Due to technical difficulties the meeting had a delayed start and the meeting was unable to be recorded or live streamed.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Matthew Engel and Charlotte Taylor.

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

Councillor Pauline Crockett acted as a substitute for Councillor Charlotte Taylor.

Councillor Dianna Toynbee was present as a substitute for Councillor Matthew Engell but had to leave the meeting before it could formally commence.

To receive declarations of interests in respect of items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 25 February 2026.

A matter of accuracy was raised that needed further officers’ consideration; therefore, the minutes were deferred to the next meeting of the Planning Committee on 8 April.

Proposed improvements to existing access arrangements to facilitate the lawful use of land as allotments and ancillary works to include signs, sheds and a compostable toilet.

Application approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation and a change to conditions.

The Senior Planning Officer provided a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Manwaring as the Local Resident spoke in objection to the application. Mrs Shannon the applicant spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained he had redirected this application to committee due to the level of public comment. He was not against allotments or improving the site, but objects to the proposal as currently designed, particularly the loss/change of open space. Concerns were raised around traffic safety and access arrangements being unclear and unsafe. Attention was drawn to the lack of fencing separating the access from paths/areas used by children with a warning that vehicles reversing and limited visibility could create a serious risk to children, referencing a council motion about being “child friendly” and embedding children/young people’s wellbeing in decisions.  He queried how the plan proposed “drop-off only” and “no parking” and asked how this would be enforced highlighting the lack of nearby public parking and the prediction of rule breaking. He highlighted an online petition “Save Redhill Green, treasured Hereford Play Area” which held 750+ signatures and argued that this showed a strong local desire to retain meaningful public open space. He challenged what counted as “avoiding peak times,” as the A49 is busy most of the time and deliveries could conflict with the CDC operating hours and questioned how large vehicles/heavy equipment could access the site given the narrow lane and parked cars.

The committee debated the application. The following principal points were raised;

·       Multiple members raised concerns with site access and safety, specifically around vehicles reversing onto the A49, lack of safe stopping/parking, and the general hazard of the location, especially given nearby uses.

·       Members debated whether the proposal could lead to significant vehicle movements, especially during setup or seasonal peaks, versus the view that allotment traffic is usually low and local.

·       The impact the plan could have and worsen the already difficult parking at the Child Development Centre and interfere with its operation was raised.

·       The loss of usable open space, particularly for children and families, and discomfort with fencing off land that currently reads as open space.

·       The proposed public/open area was described as too small and unwelcoming, potentially “designed to exclude children.”

o   The Development Management Service Manager reminded the committee that there was an existing lawful use certificate allowing allotments and access via the track, meaning refusal would not stop use and that traffic could continue on the muddy track without the proposed improvements/controls. The decision needed to focus on access and ancillary works (e.g., surfacing/turning area), not re-opening the principle of allotment use.

·       Members explored adding a condition requiring details/approval of any fencing, partly to address safety/parking boundary concerns and prevent unplanned enclosure impacts.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.

A  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

Replacement of an existing gas heating boiler and balanced flue with anew gas boiler and flue together with associated repairs and alterations.

Application approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation and a change to conditions.

The Senior Planning Officer provided a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Milln spoke on behalf of Hereford City Council and Mr Peel the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application noting that from the reports that the work needed to be done and that the building was iconic and it was positive to see that it was being handled sensitively.

The committee were in agreement with the conditions suggested by the Hereford City Council with regards to the installation of a cowl to protect the flu from rain and details around the brackets used to fix the flu to be reserved for officers.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.

Councillor Stef Simmons proposed and councillor Bruce Baker seconded a motion that the application be approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation with conditions around the installation of a cowl and details around the brackets/ fixings to be reserved for the conservation officers.

The motion was put to the vote and was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED

That Listed Building Consent be granted subject to the following conditions, the additional condition as outlined above and any other further conditions considered necessary by officers named in the scheme of delegation to officers: