To receive questions from members of the public.

The Chairman reminded Council that under the Constitution a member of the public could ask a Cabinet Member or Chairman of a Committee any question relevant to a matter in relation to which the Council had powers or duties, or which affected the County, as long as a copy of that question was deposited with the Assistant Chief Executive, Legal and Democratic Services more than six clear working days before the meeting.

The Chairman advised the Council that 14 submissions had been lodged by members of the public, with the majority relating to the planning application by Bloor Homes at Bullinghope and the Rotherwas access road.  In order to deal with all the questions the Chairman advised the Council that the Cabinet Member Environment and Strategic Housing would provide a composite answer to those questions asked by the majority relating to Bloor Homes and the Rotherwas access road and that following the meeting, individual written responses would be sent to each individual who had submitted a question.  It was additionally stated that the questions and their responses would be individually minuted for the record (and are attached as appendix 2 to the minutes).

 

Composite answer provided by Councillor J Jarvis, Cabinet Member for Environment and Strategic Housing

 

(a)   Position on Planning Application

(i)      The application to develop 300 dwellings on land at Bullinghope, Hereford (DCCE2008/0970/F) was submitted on 3 April 2008.  A detailed Environmental Statement and other supporting information have been submitted and are available for public scrutiny and comment.  No detailed timetable has been established for the determination of the application.  A separate but related challenge to the allocation of the site in the UDP would be considered in the Royal Court of Justice on 26 and 27 June 2008.  The Council is currently carrying out detailed consultations with statutory consultees and local groups.  At this stage elements of the detailed information raised in some of the questions is not available at this stage of the processing of the application.

 

(b)    Financial Position of the Rotherwas Access Relief Road

 

(i)      Bloor Homes first broached the possibility of residential development at Bullinghope making provision for related road infrastructure in their submission to a public consultation entitled 'Planning for the New Millennium' in 1999.  This was linked to the then safeguarded route of the former Hereford bypass scheme in this locality. This route was also taken as a basis for the Rotherwas Access Road.  As a public consultation, the results of this were appraised by officers and reported to members following usual processes.

 

(ii)     The Rotherwas Access Road is being funded as part of the Rotherwas Futures Project.  The road element of the project is already fully funded by the Council and Advantage West Midlands and does not rely on a contribution from Bloor Homes.  The Actual spend to date on the project is £10,524,810.   The funding of spend to date is Advantage West Midlands £6,500,000.  Council Local Transport Plan funding £1,817,076.  Council Prudential borrowing £2,207,734.  The estimated final cost is £12,780,000. 

 

(c)     The High Court Challenge

(i)      The application issued by Dinedor Residents Association Limited seeking a review of a proposed site for residential development at Bullinghope will be heard by the High Court at London on the 26 and 27 June 2008.  In readiness for that hearing a schedule of costs will be produced to the court by the Council, encompassing all legal costs up to and including the date of the hearing, incorporating Counsel's fees and any disbursements incurred in traveling to London, overnight accommodation and similar expenses.  It is not possible to identify what sum will be submitted to both the court and to the Claimant, by a schedule of costs at this stage.  The schedules are ordinarily submitted on the week of the hearing, so that all professional time can be captured.  In answer therefore to the question no estimated costs have yet been submitted to the court as to do so would be wholly premature.

 

(ii)     The Protective Costs Order obtained by the Claimant is for an overall figure of £15,000.  The Claimant has not identified how this figure was generated, although the court considered that the sum was an appropriate level to which the Claimant's liability for the Council's costs should be limited, in the event that the Claimant was unsuccessful in those proceedings.  In the event that the Claimant is unsuccessful and the Council is awarded its costs, the said sum of £15,000 would be used to pay for professional time and disbursements of the sort identified in the answer above.

 

(d)    Highway Issues

(i)      There is no specific threshold relating to the requirement or not for contributions to public transport. A range of options would normally be considered including; the provision of new infrastructure (bus shelters with high level kerbs for disabled access), the diversion of an existing bus service to serve a new development (this would need to consider the benefits to new users against the increased journey time for existing users) or ultimately the provision of an entirely new service (this would require a substantial developer contribution to cover the cost of a 3-5 year contract). The Council will consider this application in respect of a wide range of sustainable transport issues including improvements to public transport provision. 

