Apologies were received from Councillors PJ Edwards and JG Lester.

In accordance with paragraph 4.1.23 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor R Preece attended the meeting as a substitute member for Councillor PJ Edwards.

8. S113607/O - TIDNOR WOOD ORCHARDS, TIDNOR LANE, LUGWARDINE, HEREFORD, HR1 4DF..

Councillor DW Greenow, Non-Pecuniary, The Councillor previously grazed sheep on the land in question.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 30 January 2013.

The Regulatory, Environment and Litigation Solicitor  requested that the word ‘would’ be replaced with ‘could’ in the penultimate paragraph of minute number 138. One Member of the Committee requested that ‘He also advised Members that a further application would be forthcoming.’ Be added at the end of the first paragraph of minute number 136.

RESOLVED:   That subject to the amendments detailed above, the Minutes of the meeting held on 30 January 2013 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman advised the Committee that Councillor J Stone had presented him with a petition relating to solar panels within his ward prior to the meeting and that this would be handed to the Head of Neighbourhood Planning for an appropriate response.

The Head of Neighbourhood Planning advised Members that the appeal in respect of the former Pomona Works site had been received and was due to be determined by a public enquiry. He requested volunteers from the Committee to attend the appeal and help set out the Committee’s reasons for refusing the application. Councillors DW Greenow and MAF Hubbard agreed to attend the enquiry.

To update the Committee in respect of Planning Enforcement Performance for the period 1 April 2012 – 30 September 2012.

The Development Manager (Enforcement) presented a report relating to planning enforcement action undertaken throughout the County between 1 April 2012 and 30 September 2012.

One Member of the Committee felt that it would be beneficial to establish closer working links between the enforcement section and Councillors. It was considered that this would be advantageous in dealing with contentious ward issues as well as whilst formulating planning policy.

Members also discussed the time taken for enforcement action to be taken. It was noted that there were applicants who would avoid enforcement action in respect of landscape planting conditions by avoiding undertaking any planting until such a time that the weather made it unreasonable to enforce the condition. It was however further noted that the policy was currently being amended and the revised policy would include deadlines for actions.

In response to a question about the 10 year and 4 year rules regarding planning enforcement, the Team Leader advised that the policy had recently been amended in the case of developments which had been deliberately hidden from the Council. He added that the Council now had a year to take action in these such cases.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

Proposed three bedroom detached agricultural dwelling.

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

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, Dr Dowling, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Davies, representing Bartestree and Lugwardine Group Parish Council, spoke in support.

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

·         The Committee had visited the site previously in July 2012.

·         Both speakers had expressed their views well and their comments should be noted.

·         The application was a balance between the policy and the needs of a small local business.

·         Some of the orchard was extremely rare, other parts were not.

·         The applicant was keen to have a regulated site where visitors would attend on an appointment basis.

·         The application was against policy but needed to be ‘weighed up’ against the impact it would have and the needs of the business.

Two Members of the Committee opened the debate by speaking in support of the application. They noted that the apple was iconic to the county and that the preservation of the orchard was key in determining the application. The two members both felt that rural enterprise should be supported and that the proposed dwelling was modest in size. In moving approval of the application it was considered that an agricultural tie condition and a long term ecology plan would be two necessary conditions. The use of a wet system for the drainage on the site was also proposed.

The Head of Neighbourhood Planning addressed the Committee in respect of the key policy issues required for consideration in determining the application. He advised Members that the policy supported orchards and their protection through biodiversity action plans. However the policy stated that it needed to be essential for the proper functioning of the business for residents to be there at all times, as the application related to 25 acres of orchards he did not feel that this policy requirement had been met especially as it was noted in the report that the applicant did not make the cider.

Another Member of the Committee spoke and said that he would like to support the application as he wanted to support small local businesses, however he considered that it would be irresponsible for the Committee to grant planning permission at this time. He advised Members that Community Interest Companies operated in a number of different ways with some paying dividends to shareholders, some also operated under an ‘asset lock’ basis. He requested further clarification in respect of the enterprise being considered. In summing up he had concerns in respect of the financial history presented by the applicant and questioned whether there was a long term genuine need for a dwelling on the site.

Other Members discussed the application and agreed that the essential need test had not been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 147.

Demolition and replacement of 2 no. bay windows to NE elevation with tiled roof and associated terrace, replacement windows to include minor revisions to fenestrations, replacement and additional rooflights, and minor internal alterations.  Construction of new detached double garage and a new pitched roof to existing garage.

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

The Development Manager (Hereford and Southern Localities) gave a presentation on the application. He advised the Committee that the application had been bought before them as it had been submitted by a member of staff employed within the planning department.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

2.         B02 Development in accordance with approved plans and materials

3.         F07 Domestic use only of garage

4.         F08 No conversion of garage to habitable accommodation

5.         F13 Restriction on separate sale

Reason for Approval

1.         The application represents an extension and alterations of acceptable size, scale and form which are in keeping with and subservient to the original dwelling and its character as a converted agricultural building, resulting in no adverse impact upon adjoining residential amenity or the character and appearance of this open countryside location. Furthermore the proposal is considered to satisfy Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan policies S1, S2, DR1, DR2, H18 and HBA13 and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

INFORMATIVES:

1.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations, including any representations that have been received. It has subsequently determined to grant planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework. 

Date of next site inspection:   12 March 2013

Date of next meeting:              13 March 2013