Site for new school buildings and new access to extend school facilities.

Site for new school buildings and new access to extend school facilities.

The Southern Team Leader reported two typographical errors in the report. He confirmed that the word ‘protest’ should read ‘protect’ (Page 54, Para 5.3) and that ‘Director of Education’ should be replaced with ‘Director of Children’s Services’ (Page 57, Para 6.6).

He advised Members that the recommendation had been changed as a result of further discussions with the Traffic Manager and Welsh Water and that the two reasons for refusal in the report had now been resolved.

The Team Leader (Transportation Planning) confirmed that his concerns regarding forward visibility had been resolved in the independent safety audit provided by the applicant. He said that the required visibility could be provided with some excavation work to the roadside bank. He also noted that the increase in traffic would only result in an extra 120 movements per day.

The Southern Team Leader advised Members that the applicant had also agreed to provide on site sewerage treatment works if required by Welsh Water.

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

Councillor G.W. Davis, the neighbouring Ward Member, noted the concerns raised by Councillor P.G. Turpin. He had strong reservations regarding the proposed access and the general condition of the road network in the area.

Councillor J.A. Hyde had concerns in respect of the new access to the site. She also felt that Members should have been notified of the change to the recommendation sooner.

In response to a question from Councillor J.G. Jarvis, the Southern Team Leader confirmed that although part of the application site fell outside of the village settlement boundary, it would not need to be referred to the Secretary of State.

The Development Control Manager advised Members that the applicant had reached agreement with the Highways Manager in respect of the access. He felt that it would be unwise to refuse the application on Highways grounds following the receipt of the independent safety audit. He confirmed that the travel plan had not yet been received and that Members could defer consideration of the application if they felt that they needed to be in receipt of this prior to determination.

Councillor J.G. Jarvis felt that the application should be refused as it was contrary to points 1 and 2 of policy CF5 of the Herefordshire UDP in that the application did not meet the needs of the local community.

RESOLVED

That:   (i)    The Southern 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 application to the Planning Committee:

A)  The application is contrary to policy CF5 of the Herefordshire UDP.

B)The application is not accompanied with a full Travel Plan.

(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 he would not refer the decision to the Head of Planning Services.]