For:            Ledbury Allotment Association per Mr R Gardner, 123 Park Road, Barton Under Needwood, Staffordshire  DE13 8DD

Ward: Ledbury

The Principal Planning Officer said that a further letter of representation had been received from the agent for the applicant making the following points:

• the report omitted the applicant’s offer to spread a layer of top soil onto the proposed track and to spread grass seed in order to promote the growth of grass and the CPRE view that this would ensure minimal impact on the landscape;

• the report failed to mention Policy CF5 of the Unitary Development Plan that provided support for the provision of community facilities;

• the site was within easy walking distance of a number of houses on the south-western side of town and it was an Officer assumption that users are unlikely to arrive by bus;

• the association was confident that due to the profile of their members at least 50% (and probably higher) of trips to the site would be by means other than car;

• following a survey of allotment association’s members, the association was confident that at least 75% of trips to the site would be either by foot or bicycle.  The survey only revealed seven members who would travel to the allotments by car;

• a significant proportion of the roadside hedge could be retained;

• the proposed replacement hedge would only take 1 or 2 years to establish itself, not 20 ;

• there was a contradiction in the Council’s Landscape Assessment - The Council was attempting to retain a riverside meadow whilst proposing a wet woodland in mitigation;

• the applicant had offered the planting of a hedgerow on the western side of the proposed access track;

• the issue of the requirement for future storage buildings was not a matter under consideration; and

• the report failed to stress the support for the proposal afforded by policies S8 and RST1.

The Principal Planning Officer said that the officer response to these issues is as follows:

• the undertaking to spread soil and grass seed on the proposed track surface is welcomed in principle but unlikely to be successful in practice with the following likely:

·         Gilbert & Anderson – Habitat Creation & Management (1998 OUP) explained at some length the difficulties of grassland establishment in non-normal conditions as well as normal.  The likelihood of floristic habitat establishment in this situation was low that even should the application be approved, a condition requiring the seeding of this track would be unreasonable;

• Policy CF5 of the Unitary Development Plan related to the provision of community facilities (to the general public) within buildings as opposed to open-air recreational uses.  Nevertheless it was accepted that in addition to being a recreational facility the provision of allotments may afford a wider community benefit;

• the allotments would be approximately 520 metres from the Ross Road, approximately 800 metres to the south-west of the Ross Road (A449) and A417 roundabout and approximately one mile from the central parts of the primary residential areas of Ledbury;

• whilst the association surveys may represent the intentions of members, it may be a different matter when actual usage occurs and, particularly some years hence, is measured.  There did not appear to have been any survey work relating to existing allotment sites in other locations in terms of distances travelled and modes of transport used.  The application drawing showed the provision of 16 car parking spaces, presumed to be based on the applicant’s anticipated need;

• the Officer’s recollection of the site meeting was different to the Agent - it was clearly demonstrated (sighting between garden canes) that approximately half of the hedge along the 160 metres of visibility splay would need to be removed and a further 10-15m would probably be no longer viable, having been reduced so much as to cause individual plants to fail.  This was a significant proportion to be removed and a significant section of it would be required to be removed for the visibility splay to be achieved contrary to policy LA5.  Although it was possible to recreate a hedge of the same height in two years, the sane maturity of width and density would take a considerably longer period of time;

• landscape character – little could be added other than that the preferred option would be to have a restoration of the floristic value of the riverside meadow.  No change in the character of the meadows would be preferred and development should be avoided.  If an access track or any other feature was be approved, then assimilation should be attempted.  The Officers did not consider the introduction of the track into the landscape acceptable and that it would have a detrimental impact on the character of the landscape

• grassing over – during the site meeting it was confirmed that agricultural access tracks were an element in most agricultural landscapes.  It was pointed out that they are not necessarily a defining element in a landscape and the typically wet conditions in low lying landscapes often discouraged the repeated use of one track.

• whilst the Allotment Association were willing to undertake landscaping, there was insufficient land within their control to secure an appropriate scheme.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Baker spoke in favour of his application.

Councillor DW Rule one of the Local Ward Members said that the Ledbury Allotments Association had been searching for a suitable site for a number of years.  The application site had been identified as being the only one available that was within a reasonable distance of the town.  He said that their was a strong community need for allotments in the area and the Association had found that the likelihood of finding a more appropriate site closer to the Town at a price that was affordable to them was unlikely.  He pointed out that the owner of the land frequently held sales of agricultural vehicles and car boot sales upon it and felt that the existing access was adequate and would not necessitate removal of the hedge.

Councillor BF Ashton another Local Ward Member concurred with the views of Councillor Rule and felt that the access track way and allotments would not be too obtrusive on the landscape.  The Principal Planning Officer reiterated the planning and ecological grounds for refusing the application.  The Sub-Committee discussed the merits of a site inspection but noted that any further delays could result in the association loosing the site.  Councillor Mrs JP French felt that if permission was granted there should be careful controls over any sheds that were erected on site.  The Northern Team Leader advised that there were no permitted development rights and that planning permission would need to be sought for such facilities.

Having considered all the aspects of the application, the Sub-Committee felt that notwithstanding the advise of the Officers, permission should be granted.

RESOLVED:

That    (i) The Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to approve the application subject to any conditions felt to be necessary by the Development Control Manager, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee.

(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 approve the application in consultation with the Local Ward Members and subject to such conditions referred to above.

[Note: Following the vote on this application, the Development Control Manager advised that he would not refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.]