Link to the agenda: https://councillors.herefordshire.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=264&MId=8915
And we alive chair thank you welcome to the meeting of the planning and Regulatory committee the agenda papers and other relevant information for the meeting are available for the public viewing on the Herer Council website please remember your words and actions should be chosen carefully and members are reminded that
Speeches are limited to 3 minutes the council is streaming this meeting live on the Herer Council YouTube channel and also making a recording the recording will be available via the council’s website shortly after the meeting has concluded other attendees are permitted to film photograph and record the meeting providing that it does not
Disrupt the business of the meeting if you do not wish to be filmed or photographed please identify yourself so that anyone who intends to record the meeting could be made aware there’s no one to ensure that the recording quality is maintained could members speak as clearly as possible and make background
Noise to a minimum and ensure that mobile phones and other devices are turned to silence welcome to all those in attendance I’ll now ask Mrs Gibbons to introduce all the officers thank you chair uh good morning my name is Kelly Gibbons and I’m the acting development Management Services
Service manager um to my left I have Georgina COI who will be providing our legal advice today to my right we have um Paul McKim who is our interim head of Planning and Building control I also have Katie Jones who is here on behalf of the local Highway Authority OE Jones
Is presenting item six on the agenda and joining us later today we will have Rebecca jenman for item seven Elsie Morgan for item eight and Matthew neelson for item nine thank you right thank you we’ll now go to the agenda item one apologies from for absence we received apologies from
Councelor po councelor toyan attendance to observe the meeting right name substitutes we I do not have any name substitutes no uh three Declarations of interest can anyone indicate whether they declare wish to declare an interest there are none right we’ll go on now to the minutes of the meeting held on the 13th
Of December 2023 are the minutes of the meeting of the 13th of December 2023 approved please members raise their hands to indicate that they are for those in favor any against right no no extensions one abstention yeah Council jard it’s carried then right I have no Chairman’s announcement we’ll now move
On to the first item um decision item item six on the agenda can I request the public speakers present in the person to um for item six Mr Paige Mr whorn and Mr Smith please take their seats in the public participation tables good morning and welcome to the
Meeting I will call you to speak after the offices presentation on the right PE can I now ask Mr olly Jones who will make the presentation for this particular item thank you very much chair um and good morning to Members First of all i’ like to thank those members who visited the site
Yesterday afternoon hopefully that was a useful exercise in contextualizing the site so as shown on the slide this is an outline planning application for a sustainable Urban extension comprising up to 250 dwellings open space allotments and Landscaping school expansion land areas of play sustainable Urban drainage infrastructure internal roads and associated
Infrastructure so the detailed approval is sought for the means of access and layout with all other matters reserved for future consideration the next slide please um I would first of all draw members attention to the committee update sheet there are a number of updates um that supplement the published
Report um so just quickly touch upon those but um again we’ll we will um sort of cover those where relevant throughout the presentation um so yesterday updated comments were received from the integrated care board so that’s previously uh refer known as the clinical commissioning group um those are appended to the
Update sheet in appendix one um and in respect of the contribution sort the draft section 106 heads of terms has been updated to reflect that and again forms part of of the updates um so just just to clarify that this is not a a new contri contribution that has been
Provided on the basis of the reduced number of dwellings down to 250 um from that previously um provided on the basis of the application being for up to two up to 500 um so the cost per floor area um has increased um so that again is is
Updated within um just on that point as well and just to clarify um it’s worth pointing out that there are no contributions sought from the Y Valley Trust so in terms of contributions towards Herford County hospital um they withdrew their contributions and that’s in um relation to sort of challenges um
That have being made elsewhere with respect to to to contributions in that regard um there’s also a response provide you in the update to um the applicant’s agent response in relation to the local latest local Highway Authority comments um again we will touch on that throughout the
Presentation um but just to confirm that condition 36 has been removed um and some commentary is provided on that um and it just covers again in response to the applicants agents response um the matter relating to additional transport contributions being sought to deliver improvements along the 844
Footway um again there’s a just some clarification with respect to uh the correct list of local plan policies um and again some corrections and clarifications with um three paragraphs within the report um and again in terms of an updated draft heads of terms table as well which covers those points as as set
Out next slide please um so this just shows the approximate location of the site with respect to bromyard uh the next slide if we could have that please shows the extent of the site location edged in Red so just um shy of 12 hectares essentially wraps around the Northwestern tip of
Bromyard so can see the open Countryside to the West uh the river f um a44 running along the South and then upper Hardwick Lane which is taken from the a44 and sort of essentially dissects the site and then that leads to hardwood Bank Cottages to the
North and Stonehouse Farm uh sits to the southeast Southwest rather so just um to uh just below uh where below the word track um and then you can see sort of existing residential development to the west of bromyard along Winslow Road so you’ve got Brock sash close flagon is close
Hardwick close damson Tree close and Cherry Tree close which are about the site to the South and the East and to the Eastern end of the site adjacent to the site is St Peter’s Primary School um marked School on the map SES not subject to any landscape days designations no designated Heritage
Assets on the site or within immediately close proximity tree preservation has been served on a number of trees throughout the site uh these were identified on the site yesterday and again um we will touch upon those where relevant throughout the course of the presentation today so have the next slide
Please um so this is the full site layout again just to highlight we’re considering at this stage uh access and layout um there is a sort of clearer plan next but essentially this just shows the vehicle access taken from the a44 to the South with immediate land to the to to
South of the road of Stonehouse Farm um between that between that road and a44 um being reserved for drainage infrastructure and planting and there after the main spine road is flanked by a 2 m foot way to the West and a 3 met shared foot and cycle way to the
East and that meanders through the site forming a principal Street with the cyc and footway linking through to Cherry Tree close and providing therea on wood connections to the school uh the primary school and the Town Center the Cy out features green infrastructure in open space proposed play provision is envisaged to come
Forward in the way of leaps and neeps so that’s local equipment area for play and na equipped areas for play and you can see on the site plan that these are located around the site U by way of trim trails and um forming a play on the way function so also shown is
Allotments Community Gardens landscaping and the school expansion land to the east adjacent to St Peter’s Primary School the layout indicates higher density development along the main spine Road and then lower density clusters off this towards the site’s edges and the open Countryside Beyond so largely responding to the existing field
Patterns and where possible green infrastructure is is retained you will see as well that taking count of the S sites topography drainage infrastructure in the way of attenuation features are proposed to the Northwestern part of the site um and to the South close to to the um point of access of the
A44 um if you on the next slide this is a lot clearer um and shows the apportioning of uh land through throughout the site um so in blue you can see slightly clear now the spine Road um the pr and the principal vehicle access um and how that spine Road of meanders through
Through the site and then off that you have sort of secondary residential roads serving those various clusters um of development highlighted in brown and then it’s useful again in contextualizing and illustrating that uh the site abortion to uh green infrastructure and open space so you have a sort of large amount
Uh within the central portion of the site but then around the site’s edges as well and also as mentioned between the a44 and uh the road to Stonehouse um farm and then uh in pink to the Far East you can see again the location of the uh land reserved for um scho expansion
Next slide please um so this just shows um pestan access points uh together with the vehic for Access relative to existing roads and footways and public rights of way so again Sol V access indicated um to be taken from the a44 and that’s just indicated by the
Light blue um sa arrow to the far um Southwest so so bot left part of the site pedestrian access provided um from the site via and across up Hardwick Lane through flagging is close to winsler Road that’s marked by the green p and the connections there are shown in
Blue and then to the east of the site as discussed the cycl and pedestrian access being provided through the EXO expansion land to Cherry Tre close and that’s marked by the blue PC uh symbol next to the school to the east of the site and then you’ve also got
Connections um to the existing public RightWay Network both to the north so to down towards the river room into open country side but then also as well um into dams and tree clo and that’s where um members will recall we walked along um towards the end of the visit yesterday next slide
Please so just to um go through some photographs of the site these show the point of vehicle access to the site taken from the a44 so members will be aware that the site slopes um in a Northerly direction from the a44 um and this is the area that we
Reserved for sort of drain infrastructure and planting um no residential development proposed in this location within the submitted layout um and on the photos are circled some of the trees that are subject to the tree preservation order that’s been served uh I understand that to be an apple tree there next
Slide so now we’re standing on upper Hardwick Lane in the loc in sort of Southern portion of the site where uper Hardwick Lane um makes uh two bends um so we’re looking West now from up Hardwick Lane across the site we looking along the access to Stonehouse
Farm and it’s in this point um in which the spine Road would cross that road um and then to the immediate right of that photograph so just to the right um along that hedge R is where the petition access would be taken from the site and
And we’ll show some a plan to illustrate that shortly and the bottom photograph just looks North along upper Hardwick Lane um the left of the shot shows the Western portion of the site and then to the right are the rear of those properties that flank that are along um
Hardw close wagonist close um um so there is some sort of rear access to those um I know that it was pointed out yesterday with with respect to the levels differential there um condition 12 deals with sight levels and that’s a pre-commencement condition and again those sort of matters would be dealt
With in terms of scale at part of as part of the RM um next slide please so top photograph looks North along the South rather along the western portion of the site um so Stonehouse Farm visible in the distance and you’ll see a group of trees again that form part of that tree
Preservation order to be retained as part of the layout um that includes sort of Oak Ash and Larch um so they would be retained and again would form part of the area um allocated within the site for allotment provision and then the bottom photograph we look East from the access um to
Stonehouse farm along up Hardwick Lane so um we was stood there yesterday um the red arrow indicates the link to flag in as close proposed as part of um The Pedestrian access um the next slide will touch on the role of this um in delivering The Pedestrian access to and from the
Site so if we come the next slide now thank you so this juncture just worth then to point out the sort of access and pedestrian connections at this sort of Southern portion of the site um so circled are just some sort of key points really um we’ve got a three arm signalized
Junction taken from the a44 to serve the site um it’s part of a traffic regulation order the speed limit 30 mph would be extended to the West so changing the environment of the road in that in that particular area on approach to bromyard from from the
