For:      Border Oak Design & Construction Ltd, Kingsland Sawmills,   Kingsland,  Leominster,  Herefordshire, HR6 9SF

Ward: Wormsley Ridge

Erection of detached house and ancillary garage and formation of new vehicular access.

Councillor J.C. Mayson, the Local Ward Member, noted that Wellington Parish Council had objections to the application and said that he shared the concerns raised.  Councillor Mayson noted that the Traffic Manager recommended conditions but he felt that the access arrangements would result in unacceptable risks to highway safety.  He also felt that the development would have a detrimental visual impact on the area.

A number of Members commented on the narrowness of the carriageway and felt that the proposed access arrangements would comprise highway safety.  Furthermore, to provide the access and accommodate the visibility splays required, a length of boundary hedge would need to be removed but it was felt that this would have a significant impact on the character and setting of the rural lane.  It was also felt that the elevated nature of the site would mean that the development would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area.

The Development Control Manager commented that the Traffic Manager was satisfied with the application but noted that Members’ concerns about the impact of the removal of the hedgerow was a material planning consideration.  Given the size of the application site, he did not feel that refusal on the grounds of overdevelopment or density could be sustained. 

In response to a comment about the impact on an adjacent dwelling, the Central Team Leader clarified the orientation of the proposal and the distances between nearby buildings.

Some Members felt that more suitable access might be achieved via the existing access to Jabrin House.

RESOLVED:

That   (i)   The Central Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application subject to the reasons for refusal set out below (and any further reasons for refusal felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services) provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the applications to the Planning Committee:

1.      The proposal would necessitate the removal of a large section of hedgerow along this sunken lane which in itself would have a detrimental visual impact on its character and appearance.  Furthermore the opening up of the site to form the access, by reason of its prominent and elevated nature, coupled with the size and scale of the proposed dwelling would detract from the attractive open and rural character of the site and surroundings.  The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies DR1, H4 and H13 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan (Revised Deposit Draft).

2.      The proposal, in the absence of the removal of the roadside hedgerow would fail to provide a safe and adequate means of access to the site and would therefore be contrary to Policies DR1 and H13 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan (Revised Deposit Draft).

(ii)  If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, Officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be instructed to refuse the application, subject to such reasons for refusal referred to above.

[Note: Following the vote on this application, the Development Control Manager advised that, although the resolution was contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, he was not minded to refer the matter to the Head of Planning Services given the grounds for refusal put forward by the Sub-Committee.]