Site for erection of affordable home.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided; the schedule of committee updates is appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Allcock, representing Mr and Mrs Meek, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Minton, the applicant, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor PD Price, the local ward members, commented on a number of issues, including:

• The previous application was withdrawn and not refused as stated at 3.1 of the report.
• The applicant’s son suffered from Prada Willi syndrome resulting in learning difficulties and an eating disorder.
• The applicant’s son required almost constant supervision and there were 3 generations of the applicant’s family in Bredwardine who were willing to assist.
• The local community and parish council were both in support of the application.
• Due to the nature of the eating disorder, the applicant’s son needed to be away from services such as shops and supermarkets.
• Policy DR2 was not appropriate for a single dwelling.
• The building of one dwelling would not significantly impact on policy H2.
• Bredwardine had no settlement boundary so the proposed dwelling could not be referred to as ‘outside of the settlement boundary’ therefore policy H7 should not be considered.
• The application was actually in accordance with Policy H10 as there was clear evidence of a long term local need.
• The dwelling could be made affordable in perpetuity subject to a suitable condition.
• Although the site was currently green field it was previously a residential dwelling with the final remains cleared from the site in 1958.

Members discussed the report and noted the sensitive issues regarding the application. They felt that in their opinion there was a long term local need for the dwelling and that therefore it was not contrary to Policy H10 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan. It was also noted that there had previously been a residential dwelling on the site, albeit some years ago.

Members also discussed the issue of affordable housing and they were clear in their minds that any dwelling on the site should remain affordable in perpetuity. The Development Control Manager advised that this could be achieved through a Section 106 agreement between the applicant and Herefordshire Council. He added that the Section 106 agreement could also cover the issue of a trust fund which had been raised by the applicant.

The Development Manager voiced his concerns in respect of the application and felt that it was contrary to planning policy. He advised Members that there was a need to protect the countryside; that the site was not an appropriate site for a new dwelling and that it was contrary to planning policy. He added that policy H10 addressed sites which were within or adjoining the settlement boundary and that in his opinion the proposed site did not fulfil this criteria. The Locum Lawyer concurred with the Development Manager in respect of the application being contrary to policy H10.

Concerns were raised in respect of the access to the site, Members felt that emergency vehicles would have difficulty in accessing the site due to the steep incline. They did however not see this factor as a significant reason for refusing the application as the settlement of Bredwardine as a whole had access problems due to its location and topography. It was noted that the remote location of the site would be beneficial to the applicant’s son’s health and wellbeing.

The Locum Lawyer and the Development Manager had a brief discussion in respect of section 4.8.10.2 of the Council’s Constitution regarding the Further Information Report process. The Development Manager and the Locum lawyer, representing the Monitoring Officer, both felt that a Further Information Report would not be required and therefore the Committee could proceed to the vote.

Councillor Price was given the opportunity to close the debate in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. He reiterated his opening remarks.

RESOLVED

1.         The Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to complete the planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in accordance with the Heads of Terms

2.         Upon completion of the above-mentioned planning obligation Officers named in the Scheme of Delegation be authorised to issue planning permission subject to appropriate conditions to be agreed in consultation with the Chairman and Local Ward Member conditions:-