West and then you have a six meter carriageway um providing access to the site and forming the spine road which um north of the Stonehouse Farm link would provide a 2 meter footway to the west and then you have the 3 meter cycle and footway running through the spine road to the EAS
Side um so in purple you can see as discussed the um 2 meter footway link um which comes out onto up Hardwick Lane um there would be formalizations of those of that that the bend in up Hardwick Lane um to facilitate that in terms of um Crossing provision um and there you
Can see that it leads then to Flag iners close and again we walked down there yesterday um and then leading onto Winslow Road and providing a connection down Winslow Road to the junction with the 844 um so the the final details as I’ve said of that will would come forward as
Part of um section 278 and also uh trro traffic regulation order as well next slide please so now we’re uh towards the eastern part of the site and specifically focusing on the area that’s um apportioned to the land uh that would be transferred for school expansion land associated with st
Peters’s Primary School um um so as set out with the report the section 106 agreement secures a requirement for the developer to transfer the land to the primary school um if after all reason Endeavors that’s not possible then contributions would be um paid in Lee to facilitate
Improvements to to the school um but the school is situated as I said to the northern uh Northern end of Cherry Tree close and as shown by the red arrow that’s the approximate again location in terms of of that 3 meter foot and Cycle Way link leading from the site and
Providing those onward connections into into bromyard um and then the bottom photo again I’ve just highlighted again in terms of approximately in purple is the location of the existing public right of way um again that that be walked down yesterday towards the end of the visit um and obviously the scheme the the
Layout of the scheme um makes reference to that and Prov utiliz that as as a secondary connection and providing a link to to dams and Tree close as well next slide please um so now sort of towards the center central part of the site um and
It’s in this area which a lar large amounts um of public open bace is proposed um looking North at the top again trees to be return uh obained um worth pointing out that the trees that are covered by the TPO that has been served do not any do not raise
Any sort a specific um conflict with the layout as submitted um residential development has been laid out here to provide natural surveillance o over the public open space um you can see the southern boundary Beyond is flank by the two-story Residential Properties along Hardwick close and then marked in blue as well is
The existing public right of way that leads onto upper Hardwick Lane so you can see those trees at the bottom of the slide are those that flank uper Hardwick Lane next slide um so this one here again we’re looking at the school expansion land and the row
Of trees and hedge rows to the left form um a retained tree and hedro Boundary again that forms part of the T so that the layout has been designed to accommodate that and retain it to provide a corridor there and then the bottom photo again shows another TR tree covered by the TPO
And Ash Tre there along the northern boundary um and we’re looking sort of in northwesterly direction towards upper Hardwick cottages and um just noting the levels they’re falling away towards that and and the open Countryside Beyond next slide please and final set of photographs um no not the final set of photographs
There’s one more um this shows the northeastern corner of the site um and it’s here in which the Community Gardens would be reposed and again trees as well to be retained again sort of forming a a landscape buffer around the site and then final set so this is just um the southern
Extremity of the western portion of the site uh the top looks Southwest over the river valley and then the bottom looks East along the southern boundary towards upper Hardwick Lane um and it’s in this location in which the uh lay portions land for the surface water attenuation feature next slide
Please so to touch on the main considerations then for consideration uh um these are listed and refle and reflect those that are discussed within the officer report members will be aware that site forms part of a strategic site identified by policy by2 of the core strategy would provide for a
Comprehensively planned Urban extension to bromyard um and therefore the proposals can be considered acceptable as a matter of principle in terms of design and layout the scheme broadly takes account of existing field patterns where possible and provides a mix of dens ities and the formation of a street hierarchy with
Clusters of development appropriately located in context of public open space and other retained green infrastructure and corridors scale appearance and Landscaping would be considered as part of any forthcoming Reserve matters application um as members again will be aware a lot of consideration has been given to access highway safety and connectivity Arrangements associated
With the development um the submission is able to demonstrate a safe vehicle access off the a44 and the internal layout provides appropriate visibility although some further details would be required by way of condition as set out within the report um and again accompanying any further um Reserve matters applications the changes to Upper
Hardwick Lane would be made where it is dissected by the spine Road um so just to Again cover that that includes um the formalization of of the bend um and in terms of the provision of ballards as well to prohibit that being used as a through route um but nevertheless access
Would still be retained for uh the properties that the the rear of the properties along Hardware close and flagus close um 3 meter pedestrian Cycle Way run through along the spine Road from its Junction with stonos Farm uh linking with chory close and again providing links uh and sustainable sustainable
Connections to the primary schol school um and thereafter the the town center and the service and amenities afforded within it uh next slide please so again this just shows um The Pedestrian act connections um that would be by flag and as close and then onto winsler Road I know we walked along
There yesterday um and that’s those shown in purple um these have been subject to a positive road safety audit um there is a shorter link available that V VI the steps onto Brock sash close um although this is not necessarily an accessible route for all um and again members will have been made
Made aware of that yesterday um so neveress in considering the implications of the more direct sort of as the crow flies route by up Hardwick Lane and the a44 to the facilities at the junction of the a44 and Pan Lane and the Queen Elizabeth High School uh that’s shown in yellow um
In response to the local Highway Authority concerns additional contributions are sought to enable the local Highway authority to provide improvements along up Hardwick Lane uh and the a44 between Hardwick Lane up Hardwick Lane and and Winslow Road um so when having regard to that as discussed within the report and the and
The and the update to the report um it is considered that the proposal is acceptable from a highway sa highway safety and connective connectivity perspective um again as considered within the report next slide please um so just touching upon landscape and visual impact again this is covered at length within the report
Um but it’s considered that the landscape impacts whilst there would obviously be a a notable visual change that they would be localized and harmonious with the existing settlement Edge um again the details of landscaping engineering can be addressed through the reserve matter stage but we officers satisfied um and are comfortable with
The layout that’s been deposited that allows for that green infrastructure to to to come forward as part of a reserve matters relating to landscaping and again having regard to um the retained green infrastructure next slide please yes so this just shows the illustrative landscape master plan um
And and shows again how the load is designed to take take account of retained infrastructure that we’ve that we’ve looked at um but also including those that are subject to to the tree preservation order uh that includes 12 trees and four groups of trees um but it also facilitates
Additional planting as well and again just to emphasize that would come forward at a later stage next slide please so in terms of open space um more than three and a half hectares of green infrastructure which includes the opportunities for equipped play and again trim Trail equipment as set out so
S play on the way features so rather than a sort of centralized formal Arrangement um it would be encourage that um through trim trails around the site uh that there would be sort of a play on the way function um that’s close to those residential clusters the section 106 agreement secures the
Requirement and the load again is such which creates public open space and green infrastructure corridors throughout the scheme with natural surveillance as well conditions and Reserve matters uh would SC the detail of of of those elements next slide please so just touched on some of the
Other points uh in terms of public right of way diversion would be required of the existing public right of way um in terms of the impact on residential imunity it’s appreciation that some of the residential development is close to existing development um off Winslow Road the separation distances are considered acceptable but nevertheless
The reserve matters would deal with the scale um to ensure that that there’s a satisfactory relationship there and details of Le levels um would be forthcoming as as part of a pre-commencement condition and then conditions also deal with noise management noise mitigation and construction management um especially through s Construction phases as
Well um drainage the site is not risk not at risk of flooding surface water drainage strategy is considered acceptable in principle but that’s subject to further details on those attenuation features and how they would operate um consideration also would be given to maximizing infiltration where possible throughout the site um but condition six
Secures details of Maintenance and management as well of those of those features um um Welsh water advised that hydraulic modeling would be required in terms of the capacity in terms of foul water uh obviously the site would connect to the mains but hydraulic modeling as I said needs to be
Undertaken um to ascertain where that link would be and whether not any sort of improvements would need to be made um I know that representations have also raised concern about um water supply in terms of pable water that is something that’s governed by um the water industry act so there’s not any um
Sort of safeguarding condition in that regard but that’s something that the developer will need to deal with uh in any case um in terms of ecology an updated ecology assessment was submitted um there’s an extensive history of survey work um that has been undertaken for the site given the length
In which the site has the application has been under consideration um in short The Proposal is considered acceptable subject to safeguarding management and enhancement conditions that are set out within the report the site is located within the catchman of the River Log as members will be aware um an all allocation of phosphate
Credits to make the development nutrient neutral has been made Heritage Council are exploring uh sort of a phase approach to credits and that’s set out within the um the draft section 106 um but that’s dependent on on the Cel progression of of weapons um but nevertheless a positive HRA has been
Undertaken uh with natural natural England concurring with the local planning authorities conclusions in that regard and then just a few more things to touch upon on the next slide so in terms of considering um how the development addresses climate change the sites located in sustainable location to encourage sustainable and
Active travel um as discussed in terms of The Pedestrian connectivity and cycle provision retention of green infrastructure uh and new planting public open space provides um environmental benefits in that regard uh the applicants also submitted an energy and sustainability statement which sets out measures which could come forward as
Part of any reserve matters application so it would be at that stage in terms of the actual scale appearance and and and sort of landscaping that we could consider that further uh in terms of housing there’s a a policy compliant mix of affordable housing with up to 50%
Affordable so 40% will be secured through the section 106 agreement with um 10% additionality Grant funded units coming forward um those attender neutral at this stage but would be um subject to further uh consultation with with um housing and the local planning Authority um but the housing mix
Generally responds to local need as set out within the latest housing market area needs assessment uh with considerations for accessibility and an even distribution across the site to create a balanced and inclusive community which responds to that local need and then just to again review the infrastructure and SE 10 106
Contributions which would be sought for primary and Community Health Care education which includes the land transfer to St Peter’s primary school to allow for the expansion waste and recycling transport so public Rail and active travel measures and the delivery of the a44 Improvement footways um libraries Sports provision
