Site for proposed erection of 52 no. residential dwellings, parking, landscaping, drainage and other associated engineering works.  Vehicular access from A49.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Site for proposed erection of 52 no. residential dwellings, parking, landscaping, drainage and other associated engineering works.  Vehicular access from A49.)

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr M Millmore of Holmer and Shelwick Parish Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr D Weaver, the applicant’s agent spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor SJ Robertson spoke on the application.

She commented on a number of issues including:

·         The Conservation Manager (Landscapes) had objected to the development, as summarised at paragraph 6.15 of the report, referring to policies that directed refusal of development that would adversely affect either the overall character of the landscape or its key features.

·         The site had been assessed via the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment as having major constraints due to landscape sensitivity;

·         The development would represent urbanisation, spoiling the rural setting.

·         The Parish Council objected to the development.

·         St Bartholomew’s Church, Holmer was described in the report by the Conservation Manager (Historic Buildings) as being of exceptional importance and significance.  Its setting would be adversely affected by the development. 

·         The development was at odds with the general pattern of development in the local area.

·         The A49 was busy with fast moving traffic.  She questioned paragraph 6.19 which stated that accessibility could be achieved through non-car borne access to amenities.

·         Negotiations with the Highways Agency were ongoing about the A49.  She expressed a number of concerns about the proposed access to the development.

·         She questioned the pressure the development would place on schools. Holmer School was not referred to in the S106 agreement and she requested involvement in any future discussions on that agreement.

·         There were ongoing sewer problems which the development could only exacerbate.

·         If the application were to be approved she requested that the developer provide money to expand the burial ground.

·         The development would place a high dependence on the car, was not sustainable and therefore paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework did not apply.

·         The application should be refused on numerous policy grounds including policies LA 3 and LA4 of the Unitary Development Plan.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·         It was requested that regular updates on the five year housing land supply should be provided to the Committee given the weight reports coming before the Committee recommended should be attached to the absence of that land supply.

·         The Section 106 agreement offered a number of positive elements.

·         A number of matters were identified as requiring future consideration including foul water and waste disposal, and the need for design and build to be of good quality and meet environmental requirements.  It was suggested the need to consider these matters might be reflected in the decision notice as informative notes.

·         The bulk of the required housing development in the County should take place in Hereford City and the Market Towns.  The area had once been rural but was now urbanised and the site was a logical location for development.

·         The proposed access was of concern.  The Highways Agency should be requested to put in a central reservation to facilitate turns into the development.

·         Heritage assets were important and efforts should be made to protect the setting of the church.

·         Concern was expressed about highway safety issues.  The A49 was already extremely busy and the development could only make things worse.  It was difficult for pedestrians to cross the A49.  It was suggested that if the application was approved the Highways Agency should be requested to work with the developers to make safety improvements including extension of the 30mph speed limit.

·         It was asked if the developer could provide land to enable the burial ground to be extended.

The Development Manager commented that the extension of the 30 mph speed limit was provided for within the S106 agreement.  If the application was approved discussions would take place with the Highways Agency about safety issues.  Concerns about flooding would be addressed at the reserved matters stage.  In terms of the landscape impact the only question to be considered was whether the development had a detrimental impact, including a detrimental impact on a listed building under policy HBA4.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  She reiterated her opposition to the scheme noting that both the Conservation Manager (Historic Buildings) and the Conservation Manager (Landscapes) objected to the development because of its significant adverse impact.

RESOLVED:  That Subject to the completion of a Section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 obligation agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be authorised to grant outline planning permission, subject to the conditions below and any other further conditions considered necessary, after consultation with the Chairman and local ward member.

1.         A02 Time limit for submission of reserved matters (outline permission)

2.         A03 Time limit for commencement (outline permission)

3.         A04 Approval of reserved matters

4.         A05 Plans and particulars of reserved matters

5.         E01 Archaeological site investigation

6.         I17 Scheme of foul drainage disposal

7.         H01 Single access - no footway

8.         H03 Visibility splays

9.         H04 Visibility over frontage

10.       H06 Vehicular access construction

11.       H08 Access closure

12.       H11 Parking - estate development (more than one house)

13.       H17 Junction improvement/off site works

14.       H21 Wheel washing

15.       H27 Parking for site operatives

16.       Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site.

            Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

17.       No surface water shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

            Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.

18.       Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system.

            Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

19.       Foul flows from the site shall connection to public foul sewerage system located to the South of the proposed development at manhole SO50426101.

            Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

20.       No development shall commence until the developer has prepared a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with and this has been approved by the Local Planning Authority.

            Reason: To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the proposed development, and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system.

21.       No development shall take place until a potable water scheme to satisfactorily accommodate the potable water supply to the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No part of the development shall be brought into use and no dwelling shall be occupied until the approved potable water system has been constructed, completed and brought into use in accordance with the approved scheme.

            Reason: To protect the integrity of the existing public sewerage system and to prevent pollution of the environment.

22.       No structure Is to be sited within a minimum distance of 4.5 metres from the centre line of the pipe. The pipeline must therefore be located and marked up accurately at an early stage so that the Developer or others understand clearly the limits to which they are confined with respect to the Company's apparatus. Arrangements can be made for Company staff to trace and peg out such water mains on request of the Developer.

            Reason:  In order to protect the integrity of the water main in accordance with policy

23.       Adequate precautions are to be taken to ensure the protection of the water main during the course of site development.

            Reason:  In order to protect the integrity of the water main in accordance with policy

24.       No part of the development hereby permitted shall be brought into use until the works as shown indicatively on Drawing No. C712/03 Rev A have been completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highways Agency.

            Reason: To ensure that the A49 Trunk Road continues to serve its purpose as part of a national system of routes for the through traffic in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Highways Act 1980 in the interest of road safety.

25.       No trees or shrubs shall be planted within a strip measured 3m from the back of the visibility splay.

            Reason:  To ensure that the A49 Trunk Road continues to serve its purpose as part of a national system of routes for the through traffic in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Highways Act 1980 in the interest of road safety.

INFORMATIVES:

1          The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations, including any representations that have been received. It has subsequently determined to grant planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. I05 - HN10 No drainage to discharge to highway

3. I06 - HN02 Public rights of way affected

4. I07 - HN08 Section 38 Agreement & Drainage details

5. I11 - HN01 Mud on highway

6. HN28 - Highways Design Guide and Specification