Site for residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated means of access and car parking for The Full Pitcher Public House.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, subject to further consultation as referred to in the schedule of updates..

(Site for residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated means of access and car parking for The Full Pitcher Public House.)

The Principal Planning Officer 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.

He noted that the Committee had deferred determination of the application at its meeting on 11 February 2015. Further information was contained in the updated report and in the update sheet in response to the Committee’s request. In particular he noted that it was now recommended that further consultation be undertaken on highway aspects of the proposal with officers authorised to approve planning permission subject to no new material planning considerations being raised in the consultation exercise.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr K Francis, of Ledbury Town Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr I Smethurst, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr R Yeoman, Chairman of Ledbury Cricket Club spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillors EPJ Harvey,  and TL Widdows,  two of the three local ward members, spoke on the application.

Councillor Harvey commented on a number of issues including:

The application appeared to have been brought back before the Committee rather hastily and given more time and thought a better application could have been submitted for consideration.

Ledbury Cricket Club had secured a replacement site which was welcome.

The provision of 40 affordable homes was welcome.

Whilst not defined as public open space the site was open space, crossed by a public footpath and much used by residents

She had discussed the situation with Sport England who had indicated that the cricket Club site at Orlham Lane was not a suitable replacement for the sports facilities currently provided at the Full Pitcher site because it was not suitable for adult football.  Representatives of Ledbury Rugby Club had also indicated that the football pitches on its Ross Road site were not suitable for adult football.

In relation to adult football pitch provision, officers had commented that there was “a surplus of senior pitches in the Ledbury Area (not necessarily the town)”.  However, the Ledbury locality as opposed to the town included Colwall and Bosbury.  There was not an overprovision of senior pitches within the Town itself.

The provision of housing on the current green space was a concern and opposed by the Town Council.

There were still outstanding issues about the access to be resolved. She requested that the application should be reconsidered by the Committee and not determined by officers under delegated powers.

Councillor Widdows expressed his concerns about the access noting its proximity to the roundabout and the absence of consultation on the revised proposals.

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

The site was not public open space and was suitable for housing development. 

Suitable alternative facilities had been found for Ledbury Cricket Club.

The proposed changes to the access arrangements, involving major alterations to a ring road, in parallel with a major housing development, required more analysis.  The Town Council and local ward members needed to discuss the proposals.  The Committee should consider the outcome of the consultation.

A concern was expressed that the current link road worked well and the proposed work would be detrimental

The Transportation Manager commented that the proposed alterations to the roundabout where the link road joined New Street were not related to the development.   They had been proposed by highway safety engineers to address an accident blackspot.  The roundabout currently had two lanes in each direction.  The intention was to reduce this to one lane in each direction to eradicate sideswiping and reduce traffic speed. The capacity of the bypass was adequate to cope with the reduced speeds.

Having revisited the access to the proposed housing development in the light of the proposed changes to the roundabout it had been concluded that a right hand turn lane into the development was no longer necessary.  The funding that would have been needed for those works could therefore be allocated instead to the improvements at the roundabout.

The existing speeds of traffic using New Street were low and the new arrangements would further slow traffic entering New Street.

Whilst the cricket club had found alternative facilities there should be further consideration of sporting provision, in the round, mindful of the concerns about football provision.  In response to this concern it was suggested that the Town Council and local ward members could work to find a solution.

Attention was drawn to the fact that only 6 letters of objection had been received.  In response to this point it was observed that a number of organisations, representing numerous people, had submitted objections.

The Development Manager clarified that consultation had been undertaken on the planning application.  There had not, however, been full consultation on the final proposed access arrangements.

The local ward members were given the opportunity to close the debate.

Councillor Widdows supported deferral of the application to allow consideration of the provision of sports facilities and consultation on the safety of the proposed access.

Councillor Harvey also supported deferral on these grounds. 

The Development Manager commented that an application for housing development without the provision of alternative facilities for the Cricket Club would have been recommended for refusal.  Work had been undertaken to secure excellent alternative facilities for the Club and it was now therefore possible to recommend approval.  The roundabout was a blackspot and the Transport Section had been fully involved in the proposals for access to the development which were recommended for consultation. The provision of facilities for adult football could be resolved in separate discussions.

A motion that consideration of the application be deferred was lost.

RESOLVED: That subject to completion of a further 21 day consultation period, and there being no new material planning considerations raised as a result, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers, in consultation with the Chair and local members, be authorised to complete a Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 planning obligation agreement, in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report, and to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions in the report and any further conditions officers consider necessary.

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.         B01 Development in accordance with the approved plans

6.         H02 Single access - footway

7.         H06 Vehicular access construction

8.         H17 Junction improvement/off site works

9.         I18 Scheme of foul drainage disposal

10.       No development shall take place until the following has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority:

a)         a 'desk study' report including previous site and adjacent site uses, potential contaminants arising from those uses, possible sources, pathways, and receptors, a conceptual model and a risk assessment in accordance with current best practice

            b)         if the risk assessment in (a) confirms the possibility of a significant pollutant linkage(s), a site investigation should be undertaken to characterise fully the nature and extent and severity of contamination, incorporating a conceptual model of all the potential pollutant linkages and an assessment of risk to identified receptors c) if the risk assessment in (b) identifies unacceptable risk(s) a detailed scheme specifying remedial works and measures necessary to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed. The Remediation Scheme shall include consideration of and proposals to deal with situations where, during works on site, contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified. Any further contamination encountered shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme submitted to the local planning authority for written approval.

Reason: In the interests of human health and to ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution to controlled waters or the wider environment.

11.       The Remediation Scheme, as approved pursuant to condition 10 above, shall be fully implemented before the development is first occupied. On completion of the remediation scheme the developer shall provide a validation report to confirm that all works were completed in accordance with the agreed details, which must be submitted before the development is first occupied. Any variation to the scheme including the validation reporting shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in advance of works being undertaken.

Reason: In the interests of human health and to ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution to controlled waters or the wider environment

12.       If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the local planning authority for, an amendment to the Method Statement detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

Reason: In the interests of human health and to ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution to controlled waters or the wider environment.

13.       The recommendations set out in Section 4.2 to 4.4 and 4.7  of the ecologist’s report from Crossman Associates  dated May 2014  should be followed in relation to species mitigation and habitat enhancement. Prior to commencement of the development, a full working method statement with a habitat enhancement plan should be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority, and the work shall be implemented as approved.

            An appropriately qualified and experienced ecological clerk of works should be appointed (or consultant engaged in that capacity) to oversee the ecological mitigation work.

            Reason: To ensure that all species are protected having regard to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and Policies NC1, NC6 and NC7 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan and to comply with Policies NC8 and NC9 in relation to Nature Conservation and Biodiversity and to meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and the NERC Act 2006.

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. Negotiations in respect of matters of concern with the application (as originally submitted) have resulted in amendments to the proposal.  As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.         The contaminated land report as required by condition 10 shall be undertaken in accordance with good practice guidance and needs to be carried out by a suitably competent person as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.   All investigations of potentially contaminated sites must undertake asbestos sampling and analysis as a matter of routine and this should be included with any submission.

3.         HN04 Private apparatus within highway

4.         HN28 Highways Design Guide and Specification

5.         HN05 Works within the highway