And the purchase of the requisite phosphate credits um and also securing the minimum open space requirement so this would nevertheless um provide demonstrable benefits uh to The Wider community and this is especially an acknowledgement of the strains that have been cited within the received representations um in certain areas within within bromyard
Um just other matters I mean they cover within the report I think the key one was with respect to the loss of view as members will they aware there is no right to a to a private view um but again in terms of the reserve matters um submission in dealing with scale would
Seek to ensure that there’s an there’s an appro residential relationship between the site and and existing properties so just to wrap up then the proposal is considered to demonstrate broad compliance with the requirements of policy by2 of the core strategy and the other principal policies relevant to the determination of the application
Within the development plan proposal would provide housing and a sustainable location identified within the plan giving rise to Social and economic benefits these include an acceptable mix of housing Financial contributions would be secured to address local infrastructure capacity is capacity issues particularly respect to education and Health Care um so helping
To address those those known pressures a land for expansion of St peters’s primary school would be made available the environment the environmental impacts of the scheme are considered such that could be managed again through uh the reserve matters and or conditions where relevant the phosphate credits would be make the development nutrient
Neutral so in the round the proposal is considered to Accord with the policies of the development plan and there are considered no other significant material considerations which indicate that a decision should be made other than for approval so if you go to the next slide we have the
Recommendation so it’s subject to the completion of section 106 agreement within six months of the date of the committee to secure the contributions as set out and required and the purchase purchase of phosphate credits again in full or phased the outline plan planning permission be granted subject to the following
Conditions as set out in the report and any other further conditions or variations thereof considered necessary named in uh by offices named in the scheme of Delegation thank you chair thank you Mr Jones U for a very thorough um presentation can I now invite public speakers can I invite Mr
Paige to speak on behalf of bromyard Town Council and Winslow Town Council you have three minutes uh chair members good morning um my name is councelor Roger P Vice chair of the planning and economic development committee of bromyard and Winslow Count Council this application has been a roller coas for Our Town
Council at first we were not able to support due to the inclusion of The a44 Pedestrian footway then following the refusal of the gladman application to the south on the grounds of the impossibility of making this footway safe and no designated Cycle Way by this Committee in October the Harvard Bank applicant
Removed this way from their plans so hence we could support however following this in early December we discovered that the lha had introduced a 3 meter wide strip on the access spine road to facilitate a third party at uh condition 36 yet again we had no choice than to
Oppose the application unless unless that imposition was removed which it was as it was Ultra virus and we wrote to all members of this committee and he pressed out this condition 36 was removed so again we were able to support however being diligent we discovered a new additional requirement
Placed on the applicant to stump up a section 106 in lie of a section 278 to pay for improve proving this very same stretch of the a44 from upper Hardwick Lane to Winslow Road contrary to your October decision which brings us back to opposing unless this demand is removed at
7.3.5 heads of terms section 106 contributions by this committee today it is sad chair who would be a town counc at the bottom of the local government food chain voluntarily trying to do our best for our community when we are treated with such disdain when Strokes are pulled to override Democratic
Consultation condition 36 has been removed but in effect reintroduced as a section 106 extra contribution we can only request that this committee support our position by removing today this offending 106 demand placed unfairly on the applicants and granting consent for the Strategic site which has gone nowhere since
2016 we need housing in bromyard with safe access thank you chairman thank you I’ll now invite councilor white um Mr whorn to speak on uh uh in objection to the applic a you’ll have three minutes uh thank you very much I Mark whiteon the Emeritus professor of analytics at Dunder University so I
Spent my lifetime analyzing data until about two weeks ago I also supported this application I really did bromyard needs housing however I was made aware that the LHS was requesting changes which in my opinion encourage people to walk along the a44 a route that is we have consistently argued as
Dangerous so I can only support this application if this is removed essentially the lha is requiring the developer to provide funds to upgrade the Footwear on a section at the a44 that section is known to us all it was discussed last October with gladman application and it was a major factor in
The refusal of the application so I will try and answer four questions why is this section of the a44 dangerous we discussed this last October it is basic too narrow it’s constrained it cannot be any wider and if you take a 2.5 M section out of that width of a footway
You are left with a section of carriageway that is not wide enough to allow two large lores to pass what they then do is they mount the curve that’s this is the bottom line there’s no way around this nobody has ever come up with the way around
This can it be fixed no it can’t because there are these constraints this has been discussed years why what reason does the LH lha give for this request it says essentially the application applicants proposed pedestrian route is too long and that people will use this section of
The a44 because it’s the shortest route between the site exit and basically the rest of brard you know the the the dentist the the school so they’re saying that that route is too long and what they’re saying is that this route is the shortest route and people naturally go
For the shortest route especially children well actually it isn’t the shortest route that’s not true V’s proposed route is 380 M the a44 route is 324 which is shorter but the shortest route which you saw yesterday I gather which is through the car park and down to BR close is
38 so if your argument is people are going to use the shortest route well they’re not going to go along the4 for it why upgrade the footway why make somebody do that well the officers argue no matter what you do some people will walk along the a44 so it’s better to
Make it as safe as possible but it’s also true that the more you improve it the more you encourage other people to walk along it and the crucial Point here is that even if developed to the best that the topology allows it will always be way below standards you there is not
Enough room to make it so why are we looking at a proposal to encourage people to walk along along an unsafe route I would really encourage you to accept this um application but to remove this uh requirement thank you very much thank you right and now we’ll move on to um
Invite Mr Smith the applicants agent to speak in support of the application do you have three minutes thank you uh my name is Russell Smith from mland planning um and I’m speaking today on behalf of the applicant V homes thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning the
Proposed development before you today is identified within the adopted core strategy the proposals represent the culmination of extensive discussions with officers and the Town Council and will deliver much needed new housing including affordable housing extensive new public open space land for the expansion of St peters’s primary school
And financial contributions of Circa 1.5 million towards local infrastructure improvements you’ve received a comprehensive report and presentation uh from the case officer um confirming that the proposed development is in accordance with with the court strategy the applicant has received an allocation of phosphate credits from the council and proposed development is deemed neutr
Neutral by Natural England the application should therefore be approved without delay in accordance with national policy the issue that I want to touch upon today is that of sustainable connectivity and the comments received by the local Highway Authority the lha um the proposed sustainable transport strategy has been the focus of extensive
Discussions between the applicant the lha and the Town Council connections are proposed to Winslow Road via chory close dams and Tree close and flag as close as shown in the officers presentation in accordance with mppf paragraph 114 the proposed strategy ensures that safe and suitable access to
The site can be achieved for all users and appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes been taken up given the type of development and importantly its location it’s important to have regard to the specific location uh factors of the site the strategy put forward by the applicant is to discourage pedestrians
And cyclist from accessing the a44 west of Winslow Road this is due to concerns regarding the nature and environment of the existing local Highway Network at this point these are concerns that have been raised by by local residents the Town Council and also by members here today when considering an application referenc
190111 for development on a nearby site the south of the a44 members refuse that application on highways grounds uh by virtue of the insufficient width of the proposed footway taken with the unsatisfactory nature of the environment despite this decision and the concerns of the Town Council the lha continues to
Insist upon Works to up a Hardwick line in the a44 footway and this could encourage residents to access the a44 at this point where in sufficient width to widen the foot way to an appropriate standard the applicant proposed staty which should be subject to road safety audit proposes a safe and suitable route
Of ver flag is close this route is broadly commensurate in length just 70 meters longer and will be signed and lit and suitably surfaced however the recommendation before you today six an additional Financial contribution over and above the sustainable transport contribution of half a million pounds um
To carry out these works the applicant will be guided by members on this matter but respectfully request that members consider whether this contribution and the works would fund and necessary to make the development acceptable and consistent with their earlier decision thank you thank you Mr Smith uh could you
Kindly take your seats back in the public Gallery thank you councelor CLA Davis is the local member and she has the right to uh introduce the debate um and to speak at the end and final summing up of the debate she has 10 minutes at the beginning thank you Council
Davis I start again firstly I would like to thank our planning officer OE Jones for the amazing amount of work that has gone into um your presentation it was fantastic thank you um I’m not going to mention the extra that we received yesterday afternoon at this point um I’d
Also would like to thank the lovely Katie Jones um the team leader for the area as the area engineer and it was lovely because we hadn’t met you before on site so thank you um I want to thank Roger pagee um Vice chair of Bron and winsler Town
Council for coming along today as well as Professor mark whorn uh a concerned resident and has spent many hours identifying the problems with the traffic and safety of pedestrians and cycl cyclists on the a44 to Russell Smith on behalf of the applicant who’s flabbergasted at the amount of restrictions and conditions
That were put forward I’d also like to thank our planning committee who came along yesterday um who enjoyed the lovely day that we had looking at the site and the most of us had to step over um a fence which was um yeah quite interesting so want to thank you for
That but I do want to move on now this application is very much needed in bromyard and residents have been looking forward to the positive changes it will bring to their lives and to the Future development of the town I will not add any comments about condition 36 because it has already been
Mentioned passionately I can’t understand and I hope someone can enlighten me as to why the developer has been asked to contribute to the a44 foot path from upper haruk Bank to Winslow Road which has not been mentioned before and we the committee only found out about it if we
Turned our commuter our computers on yesterday afternoon after sign visit if we needed to confirm without Town Council because of this material change we would not have had time to do so I asked the question what has a path got to do with this development when other Provisions had been made for
Pedestrians and cyclists can I have uh Clark can I please have um a slide just bear with me I’m just going to I’m just going to use my pointer so um counc Baker if you could just move your head out the way so I don’t uh actually put the character
Anywhere near you is a very large yes okay right let’s just find it all right so if we come if we come down here where’s the pan going to go in can we see it we we can’t see that through we can’t see it screen okay you
