Apologies were received from Councillors MAF Hubbard, Brig P Jones, JG Lester, RI Matthews and DB Wilcox.

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

In accordance with paragraph 4.1.23 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor JLV Kenyon attended the meeting as a substitute member for Councillor MAF Hubbard and Councillor R Preece substituted for Councillor RI Matthews.

Agenda item 7: P140844/O - Proposed Erection Of 4 No. Three Bedroom Detached Dwellings On Land At The Sun Inn, Off The A438, Winforton, Herefordshire.

Councillor JW Hope MBE declared a non-pecuniary interest as he was an occasional customer at a number of the public houses within his ward.

Agenda item 8: P140495/F - Development Of 1 Dwelling With Off Street Parking And Garden. At Land Adjacent To, 7 Milvern Close, Bromyard, Herefordshire.

Councillor GR Swinford declared a disclosable pecuniary interest as he was a Partner in the Page Swinford Partnership who had acted as agents for the application.  He left the meeting for the duration of this item.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 May 2014.

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 May 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

There were no announcements.

Proposed erection of 3 no. three bedroom detached dwellings and 2 no. two bedroom semi-detached Dwellings.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and noted an additional representation had been received.  This was referred to in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.  He clarified that whilst the original application had been for 3 three bedroom detached dwellings and 2 two bedroom semi-detached dwellings the application before the Committee was for 4 three bedroom detached dwellings.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor JW Hope MBE the local ward member, spoke on the application. He referred to paragraphs 6.6, 6.9 and 6.11 of the report which concluded that the principle of small scale development of the site was acceptable.

The debate opened and the following principal points were made:

·         Some concern was expressed about the access to the development.  Further information was sought on a recent appeal decision referred to in the report that had concluded that the junction met minimum national highway standards.  The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the Planning Inspector in considering an application for development at Winforton Wood had considered the access of the ‘Common Road’ junction with the A438 to be acceptable.  The officer added that he could not support an alternative proposed access through the Sun Inn car park because of the potential effect upon the viability of the Inn.

·         The Council’s lack of a 5 year housing land supply was clearly a key factor given that the report stated that the proposal was contrary to the housing policies in the Unitary Development Plan.  However, it was requested that where sites were granted permission in such a context every effort should be made to ensure that the development was of high quality design and included the best energy and water efficiency measures.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He commented that he considered the access to be suitable.

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

Development of one dwelling with off street parking.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, with additional conditions.

(Councillor GJ Swinford left the meeting for the duration of this item.)

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr R Page, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor A Seldon, one of the local ward members, spoke on the application.

He commented that he had no objection to the development in principle.  However, the site level was uneven and there was public concern about the stability of the boundary walls and that instability of the ground itself potentially made development unsafe.

The debate opened and the following principal points were made:

·         The Development Manager commented that additional conditions could be imposed to ensure the current and future stability of the site including all boundary walls.  A condition could also be imposed to ensure appropriate surfacing was used to ensure permeability for surface water.

·         Paragraph 4.2, containing an objection from the Traffic Manager relating to car parking and cycle storage, appeared to be in conflict with paragraph 6.4.  The Development Manager confirmed that revised proposals which included parking for the existing dwelling and cycle storage for the new dwelling had been put forward and the Traffic Manager was now content with the application.

·         The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He indicated that he was content with the proposed additional conditions.

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

New dwelling.

The application was approved, contrary to 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, as appended to these Minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr J Hinton, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor JW Millar, the local ward member, spoke on the application.

He commented on a number of issues including:

·         The principal reason for the Planning Officer recommending refusal was his view that the application did not meet the National Planning Policy Framework’s (NPPF’s) definition of sustainable development.

·         The site was well screened had other properties nearby and was within the village.

·         The site was closer to the school than to the centre of the village.  The family’s two children would contribute to the school’s sustainability.

·         The applicant had local connections.

·         The Parish Council supported the application.

·         UDP Policy H6 (housing in smaller settlements) might preclude the development but the New Draft Core Strategy policy RA1 required the growth of villages, including Stoke Prior, and the NPPF said that emerging strategy should be given weight.

In conclusion his view was that the application did represent sustainable development.

The debate opened and the following principal points were made:

·         The application would develop a brownfield site and provide a dwelling of a high quality sustainable design.  The applicant had confirmed that he wished to build a sustainable dwelling to Passsivhaus standards for his family.

·         The NPPF was opposed to isolated dwellings.  The view was expressed that the application site was not isolated.  In reply the Development Manager commented that the site was isolated, divorced from the settlement of Stoke Prior and surrounded by green field sites.  He directed the Committee’s attention to the definition of the characteristics of sustainable development, acknowledging that there was a degree of subjectivity involved.  He added that if a recommendation to grant permission were to be made this should include Passivhaus house conditions to align with the sustainability aspects being considered by Members.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated his view that the application site was not isolated and represented sustainable development of a brownfield site.

A proposal that there should be a site visit was lost.

The Committee discussed reasons for granting permission.  The Legal Officer suggested that the grounds for approval could be summarised as a view that the development is in fact sustainable development and that the benefits of the application outweighed any adverse impact.

RESOLVED:  That planning permission be granted on the grounds that the application represents sustainable development in accordance with paragraph 14 Of the National Planning Policy Framework and is of benefit to the community and officers named in the scheme of delegation be authorised to finalise conditions which shall include the Passivhaus conditions.

INFORMATIVE

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Date of next site inspection – 24 June 2014

Date of next meeting – 25 June 2014