the debate indicated that in the Committee’s opinion the application was contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies DR2, RST12 and S1 due to the incompatibility of the land uses and the remote location of the proposed holiday let. The Planning Officer added that the issue of phosphates in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

Continued use of mobile building to house pre-school – new 5 year lease to be agreed, so permission required to 2017.

The application was 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.

Councillor P Rone, one of the local ward members, advised the Committee that he knew the public speaker. He declared a non-pecuniary interest in the application which was recorded by the Democratic Services Officer accordingly.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Coultas, speaking on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

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

·         The recommendation for a 12 month permission was welcomed and a sensible compromise.

·         The nursery staff needed to communicate concerns related to vehicles turning in neighbouring residents’ driveways.

The Committee discussed the application and were of the opinion that a12 month permission would be appropriate to give the nursery staff sufficient time to address the current concerns in respect of dropping off and picking up of children.

One Member of the Committee was of the opinion that the concerns raised in the report could also relate to a number of schools throughout the County and requested that a letter be sent to Children’s Services to raise the issue and ensure that other schools with a similar problem at drop off and pick up times addressed the problem in a responsible manner.

The Committee noted that the Transport Manager had ‘significant concerns’ in respect of the application, Members also had concerns regarding child safety at busy times due to vehicles reversing on pavements to turn in the road. The Committee suggested that closer working between the school, the nursery and the Church could result in a more appropriate long term solution.

In response to comments raised throughout the debate, the Principal Planning Officer advised Members that the school had an existing school travel plan; that the site was in shared ownership between the Church and the Council and that the recent traffic monitoring had shown an improvement at peak times.

Councillor Rone was given the opportunity to close the debate but chose to make no further statement.

RECOMMENDATION

That temporary planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.         F20 Temporary permission, for one year, and reinstatement of land (one year).

2.         Within one month of the date of this permission a traffic management plan relating to the parking of vehicles and access to the pre-school / nursery shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Travel management shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and a detailed written record shall be kept of the measures undertaken to prevent parking in Boycott Road / promote parking within the Church car park. Documentation shall be made available for inspection upon reasonable request by the local planning authority.

In the interests of highway safety having regard to Policy DR3 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

Date of next site inspection:   6 November 2012

Date of next meeting:              7 November 2012 at 10:00 am

Please note that there will also be an extraordinary meeting of the Planning Committee on 7 November 2012 at 2:00 pm.