Have to describe right well we’ll forgo that so uh looking looking at this map you can see that we’ve got this nice send so from the a44 we go along Hardwick bank and we get to the nice send and from that send we have got walkways going on to safer areas now my
Question is why would anybody want to walk that 100 yards possibly 100 yards from that corner right onto that a44 where we’ve got these massive big lorries passing by and yesterday the wind was actually knocking us towards defense um so I’ll say again I can’t see
How anybody would want to do that but as you said earlier on there will always be somebody who will want to have a little go we the committee you unanimously decided last October to refuse the application 1 190111 gladman to the South because the footpath access
Referred to me to to youor by me as not being safe and yesterday as I’ve said it was confirmed again this fo path should be discouraged not encouraged I feel sure that this committee will stick to its previous decision regarding this footpath and remove this requirement imposed at Paris
735 under 106 contributions as an additional contribution on top of the half million already accepted by the applicant for highways works as specified chair it has been over 10 years since the Town Council pushed hardwood Bank as a designated site for for 500 dwellings 80% of brom’s Target on top of the 133%
Already built and a further 5% in the pipeline it was in 2016 when the applicants commenced pre-planning discussion and here we are eight years later with nothing built in the meantime planning consent has gone down the drain for the old Depo sites Ashfield ways I could be corrected on that because they
Could not be physically developed and hardwood bank has been pushed aside in favor of gladman which has been refused four times including an appeal I ask members to support this application with the removal the removal of the additional contributions for the Redundant a44 Pathway to be con to be consistent with
Previous decisions I thank you for your time thank you councilor Davis can I now invite debate can I have any speakers none then we is sorry I I just wondered is it worth Katie just talking explaining her position now before before we start the debate with that
Help hello um with regards to the local Highway Authority’s position on the 844 footway um we don’t view as encouraging its use um we view that um particularly teenagers perhaps going to the high school would walk the shortest route which is down up a Hardwick Lane and on to the
A44 um regardless um there is another route that intuitively doesn’t wouldn’t feel to be the shortest route to any teenager because it’s heading north it’s going the wrong direction to where they wanting to go so we feel that there will be um a proportion of pedestrians from
The site who will walk straight down upper hard Lane onto the a44 um regardless um and it’s not a route that we we would encourage or but but we think that they will use the route anyway so our view is to make it as safe as possible by setting back the fo on
The a44 um to the back of the Verge um thereby creating a half meter um grass Verge between the footway and the a44 where it is recognized it is a pinch point at that point for large vehicles and um it would help mitigate any overhanging um Wing mirrors from from
Lor’s um because you’d have this sort of half meter buffer um and so it is the local the high authorities view that would um enable safe passage for those who who aren’t going to walk the um the sort of designated route on flagin as close um and and and and stated in our
Response we would object if it wasn’t included um so yeah I just sort of to set out views but I think we have to identify after the position we find ourselves in if we were minded to leave this particular condition in bearing in mind we may be subject to an appeal on a
Rejection of a previous application based on prin well princial objection to this particular site um forestan development can I coun we had a look at this yesterday and what I ask is Highway has actually got your takee measure because what you’re proposing is not not possible there just
Not enough ground there so it it’s um actually uh myself and our section 278 manager have been out to site and measured on several occasions for the footway to confirm that it can be fitted in right um other country members Council Simons thank you chair
Um thank you very much uh olle Jones for um taking us out on site yesterday your comprehensive report it was very good to revisit the site again uh particularly the section with the a44 um I would very much like to support this proposal coming forward I think
There’s been a lot of hard work done in terms of the layout and Landscaping um I’ll deal with the a44 section first of all I do agree with the highways officer that desire line and research on there show that people will from this development likely to access the a44 I therefore understand the
Highway authorities View and the need for section 106 on that I am however wishing that people are directed towards the other routes which would take them away from the 44 um I’d like to see if we can discuss transport plans as part of conditions uh linked to the development of the site and
Communication with the senior School uh with regards to that um I’m really pleased to see the greater permeability of this strategic site with the existing landform and development of bromyard uh particularly the addition of the cycle access uh via cherry tree in the school expansion area um I’m really pleased to
See the connectivity with the existing public rights of way um I would like some improvements made to the footway connection into flaggers um and whether anything could be done with the footway connection into Brock sash close with the steps that come off up Hardwick Lane
I do appreciate what the um uh Mr wh Mr whorn uh said with regard to the distances but I think he’s taken that distance as across the car park which as we discussed yesterday isn’t a public right away through that car park it is just up the steps which means it’s not
Accessible to everybody um and I’m sure the highways authori is looking at access for all including push chairs Wheelchairs and um and whatnot um I really would like to discourage people walking along the a44 I’m quite torn about the addition for section 106 there um I would also like to discuss the
Layout although Landscaping is a reserve matters issue um the layout informs the abil to do landscaping I’m really pleased to see the area tpos um because I know how difficult it is to um condition through pre-commencement retention of areas of hedro and other land form that tend to end up U being
Passed to outline and then conditioned at Reserve matters I’m bit concerned about the public right of way access behind um I think it’s dams and trees we walked along there there’s a public righted way that has hedging all along the development side um looking at the layout it really looks like the
Development would be up against that public right away and potentially require the removal of that hedge row um I would like to make sure that we have that connectivity as per our core strategy with existing um land form and uh hedge RS there being retained wherever possible um yeah thank you
That’s my comments i’ like come back on anything is raised councilor Baker please thank you chairman I don’t have any cons concerns regarding the size and proposed layout of the site it’s it’s been a long time coming I understand the original plans were made in 2016 think years ago but first of all
Can I commend Ole Jones on his detailed planning report and the comprehensive guided tour we had of the site yesterday um we had four hours of site visits in the cold yesterday I think most of us have actually thought out now it was a it was a killer but anyway it was
Worthwhile the site all of them but this one was worthwhile certainly my concerns much like everybody else is the safety of children especially those older children who will be attending Queen Elizabeth High School in P Lane um I think the problem is we won’t really know what the problems are with
Where the children are going are they going down up a Hardwick Lane along the404 or using the preferred foot paths through the existing site we won’t really know what they’re going to be doing until the site is built and all the children have moved in and start
Going to school so it’s one of those difficult quandaries uh we’ talk people have talked this morning about this 106 um agreement to to widen the foot path along the a44 if the developers want that then they should pay for it surely not a 106 money but that’s just my
Opinion um but we we we haven’t discussed that it certainly wasn’t discussed yesterday and so we’ll have to wait and see what happens with that it’s a matter for officers and the developers I assume as to how that’s dealt with highways are quite clear they to widen the foot path
There there is a bit of grass Verge that could be used between upper Hardwick Lane and winds slow close that’s basically encouraging people to use that section of road which is inherently dangerous which we one of the reasons why Clare Davis has said we refused the flag and
ASV application a few months ago because of the danger to children on the 44 but I think it will find it own level eventually but we won’t really know how particularly dangerous it is until it’s been built but um but anyway that that’s that’s just my views but thank you very
Much I’m not going to make a recommendation for approval at this stage I’ll keep my powder dry until my colleagues have finished talking sorry did you want something yes sorry can I just add in relation to um what my colleague has said um in relation to that section between um
Hardwick Lane along the a44 advantages there I mean when we discussed this in the previous application relating to the opposite side of the road um it was particularly we were really concerned as well about cycle the fact that that can’t be wide enough for a cycle a combined footway and cycle and that
There was no other access um safe access to the schools or wider permeability so I think it goes beyond just the a44 um I think this development has that cycle access and better permeability Elsewhere on the site um but I do understand the need for highways improvements in that section on
The a44 so I wouldn’t like to see the section 106 removed if it’s you know if we find that as you say once the development has been developed and we we need to we need to do something because people are using it but it it would never enable a cycle way along there
Which yeah thanks councilor General thank you um I think previously we were discussing pedestrian access from further to the West on the a44 I think with the section that we’re yeah so the section we’re looking at already has a footway it’s between upper hardwood Lane and winds road so I
Think from my point of view it’s there’s not as much a risk as the extended a44 we last time that sense um any other speakers councelor Hamlin following on a little from councelor jenard comment a second ago um yes I I think perhaps for pedestrians it
Might be just not quite so dangerous as the previous Pro proposed one that was turned down but what can we do to prevent the possibility of children who do like to ride their bicycles on the the foot paths and if they’re doing so cheekily and have to drop off the
Pavement onto the road to um get round pedestrians for instance they’re going to really ending themselves thank you any other speakers councelor Thomas yeah listening to everybody I think when we um with there two months three months ago and we rejected the gladman one of our um colleague one of my colleagues
Said I don’t want the blood of one child on my conscience I’m not going to say who it was and I felt exactly the same thing and we all stood there and we all almost instantly look this cannot be allowed we but we’re now rehashing more or less the
Same thing coming across at a44 whatever we do should we should discourage anybody from walking on the edge of the a44 even if you take the 30 mph speed limit 100 meters down the road orever far you will not slow lores a a 37 ton Arctic gentleman over there will
Probably traveling at 30 mil an hour which he will be doing at that point takes a heck of a lot of stopping and if a child steps out in the road there is no earthly way that you can prevent a serious accident you have a accident you do not survive it and I
Think this constantly re encouraging an walkway on the a44 we should discourage it completely because we you know at the end of the day we are going to have children killed there and it’s as serious as that I’ve never stood on a more dangerous section of road anywhere in
Harry piture and I live virally on the a49 sorry Gib if that’s okay um sort of just to to interject there I suppose on a couple of things one obviously you’ve you’ve heard that you know there is an existing footway there people may walk on it anyway and that that situation
That you’ve described you know may occur whether the footway is wider or not wider but I think the other thing to to to mention as well when we’re dealing with it you know if we request we’ve requested the section 106 many after careful consideration you know we understand those local views and we
Understand the views of the Town Council and also the views of the of the the applicant they’ve they’ve made the the same the same views the local Highway Authority as you said this has been going on a long time they haven’t come to that conclusion lightly it’s is a is a very
