Proposed erection of 31 no. key worker dwellings, including access from Clubtail Drive with associated infrastructure and landscaping.

Application deferred.

The principal planning officer provided a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr Hubbard, local resident, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Rawlings, applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution, the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained there had been a number of objections from local residents and the local parish council. Holmer and Shelwick Parish Council objected to the application for the following reasons: it contravened the NDP; it proposed inadequate provision of spaces; the scale of the development was felt to be overbearing and overshadowing of existing houses in the area; and there was not a drainage strategy to address flooding issues on the site; the new development would overlook existing properties due to its elevated position and height which posed concerns regarding the loss of light and the undermining of privacy; there was concern that flooding would increase from water runoff, contrary to core strategy policy SD 3(5); there was a history of problems with water runoff in Clubtail drive; the development was not in keeping with existing houses. The development reduced plans for the park and choose facility to the north of Hereford and additional traffic would be generated by the development which would have an unacceptable impact on existing residents’ amenity. There was concern over the security of the proposed development due to the individuals who would be housed.

The committee debated the application.

There was concern across the committee regarding the tight and constrained site for the development. The site represented intensive development and the significant density of housing and lack of parking spaces was problematic. Tarmac and concrete was predominant across the proposed site and there was a lack of space for landscaping features to ameliorate the stark appearance of the building and immediate surroundings. The application posed an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and on the local environment and landscape. The committee felt that changes were required to the application and plans before the scheme could be considered for approval. The committee discussed the deferral of the application based on the need to amend plans to include additional mitigating landscaping and landscape features to address the appearance of intensive overdevelopment. It was understood that the introduction of landscaping measures to mitigate the appearance and impact of the site on the landscape and residential amenity could result in changes to the scale and design of the buildings proposed on the application site.

The local ward member was given the chance to close the debate. In summary, he reiterated concerns about the development and explained that the narrow and limited access point needed to be reconsidered along with concerns about security.

Councillor Stef Simmons proposed and councillor Richard Thomas seconded a motion that the application be deferred to: enable a reconsideration of the plans and the introduction of additional landscaping measures to mitigate the appearance of intensive overdevelopment on the site; and consideration of any consequent changes to the scale and design of the buildings proposed that might arise from changes to the layout.

The motion was put to the vote and carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: that the application be deferred to enable a reconsideration of the plans, particularly to secure the introduction of additional landscaping measures along the northern and eastern edges of the site (alongside any layout and design changes considered necessary to facilitate this) to ensure the scheme assimilates appropriately into the local context whilst delivering enhancement of green infrastructure as required by policies LD1, LD2, LD3 and SD1 of the Core Strategy.