 

(ii)     The Transportation Service is currently reviewing the Transport Assessment supplied with the application. This will include comparison with assessment of the site during the UDP Inquiry and liaison with the Highways Agency with respect to impacts on the trunk road network. As this review has not yet been completed it is not possible to comment in detail on the comment included in the question.  The result of this review will be submitted to the planning officer for consideration and inclusion in the report on the application. 

 

(e)    Housing Values & Affordable Housing

(i)      The issue of the market value of houses is not a material planning consideration.  In the event that the application is granted planning permission it will be for the developer to set its own marketing strategy.

 

(ii)     Neither the Central Area Planning Sub-Committee nor the Planning Committee has yet considered the application.  When the application is reported to Committee it will be for Members to balance up the issues and any planning obligations, in general, and the absence of affordable housing in particular. 

 

(f)     Archaeological Issues

(i)      The Council’s Archaeologist is liaising with contractors acting for Bloor Homes to identify the scale and nature of the archaeological importance of the site.  Contractors working for Bloor Homes are completing a full evaluation process as set out in PPG 16. This will allow the County Archaeologist to have an appropriate opportunity to assess the results before the Committee determines the application. Additional consultation will be carried out on the completed evaluation. 

 

(g)    The Proposed Section 106 Agreement

(i)      The planning application proposes a financial contribution to Rotherwas Futures.  This is unspecified and will be the subject of detailed discussions between the Council and Bloor Homes around the scale and nature of any planning obligations package in the event that planning permission is forthcoming. 

 

(ii)     The planning application proposes a financial contribution of £40,000 towards local libraries including Belmont Library and £40,000 towards Belmont Community facility.  This part of the proposed application will also be considered in the detailed discussions to be arranged. These discussions will explore the opportunities that exist to secure community facilities in the three mentioned wards and others in the City.  

 

(h)    Technical Matters

(i)      Welsh Water is one of the statutory Consultees on the Planning Application.  Council officers have consulted Welsh Water on the application and are awaiting their response. 

 

(j)      Rotherwas Industrial Estate and Rotherwas Futures

 

(i)      The issues of sustainable residential design have been discussed with the applicant and the application proposes the following features:

-                      surface water drainage through a private system.

-                      the use of sustainable drainage techniques where possible.

-                      construction methods to respect the Code of Sustainability themes.

(ii)     The asset valuation for the Council owned part of Rotherwas Industrial Estate for 01/04/08 is £10,850,000.  This figure is provided for financial regulation purposes and not as a value for the Council.  

(iii)    The applicant has had detailed discussions with the Environment Agency as part of the submission of the application.  The details of Flood Risk and Water Resources are set out in Section 15 of the Environmental Statement.  The Association of Rotherwas Enterprises indicated its support for the housing development at Bullinghope prior to the start of construction of the Access Road and has made no comment for or against it since construction started. 

 

Questions from Mr R Steeds, Bringsty, Worcestershire

 

SCHOOL CLOSURES

 

Prospective Bromyard school parents and current teachers need to know which policy the Council are following?  This cannot wait until 2011 as determined people will seek the best long term outcome for themselves and their families and will seek to avoid uncertainty.

 

As it seems geographic considerations and current educational performance are not to be criteria for school assessment in the matter then it is reasonable to ask the Council to list the criteria they will consider?

 

Answer from Cllr J Hyde, Cabinet Member Children’s Services:

The Council is not considering the closure of any school, and therefore the identification of criteria  to give schools 'a degree of protection' is irrelevant.

 

The Council has invited schools in their areas to discuss if and how falling numbers of children will affect schools, and what action could be taken to mitigate any problems. We are aware the schools in the Bromyard Area have already begun this debate and we look forward to seeing positive outcomes from this, which may provide not only ideas for other areas of the County but possibly for other areas of the country.