Considered response um as we do with with those sexual 106 contributions we’ll request that contribution we’ve put it in as a separate contribution we haven’t put it in as part of the longer list of The Wider contributions it’s an additional contribution um when um if at the point
That we go to um deliver or spend that there is a consultation period a consultation process that we will go through with the ward counselors with the Town Council when we can talk about that delivery mechanism at that point officers are of the opinion it’s necessary to make the development
Acceptable at this point and I appreciate the viws that may say that they don’t feel it’s necessary to make the development acceptable however that’s a view that you know you need to come to in that decision the other thing I would say just referring back to the
Travel plans and the you know you know directing people in the other direction part of those proposals will include signage and they will include travel plans for those um for the role out of those um sale of those properties and we’ll engage in that way so there is
Those things already in place and we agree we should be directing people in the other direction but it’s for though it’s it’s about addressing the potential for people to walk in that desire line and that as I said it’s a very careful and considered approach being mindful of
The previous decision ourselves but it’s still an approach that we have taken and that the local Highway Authority have put forward so I’d like you to take that into account as well as well can I I say you know this is a a dilemma because whatever we do we’re
Damned if we do and we’re damned if we don’t if we do don’t do this um um footpath scheme and some child is injured or killed we’ll be blamed and if we do and some child is injured or or um killed we be blamed um
Whichever way we do it so it’s a matter of whether we think on balance that it might be safer for this to be done or not and that’s a very difficult thing to do um anyway members for the councilor Baker in the absence of any further debate Mr chairman I would recommend
That this application be approved according to the recommendation is outlined in the paper is that seconded that is seconded yes coun chair i’ second that all right thank you are there any other speakers please see sorry did you want to yeah at the end I mean I don’t know unless you
Wanted to put right something that’s actually being said yes please I just wanted to make sure that everybody knew that it was the developer was asked for extra money to the half million that they’ve already said that they’re willing to contribute I think you know if this has to be done
Then why should the developer have to be the one to to actually pay for it I I think you know the scale of this development Mill half a million pounds is relatively minor anyway councelor bter yeah just one question chair do we have any data on accidents
On that road for the last 10 years that have formulated any opinions regarding the transport s m Mr Jones um I’m not aware of any issues but I’ll just double check for you now thank you right are there any other speaker back had to so you want to just in relation to
Councelor Davis’s comments just there I would much rather developer pays for this than taxpayers from the area thanks just just on that we waiting yeah just probably sort of a learning point and and just a a point of clarity that if in the event that money isn’t spent
Then the section one the six does requires to return that money so it’s that sort of position is there that if you know if when we go to do you know off if if the if the result is that for whatever reason that work isn’t undertaken then there is that position
Whereby the money is required to be returned to the developer um but as I said you and it is an additional payment as you said because we feel it is necessary to make the development acceptable and therefore that payment should be required a section 106 in lie
Of the 278 Works within the highway that we would have um requested initially right are there any sorry sorry just coming back on the accidents um there have been there’s been a serious accident at the junction with P Lane um on the a44 and F the
Sorry East on the a44 um but there’s been no accidents between uh winow Road and upper Hardwick Lane in the last 10 years yeah yeah that’s reported accidents in mind we going to add 250 houses to that but anyway councelor Andrews thank you chair I would simply
Comment that it’s it is this actual development that is causing the necessity to proove that stretch of pavement are there any other speakers we have a um proposer and seconder for the uh recommendations outlined in the agenda papers um yeah yes yes I’m I’m coming to that
I’ve got the officers for any further comments from officers no nothing from us thank you then I’ll come to councilor Davis to final comments thank you chair and thank you um colleagues for your indepth comments um I too will um will accept this application admittedly I’m a little bit sad about
The one area I’ve already mentioned but we do need this in bromyard so I fully support the recommendation that has been made okay thank you thank you councilor Davis we have a Rec recommendation proposed and secondly can I ask for those in favor of that recommendation please show those against
Extensions one exstension and that is carried can I now call for a 10 10 minute break uh if we can get back by then for a comfort break thank you you if if you can uh microphone I one is it just yeah yes no no mic oh yeah we’re back we
Are back right welcome back can I now ask that the meeting s can I ask that the live stream is live back right and we’ll now move on to the second application request can I request that the public speakers present in person for the agenda item seven join
The meeting Mr Le M Miss Stewart and Mr White to take their seats in the public participation tables good morning and can I welcome you to the meeting and I will call you to speak following the officer’s presentation um to the right page can I ask M jenman to give her presentation
Please thank you chair uh firstly can I thank all members who attended the site visit yesterday which I hope uh was helpful in terms of site context this application in front of members today has been redirected to planning committee um by Council Hamlin due to the level of local
Interest uh firstly I would like to bring your attention to the update sheets whereby a further representation by the member a member of the public is is reported and updates to queries raised yesterday relating to site levels seasonal worker accommodation and local Water Systems have been clarified
I will discuss these points in more detail as as I go through the presentation members will see that the only change to the recommendation is that of condition s which has been amended to capture and consider the ground levels U moving on to the presentation uh so the application site
Is identified in the usual manner by the red star this is a full planning application which seeks seeks per permission for 9.5 hectar of fixed poly tels for the growing of strawberries the application also seeks seeks permission for the relocation and upgrade of an existing field access a steel framed general purpose
Agricultural building and six water tanks all of which are ancillary to that of the the proposed poly tunnels the application site is known as drele farm and is currently accessed VI a track taken from the c1124 which members used yesterday there is a prare of semi- detached dwellings and a range
Of small out buildings um which members would have seen yesterday however these do not form part of this application the proposed development under consideration represents an extension to the existing soft fruit Enterprise of sna produce with the proposed development to be incor incorporated and farmed alongside that of the existing soft fruit
Enterprise the application in front of members this morning is recommended for approval with suitably worded conditions as detailed at the end of the report next slide please so this side helps with the site context the application site is located in the Parish of mden around 4.5 kilom to the north of Herford the
Village of mden is located in a central located location within the parish and is the main main set settlement supporting a range of services there are no main a roads within the parish with the closest being that of the a49 um Herford lempster road which is
Shown in green on the western edge of the top map Haywood Lane connects the a49 to the Village of mden and crosses the railway line and the river lug which meanders and winds its way down from the village of bodham in the north towards the village of Morton and lug to the
South the village of mden hosts a range of services including a village shop and school as me members would have seen yesterday there is an extensive network of public foot paths and Bridal paths which crisscross around the site and through the village uh Brook Farm which is the
Headquarters of sna is identified to the north of the village with the application site at Drake drele located to the west of the existing poly tunnel as viewed and identified on site yesterday there is a recently constructed winter fill Reservoir which adjoins the site to the East and
Identified on the aial image at the bottom of the the slide the Earthworks which are currently taking place and which were viewed Yesterday by members are in connection with a further Reservoir to the east of the application site and does not form part of this submission there are a number of
Residential Properties located in close Pro proxim proximity to the site of particular note are those close to the proposed upgraded access and those along the existing Bridal path and to the east of the site at Ben green next slide please this slide shows the extent of the applica the applicant’s land
Ownership and existing business the application site is outlined in red with all other land owned by the applicant in blue yesterday on site it was identified that there is a field between that of the existing development and the application site which is not within the applicant’s ownership within this field
However there is a public footpath which provides a direct uh direct pedestrian access which will be utilized by workers to access the application site from that of the existing site as identified within the beginning of the report the application represents an extension to the applicant’s existing soft fruit Enterprise
Sna sna are one of the largest independent soft Fruit Growers in Europe growing a variety of soft fruit and vegetables their headquarters are at Brook Farm in Marden which is Loc located just north of the village and consists of a packing and processing plant seasonal worker accommodation research and development Laboratories and
Offices the areial image um at the bottom of the slide shows the existing coverage and location of the poly tunnels which cover some 37 hectar of land around Brook Farm the settlement of Marden is also evident to the south of the existing development and which members would have seen yesterday next slide please
So this slide shows the proposed layout of the development the proposed poly tunnels are split into four cropping areas which are identified and described at paragraph 1.14 of the report the tunnels are to be arranged at various lengths to fit um fit the fields which they are located upon a headland around
The perimeter of the site is to facilitate access and circulation around the sites access tracks constru constructed Stone at a width of 3 MERS are proposed with further areas of wild flowers along along its length all boundary Hedges and trees and tree areas are to be retained with appropriate route protection areas
Provided as is normal practice with poly tunnel developments the tunnels Will Follow The Contours of the land however due to the current Earthworks which are occurring on site and in connection with the approved water reservoir and that of which have occurred as a result of the completed water reservoir
Uh it is recommended as part of condition seven that prior to any works commencing on site cross sections through each of the fields are provided for uh for approval which show the finished ground levels um for us to approve this will ensure that the character of the area is safeguarded and
It will consider the need for any additional landscaping and planting at the center of the site uh on the lower ground there is to be a central yard uh where the proposed storage building and water tanks are to be located a new access track which connects the yard to the proposed
Upgraded access to the south of the site onto the c1124 will run along the western boundary of the site uh the proposed tunnels have been positioned and laid out so they are set back from adjoining highways and are appropriate appropriate distances from adjoining Residential Properties however the further details which will be
Secured through condition seven will ensure that there is sufficient distances from the HED RS and public rights of way with regards to the principle of the development uh Strate excuse me strategic policy ss6 in the Cs and in the core strategy states that in Broad terms uh the continuing
Development of the more traditional employment sectors such as farming and food and drink manufacturers will be supported the national planning policy framework seeks to promote strong rural e economies through sustainable growth and expansion of businesses in rural areas and the diversification of agricultural and other land use businesses the principle of the poly
Tunnels and Associated development in this rural location is detailed within paragraphs 65 to 6.24 of my officer report the proposed poly tunnels are to be installed in association in in association with the existing tunnels and operations to the west of the SES with all fruit grown to be processed and transferred via the
Existing infrastructure at Brook Farm as highlighted on site The Proposal represent represents an extension to the existing business and will utilize all existing infrastructure including the seasonal workers um whilst we were on site yesterday um councelor Simmons asked for clarification on the number of additional seasonal workers required the
Applicants clarified this in a submission in October addressing points raised by the parish council the additional overall requirement is that of 30 the company currently employs 395 seasonal workers however there is permission for the accommodation of up to 850 workers if approved the total number of seasonal workers required will be that of
425 the business therefore has more than sufficient accommodation there is clear support both in local and National planning policy for the principle of the development in this rural area uh and has benefits for the UK food production and for sustainable food distri distribution however the principle of
The development and the E and the economic and social benefits needs to be balanced against the topic based material planning considerations which I’ll now move on to next slide please this next slide shows the elevation and details of the proposed poly tunnels the picture on the bottom is taken from
Within the existing site each tunnel is to have an 8 m wi width and a maximum height of 4.5 M they are to be constructed using a steel framework and are to follow the Contours of the ground the image shows that each tunnel will accommodate six parallel rows of tables
At a height of 1 meter for the soft fruits to be grown the covers um the covered are clear polythene sheets um secured over the framework the covering has a lifespan of three years at the end of which it is removed bailed and sent to a recycling plant next slide
Please this slide um shows the detailed drawings of the proposed storage building and water tanks to be located within the proposed yard members will note that condition 13 on the recommendation controls the use of the building to that of the storage of machinery and equipment associated with the growing of
Soft fruits on the site the proposed storage building is to be 36 M long and 18 M wide and the building is to be colored slate blue I’ve included on this slide a picture of the tractor and trailer which members would have seen yesterday um these tractors and trailers
Will be used to transport the fruit um and the the size of the building has been designed so these building so the tractors and trailers can be stored in the building dur um overnight in terms of the water tanks these are to be used as primary water
Storage tanks um water is to be pumped from the reservoir and stored here as a localized water supply this water will then be used to irrigate the crops which are grown in drakeley when required as seen on other polyol sites within the county it is necessary to have localized
Water storage for security in case there are issues with the water supply as as the crops grown are extremely sens sensitive to any break in in irrigation next slide please uh this slide identifies the proposed relocated access if approved all vehicle access into the site in connection with the growing of soft
Fruit will be from the proposed new access at the northern edge of Marden Road the access has been designed to accommodate the required Maneuvers and Vis and visibility spads of 56 m in each Direction this this is as a result from the speed surveys undertaken the existing access adjacent
To the residential property 3 Hawk head Cottage is to be closed with the landscaping and planting provided um adjacent to the boundary um with the the new access track and residential property it is recognize that traffic generation arising from the proposed development represents a key issue for
Many of the local local residents and that of the parish council as already mentioned once the fruit has been picked it will be transport transported back to Brook Farm to be processed the route to be taken is that from the new access through the center of the village and the
Residential Walker Green back to Brook Farm no hgbs will access the drakeley site the fruit will be transported by the tractors and trailers um which again a photo is included at the top the application has been supported with the transport statement which identifies the proposal will result in 12 two-way Mo
Two-way movements per day from the site back to Brook Farm this is six arrivals and six departures all seasonal workers are to travel to and from the site by the network of public footpaths the development will result in an increase of one to two additional HG movements from Brook Farm a week during
The growing season as part of the recommendation conditions are included for a site management plan which will include details of the management of all traffic transporting fruit from and around the site the site management plan will also incl include a noise a noise management plan to ensure that all operations on
The site do not generate noise which will impact upon the residential imunity of nearby residents or users of the public right of way the council’s highways officers have no objection to the proposal and are satisfied that the proposed upgrade access provides a safe entrance and exit to the site for the
Traffic to be generated from The Proposal next slide please uh this slide identifies the route from the site back to Brook Farm as well as the route from Brook Farm to the a49 officers have considered the context of the route and and the development and services along it the applicants have
Offered to restrict vehicle movements to and from the site during during school start and finish times and this will be captured through the site management plan it is recognized that the development will result in a change in the nature of vehicle movements to that of the arable use in recent years
However from the information submitted and controls around the transportation of fruit the traffic generation is not considered to impact significantly on the local Highway Network and can be accommodated safely next slide please so this slide shows some f some photos taken along the along the route back to
Brook Farm through the village the majority of the route back to Brook Farm has a 30 mile speed limit and has Pavements for pedestrians next slide please this next slide identifies the network of public rights of way and Bridal paths which surround the the development the network of paths are
Valued and enjoyed by manyc local local local residents and the impact of the development upon the visual amenity and Landscape character when viewed from the foot foot paths by users has been considered officers have also considered the cumulative impact with that of the existing development it was identified on site
Yesterday that Bridal path mr22 travels through the the proposed developments with Bridal path mr19 running along the whole length of the western boundary of the site on which members walked yesterday all paths are to remain unobstructed and will be accessible it was identified on site yesterday when members walked along
The bridal path within the site that a new HED R was to be installed to provide a visual separation between the tunnels and that of the bridal path whilst also providing screening of the proposed tunnels from the Marden Road the scale of visual effects along the stretch of the bridal path which
Members walked yesterday are considered to be high although open Corridor with adequate spacing the development will change the character on this stretch of the path officers acknowledge that there will be some visual harm to varying degrees both in isolation and cumulatively with the existing tunnels however the harm is not considered to be
Substantial and the proposed planting and Landscaping mitigation will help in screening the tunnels and filtering viewed whilst also enhancing the existing green infrastructure around the boundaries next slide please this next slide shows photos taken along the public right of way and Bridal path both within the site and within the
Existing polyal development the photo on the top left is where members stood yesterday and were able to view the wider landscape as identified yesterday the field is not within the ownership of the the applicant however there was a well-used public footpath which provides a connection from the existing site to
That of the proposed the photo at the top right identifies the footpath within the existing site as the site is a working site the applicants Mark out the root of the footpath and in some areas have planted planted vegetation either side which is shown in the photo on the bottom
Right the photo in the bottom left of the slide shows the roote of the bridal path which members walked yesterday um as identified part of the landscape mitigation is to plant that native hedge R along the majority of the length of this stretch of the bridal
Path um which will not only help with the visual immunity from the bridal path but also help from the views from the highway members were also able to see yesterday the uncovered blueberry plantations uh which are grown in pots on land to the south of the site these plantations don’t require planning
Permission and serve as an as additional landscape mitigation against the proposed poly tenel areas it is considered that the majority of potential visual effects are to be experienced by users of the public rights of way within the area as well as within the wider landscape the legal
Routs of all paths however will remain intact officers recognize that the landscape is a working agricultural landscape the views from the public right of way of the development will be largely filtered and contained within the extensive landscape fabric the landscape officer and public rights of way officer have raised no objection to
The Proposal with regards to the potential effects on the public rights of way next slide please this next slide identifies the Heritage assets which were assessed as part of the um Heritage statement Heritage statement which accompanied the application it was identified to members on site yesterday that there is a
Cluster of grade two listed residential dwellings and buildings to the southeast corner of the site where members access the site and along Marin Road as well as to the east the impact on Heritage is discussed in detail within the report the application was supported by a Heritage impact assessment which
Considers the setting of each asset and how the proposed development will impact upon it the assessment concludes that the assets the aspects of the settings which contribute to the the significance of each of the listed buildings would not be harmed the council’s Heritage officer having previously objected to the larger
Proposal on site is now satisfied that the proposed scale and layout of the development proposed will now result in a neutral impact upon the setting of all Heritage assets identified next slide please these next few slides considered the wider landscape impact and identified Landscaping scheme around the
Site by their very nature the effects of a polyl scheme on the character and appearance of the landscape is a key consideration and has been raised as a concern within the majority of of representations received the council’s landscape officer has been actively involved in the application process the
Site is not within a designated landscape the application was supported by a landscape and visual impact appraisal which has assessed the Direct effects of The Proposal on the landscape resources and indirect effects on the on the Public Public perception of a land of landscape arising from the change and
Visual impact this appraisal assess 20 viewpoints which are shown on this slide on site yesterday it was identified to members the proposed longdistance view from the Queenswood Country Park which is located over 2.6 kilm from the site to the Northwest this was assessed as part of the appraisal and the photograph on the
Bottom of the slide was taken from the view was taken from the Viewpoint it identifies where the development will be seen due to its elevated position the Viewpoint is afforded wide views across the landscape towards Herford along the a49 there are several Villages and large developments which can be seen within
The rural landscape on a clear day the existing tunnels can be seen from this Viewpoint and it is recognized that parts of the proposed site will be seen from the Viewpoint especially during winter months overall the appraisal identifies that there is a potential for a moderate adverse effect
Upon this Viewpoint the separation with the existing development um and a varied topography across the site will result in not all of the site being seen however officers acknowledge the development will be viewed from this Viewpoint uh other viewpoints assessed um were positioned on public rights of way and local highways the appraisal
Identifies that the majority of potential visual effects will be experienced by the users of the public right of way which are in close proximity to the site offices um o overall the conclusions of the appraisal is that the the scheme would create a localized moderate adverse effect on the overall
Character of the sites however the proposed mitigation will assist in ensuring that the visual and physical impact on the landscape is not to be overbearing and takes into consideration the existing landscape historic context and public viewpoints officers would agree with the overall assessment especially when considered cumulatively with that of the existing development