 

THE GOVERNANCE OF BROMYARD DOWNS

 

(i) In December 2006 the Cabinet responded with an action plan involving proper consultation to be completed by April 2007.  Nothing happened.

(ii) When can we expect a response?

(iii) Why has the District Council involved Legal Counsel?  Surely this cost is not justified and if needed should be AFTER consultation NOT BEFORE.

(iv) Is the District Council aware that the Commons Management Committee, to whom it has been formally delegated financial responsibility, spent just £49 on the Common in the year 2006/07?

(v) How much did Herefordshire District Council spend on the Bromyard Downs Common “physically and administratively” in 2006/07?

(vi) Why did Herefordshire Council spend anything?

(vii) Are the Commons Management Committee’s accounts properly audited and incorporated into the Parish Council’s accounts?  If not, why not?  Have the District Council ever inspected the accounts?

 

Answer from Councillor A Blackshaw, Cabinet Member Economic Development and Community Services

Mr Steeds is referring to the Consultation process last year. The consultation documentation has been prepared following Counsels advice. This will be circulated shortly to all interested parties, including the User Groups, Committee Management Group and Parish Councils and others. The issues raised over the current arrangements involve complex legal issues which have required adequate advice.

 

I would invite all concerned to participate in the consultation to express their views for further consideration.

 

The accounts for the Management Committee are open for inspection and copies are available at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Commons Management Committee.

The Council paid for the “Firebreak” cutting, but no separate account is kept of the amount of time spent on individual commons.

Herefordshire Council owns the common and therefore has overall responsibility for it.

The Management Committees accounts are completely separate from the parish Councils. The accounts are available and they are handed out at the AGM.  There is no requirement in the management agreement for Herefordshire Council to audit the accounts

 

LINTON TILE WORKS

 

 (i) Why does the Council say it has no right to repair the access road?  Surely it has a duty to see the road is repaired.  No good will come by threatening the existing owners with the law.  Surely the Council should seek their cooperation and pay most if not all the costs?  Has there been any joint meeting of all the parties with an interest in the road?

 

(ii) When can we expect to see the road improved?

 

(iii) As the road is so poor would the Council allow 4x4’s and trailers to use the site “domestically”?

 

Answer from Councillor J Jarvis Cabinet Member Environment and Strategic Housing

 

The access road is a private road in private ownership; the Council only has access rights over the road and a requirement to contribute to the cost for the maintenance. The Council has no right to maintain it the road and whatever works the Council did would have to be by agreement with the owners. The registered owners have been written to with a request that they confirm they still are the owners and requesting that they carry out works for which the Council will contribute. The Council could, if the owners agree the specification and how much each party contributes, carry out the works. There are three registered owners, so far a response from only one of the owners.

Vehicles with trailers and 4x4's can use the Household waste sites across Herefordshire and Worcestershire for domestic waste recycling and disposal as long as they are driven by a resident and have a "Commercial vehicle & trailer permit". The permit system was brought into effect in April 2007 to ensure that only residents with household (domestic) waste used these sites rather than traders using it as a free tip. Permits are available to residents by ringing 0845 607 2007.

 

MALVERN ROAD, BRINGSTY

 

 (i) Who authorised the work?

(ii) Why were the proper authorities not consulted?

(iii) Whose budget is expected to pay for it?

(iv) The work is neither sufficient nor complete.  Can we be assured that the job will be completed to the satisfaction of both the Land Agent and the victims?

(v) When will the Council implement Mr Grover’s simple recommendations and bring to an end this era of mismanagement?

 

Answer from Councillor A Blackshaw Cabinet Member Economic Development and Community Services

The Bromyard Downs Management Committee are entitled to make management decisions under the Schedule of Regulations, which under paragraph three includes drainage works.  The matter was discussed with the Committee and an executive decision was made to employ Mr Poyner to do the work.

There is no obligation for Herefordshire Council to be consulted, although various Council officers were consulted, mainly highways.

The Management Committee will be paying for the works.

The work has yet to be completed and the Herefordshire Council drainage officer will be consulted before it is completed.

The Council are shortly to issue consultation on the governance issues regarding the Downs to include all interested parties.