Next slide please this uh this next slide shows the landscape master plan and mitigation on the northern part of the SES the landscape master plan has evolved over time with inputs from both the council’s ecology and Landscape offices during pre-application discussions and during this application process areas of native
Buffering and hedro planting are proposed along boundaries to filter views of the development from the public rights of way and residential dwellings existing and proposed HED roads are to be active are to be actively managed to Max maximize thickness and maximize visual screening officers do recognize that there are areas where the proposed
Landscaping can go further members identified areas along the access track yesterday where mature trees and hedge roads need to be protected but also areas where further enhancement could also be provided not only from a landscape perspective but also from that of a bi a biodiversity one uh as already highlighted condition
Seven on the recommendation includes a requirement for a scale plan for all trees and hedge RS to be retained with their protection to be identified along with further de details on species of plants these plans will also identify the distance between the Hedge R boundaries and that of the tunnels to
Ensure that there is adequate separation not only from a visual perspective but also to assist in biodiversity connectivity the landscape officer although acknowledging that there will be some harm to the overall landscape character um through the proposed mitigation and a detailed planting scheme and Landscape Maintenance and management plan uh recognizes that this
Will be reduced um and the views will be filtered into and across the site having objected to the previous proposal the landscape officer has now offered support for this for this application subject to appropriate conditions next slide please um so on these next set of plans they show the proposed Landscaping on
The southern part of the site uh and include the proposed relocated access onto Marin Road and the areas around the bridal path um which travels through the site next slide please um this further slide um just shows um photos um of from around the site including the blueberry planting um
Which members would have seen yesterday next slide please um so moving on to the drainage strategy um around the site um this plan um and and drawing um and and photograph show the existing Reservoir which has been constructed on the site the impact of The Proposal upon surface water runoff rates and the
Implications for localized flooding is a material planning consideration the application has been supported by a flood risk assessment and a surface water management plan it is recognized that the availability of water is fundamental to the success of soft fruit businesses the strategy put forward is similar to that across many of the
Polyal sites in Herer rainfall is to be captured and recycled for irrigation during the growing season preventing the need for the applicant to abstract from any local water course as members were able to see yesterday the site is already served by a number of ponds and the recently constructed constru constructed
Reservoir surface water runoff from the proposed tunnels will be intercepted and directed to French drains located downg gradient of the poly tunnels which will discharge directly into the reservoir for irrigation the council’s drainage engineer Engineers have been involved in the development and design of the drainage strategy throughout the pre-application discuss discussions and
Join the course of this application the drainage Engineers have advised officers that the submitted information has demonstrated that the scheme is capable of delivering a sustainable water management system which will protect and enhance groundwater resources and which does not pose a risk to localize flooding when we were on site yesterday
There was a question raised regarding the protection of existing ponds and water courses um the application site is within the river lug catchment and as such there is a is a requirement for Habitat regulations assessment to be completed to consider the potential effects on the proposed of of The
Proposal upon the river lug sack the application was supported with a shadow HRA which follows which following considerations of all supporting documents the planning ecologist was satisfied to formally adopt as the majority part of the required habitats regulation appropriate assessment commentary is provided at paragraph 4.6 um by the council’s planning
Ecologist the council’s completed H identified net reduction in agricultural pathway for nutrients into the lug sack catchment by reducing rainfall and water movements through existing top soil and reducing the pathway for the Legacy the Legacy phosphate to enter the hydraulic attachment clean surface water created by the proposed tunnels is to be
Utilized um to provide required crop irrigation with any excess being diverted to the local pond system to maintain their bio maintain their biodiversity iers potential all irrigation water is managed on a demand and Supply basis and any outfall from the tabletop system is direct directly recycled so any nutrients remain within the closed
System I would highlight condition n’s members on the recommendation which will control and maintain the Water Management scheme throughout the lifetime of the developments n Natural England were consulted on the completed HRA and have confirmed they concur with with the planning ecologist findings and next slide please so to sum up the application
Seeks full planning permission for the construction of 9.5 hectares of polyenals and Associated infrastructure across the site The Proposal represents an extension to the established soft Enterprise and supports the growth and expansion of the existing business providing further employment within the Agricultural and other related sectors whilst adding value to the local food
Chain the national planning policy framework gives strong support to sustainable growth growth to support a prosperous rural economy the success of the soft fruit growing industry in Herer in recent years can largely be attributed to the use of poly tunnels which has enabled Farmers to increase productiv productivity and adapt to climate
Change as identified within the reports and discussed in and in the presentation there is harm to the landscape however in this case in the case of the proposal put forward the scheme is considered capable of mitigation to such an extent that an objection on landscape grounds is considered to be un UNS
Unsustainable the proposed tunnels have been positioned and laid out to ensure that they are not readily seen from any adjoining Highway and are considered to be appropriately dis distan from any adjoining Residential Properties as highlight highlighted and evident within the report there are no technical objections to the proposal and
The principle for the development is supported your officers have assessed The Proposal against the development plan and although moderate harm to the visual immunity of the area has been identified these are outweighed by the social economic and environmental benefits which have been identified in conclusion and on balance
The scheme is considered to Accord with the relevant policies and found to represent sustainable development there is no material considerations that are considered to outweigh the presumption in favor of sustainable development and officers are mindful of the benefits of The Proposal as such the proposal is recommended for approval subject to
Conditions thank you chair and members of the committee this concludes my committee presentation thank you for a very extensive presentation thank you right we’ll move on now to to public speakers can I invite uh Mr Le to speak on behalf of mtin Parish Council good morning chairman and members of the planning
Committee rodley Martin Parish Council we object to the application on the following grounds transport the road system is not designed to support the current volume of vehicles less loan additional traffic this is evidenced by the damage to the road edges and hedge RS the exit from the field into
C1124 is potentially unsafe the data used to design this Junction is not robust it was is based on a 3-hour survey between 9:35 and 12:35 on a Thursday when traffic levels are low best practice is it should be over a 7-Day period the average speed used is crucial to the visibility spays the
Information on the route taken through by the additional traffic through the village is factually incorrect 4.7 in officers report it states that the route is mainly through a rural residential area on the outskirts of the village it goes through the middle of the Village past the exit for the 90 house
Development and the post office and Shop resulting in flawed conclusions being drawn on its safety and impact we don’t accept the conclusions on hgvs and other visitors mostly going west of the a49 this route is regularly closed due to flooding and Bridge damage observations show a significant number of vehicles go
East and north flooding and surface water drainage we dispute conclusions drawn and the robustness of the data the basis of the argument is that the fresh French drains coupled with the attenuation pools and reservoirs collect all the water under item 4.8 of the officer’s report it becomes clear that
This is not necessarily the case since the permanent poly tunnels were installed flooding has got worse and we believe the tunnels have contributed to this additional tunnels will only make this worse prow the impact on prow is huge currently 20% of our bridal ways are adjacent to tunnels if this development
Is approved it will be over 60% this is in total contention to the council’s rights of way Improvement plan and will spoil the enjoyment of parishioners and visitors the mitigation plans are ineffective and the tunnels will spook horses creating a dangerous situation new roadways running alongside the bridal ways will only
Exasperate this noise and nuisance the information environmental health have based their recommendations on for 11 is inaccurate they State there have been no noise and nuisance complaints we know that a number of complaints have been raised about noise impact of mud on the roads causing drainage problems and potentially dangerous incidents with
Vehicles development of mtin Martin is key to the plans of Heritage Council for delivering in their long-term housing commitment this has had no consideration or comment when recommending this application goes ahead we would like you to consider that whilst 22 people objected to this planning application I’m afraid you used your three minutes
Thank you can I now ask uh Miss Stewart to a resident to speak in objection to the application you have three minutes good morning everyone um I’m CLA s a local resident speaking for local objectiv we contend that this is industrial Agri agriculture to grow a luxury crop there are 27 supporters for
These only three of whom lived live in mden the rest are outside as far as Manchester and East Kent there were 25 objections um there were over a hundred all of all the objections were in M there were over a hundred objections to the previous with but that was withdrawn
And not with given because we understood it was all the same application so to consider what will be lost if this development is permitted I don’t think you saw all the area yesterday there’s about 20 acres of gentle arable Fields bordered by huge Oaks and traditional Hera Hedges Hawthorne Blackthorn
Crisscrossed by ancient Lanes left to revert to Nature when they were not adopted and made up by the local Council the views reach hey Bluff all is quiet field fairs Red Wings Footprints of deer and Man Trap Burrows of Fox Badger and rabbit it’s an utterly enchanting peaceful and restorative Haven for man
And Beast horse riders and Walkers fitting Hera’s core strategy desire to safeguard our natural her Heritage so as to encourage tourism yet this will cease to exist when the fields butting up to those lanes are filled with noisy plastic tunnels machinery and workers going back and forth and not just these immediate
Acres because of the height of the landscape any noise or visual dissonance is carried for Miles having experienced the current poly tunnels there is always noise they vibrate in the wind and the rain Machinery has been experienced anytime from 5:30 in the morning to all weekend the British horse Society wrote
Objecting to the previous application which is essentially the same saying that there had been an agreement that the three rivers ride would not be should be protected however this impact would impact this development would impact it CPR campaigned for the protection of rural England also sent a very detailed and referenced objection
To quote the proposed development will be a significant cumulative negative impact on the rural landscape and overwhelm The Village such large scale developments will have a profound effect on the intrinsic qualities with the Hera Countryside it is these qualities which form the basis of Tourism within the county the sacrifice of agricultural
Land to such industrial farming methods will be inevitably make the the county less attractive as a tourist destination people don’t want to come here to see Acres of plastic Herford chakor strategy also talks about sustainable development CPR quotes the entire site comprises grade two and therefore best and most versatile agricultural land
According to defra the proposed development would therefore take over nine hectares of valuable BMV land indefinitely threatening long-term sterility from spread Etc at a time when food security is of particular concern yearr round soft fruits are luxury crops and this large area of land would be useful in growing necessary food such as
Staples pray go to three minutes thank you thank you and now I ask um Mr White to speak on behalf of the applicant morning um my name is Jim White representing sna produce um as operations director um I was born and educated in Herford and I’ve been in the soft rout industry
For 20 years um sna is a fourth generation family-owned Herford business growing fruit since the 1990s and since 2016 the business has changed considerably now run by industry experts who have focused on leading the business based on high ethical and farming standards sna Farms a total of 355
Hectares in the UK of which 127 hectares are in Strawberry production representing 35% of our land mass how Garden Farm is 35 hectares and the Drake application is an extension to our current site and will be controlled and operated as one the rest of the land in our control is either in aable
Production environmental areas or water storage infrastructure a key focus of the proposed site will be to support our R&D facilities in 2012 sna started a breeding program which is now Europe’s largest independent breeding program in 2024 it will supply 50 million plants to 95 European Growers this should be
Recognized as a major success for British Horticulture and at one level we should be proud that the groundbreaking innovation has been delivered by a Hera of farming business further opportunities to promote and Champion British genetics can only be delivered if we are able to present a world-class farming environment which we have built
Our vision into the drle planning application we achieve industry leading yields through a dedicated management team focused engaged and Market facing allowing us to be financially stable while shaping the mod food production sector of British agriculture we now employ 150 full-time staff of which 120 are based in Herford
Data from 2022 demonstrated that we offer premium jobs to the herriage rural economy at a 48% premium to the heriage our average Our Guest workers live on our sites and we estimate that 60 to 70% of their earnings are reinvested back into the local services and economies the primary use of poly
Tunnels is to protect the fruit we grow and safeguard crops for our customers our financial investment in sits is large but essential for the key efficient operation the ability for us to build permanent roadways modern growing structures water storage reses and rainwater harvesting systems is all
Key to a modern production site sna is privately financed investing 5 million pounds if Herer with this application our farm and genetics are supporting the UK herriage farming industry and it will see Growers travel from around the world to come and experience and share knowledge with our
Business I and my colleagues are proud to work in the UK soft root industry and we’re proud to work in sna the business allows me and others like me to make a fantastic living in a progressive sector where we’re all passionate about what we do the opportunity of our business
Offers young industry entrance to in a huge enabling them to build successful careers in our County UK farming relies on controlled and considered expansion to remain competitive and resilient to against inflationary pressure this application has been resubmitted having considered and addressed previous concerns raised together with the neighbors in close proximity to the
Application I’m afraid you’ve gone to your three minutes thank you thank you right right we’ll now move to the local member councilor Hamlin who will um speak he has no vote in this particular matter as being the local member um Mr Hamlin you have 10 minutes thank you
Chair good morning again to everybody and thank you for all those who turned up yesterday at the site visit it was extremely useful I think many of the people who had not seen a um a farm similar to this before were quite surprised by what they found when
They arrived uh of course having not been able to see it previously as indeed from the local roadway systems the local highways you cannot see it thanks also to the officers particularly rea Gman for her extraordinary amount of work on this one she as indeed have I spent
Spent a lot of time uh on the site and um consequently have been able to bring this application into form suitable to be brought to the committee the applicant sna group or sna produce uh we’ve just heard Fruit Growers and breeders uh they will be known to many
Of you there really are a major player in the European soft fruit business as well as actually I think in South America and other much more distant parts of the world at the headquarters in M they have several hectares of Nursery poly tunnels where they uh nurture new and potential varieties of
The fruits and they also have a multi-million pound scientific unit with Laboratories capable of mapping and understanding the DNA profile of each of these fruits it’s a very Advanced business however some of the developments required to conduct this Enterprise have not always met with approval and for this reason the process
Of undertaking a lengthy and thorough period of consultation is necessary as a consequence unpopular parts of the plan can be amended or removed and further information can be provided to those who have concerns these concerns often being put to rest by providing a greater understanding of the
Operation so this in effect has been a great opportunity for sna to fly their flag and to inform local people about themselves about what they do and about how they do it I hope that they’ve taken advantage of that opportunity uh and that they will take away from this
Exercise the advantage of being open and transparent and the value of involving the local people when the application first came forward the consultations produced over a 100 representations 76 of which raised objections and 36 were supportive many of these being extremely well thought out and presented and raising very valid
Points so the response of the local residents the local Parish Council and other interested parties has been much appreciated this has been a super example of the process working and consultation making a difference it was a great challenge to work through all of this correspondence and take this into
Account of the many opinions our Council officers have done this consequently a number of significant Amendments have been made to the overall project in other areas it’s been possible to provide information to a lay pupil spheres uh an example being the question of heavy traffic the tractors
And trailers which you’re going to be used in this uh proposed operation are small compared to those seen in many agricultural situations and they are Turing produce just back to the main farm six Journeys each way daily and the advanced standard of suspension required for the good of the fruit will result in
Little road noise and little or no Highway damage after resubmission and these alterations having been made the representations that were resulting from that numbered 24 in objection and 25 which were in support so this is a significant difference by the virtue of the consultations um in the representations
That were made so we really must thank the local people and and the residents who’ve shown that they care they’ve raised concerns and as far as possible these concerns have been listened to and acted upon so consequently they have enabled this application to be brought to the committee fully compliant with
Planning regulations and the core strategy requirements we’ve heard a little the about the employment of the uh the number of people employed in Heritage here and I can tell you that the 121 full-time employees in Heritage year the average earnings of those is 687 pounds per week compared with the herriage
County average of 454 pounds per week I think we just heard this expressed as a matter of percentage but it is highly significant and incidentally um on a lighter note by the number of romantic leosin which have happened within the workforce they are actually also helping to populate the local PR
School so now it is the job of the committee to hold their debate on this application and come to a decision on its merits I look forward very much to hearing their discussions thank you chair thank you councelor hin could the public um speakers please take their place seats in the public gathering
Right councilor Baker thank you chairman as a previous resident of mden sna Davis were always seen as the bogeyman of the area and of course when this application was was when this application was first moted I think this that reputation was was enhanced somewhat however um when we
Well rather when I received this written report from Miss jenman um my some of my opinions were dispelled and we had this very comprehensive site visit yesterday which was quite an eye opener to how good this application could be um it was it really quite an eye
Opener um I have some a couple of concerns one is that there’s a 40 m hour speed limit past the new entrance that’s proposed for this site it runs from the um in the east from the a1125 all the way down the a1124 through the village of paron
And I would suggest if it’s possible that the 30 mph spe speed limit that’s currently in the village be extended to the east all the way up to the junction with the 1125 I think 40 mph is unrealistic there anyway it’s always been dangerous and so that was just a recommendation that
Possibly we could look at a trro for the future the other concerned is the tractors exiting the site are going some parts of the year they’re going to have muddy wheels and I’m wondering whether the 15 m is it 15 M back the gates to
The site I don’t think there going to be suitable for cleaning the wheels and I’m wondering whether a Wheel Wash facility might be um worthwhile there there are a couple of informatives number four and number five that mention not dropping mud in the road but that’s only an
Informative it’s not a set condition and wheel washers are something that could be utilized quite easily otherwise we could end up with a muddy track all the way through the village however um I got no real objections to the application and I would at this stage recommend approval
With conditions as listed thank you Mr chairman is that a proposal is that seconded are you seconded Thomas yep a question um Thomas where I live I’m suround my neighbor has got 75 hectares of tunnels the last two applications he has had um the last one was three years ago
The conditions to have his tunnels meant that he had to remove the covers in the winter um when I asked this question yesterday I was told that no these will be permanently covered why is a difference in um requirement G um yeah thank thank you chair so this this application has been
Submitted um for fixed for fixed um covers to be on all the all year round certainly um that’s how we have to assess the application um certainly my experience in recent years is that they’ve is that Growers have gone away from that um because of the implications
In terms of removing the tunnels there’s a cost uh implication for removing them but also that the covers get damaged every time they’re removed they get damaged so as it stands at the moment by having fixed tunnels that um those covers have a lifespan of three years
And at the end of that they can be recycled um um so that’s why most of the growers in her have gone now for fixed tunnels rather than those seasonal tunnels tunnels which we used to see right thank you for that um yeah there’s
Sort of a little bit more um I yes I don’t I say I’ve lived with these I have had tunnels of my own and years ago I had put you know seever a hectare or more tunnel so I’m sort of a a proponent of them I suppose um just um other things
Um the lady from the representing the objector said um about field fairs and Red Wings well we have an awful lot of uh fieldes visit us um they don’t visit anywhere around the poly tunnels because nothing in the poly tunnels produces food um if their fields were wheat which
Would be the other alternative um again there’s no real feed for them so I I would probably disagree with the fact that they were going to see less um sprays and sterile land my neighbor removed uh 12 hectares recently on land that he had rented that’s gone back into agricultural
Production of Wheat and various other crops and there is absolutely no uh being no side effect whatsoever so again I think that those two probably aren’t um probably correct but I am fully supportive of this and happy to seconded thank you chair um thank you to um Miss jenman for her
Comprehensive report and taking us through on site visit yesterday it’s much appreciated um have read through uh the majority not all of the objections listed on the planning acri site and I’m thank those that have spoken today I would rather not see the intensification of our Countryside um
That’s a personal preference but I also understand the need to um weigh up the competing tourism versus rural economy uh provided through Horticulture and agriculture um there is a successful business there that does support um a large number of our population in that area so we have to bear this in mind
Looking at the site there was some real concerns I had which you’ve picked up in condition seven with regard to the terracing and uh leveling of the land form towards the north of the site um as with the hedro and the proximity of the poly tunnels to the hedro particularly
The bridal way it looks on the landscape plan as if you’ve got the hedro then the access track and then area of planting for sort of wild flower Meadow I think I would like to see the hedro then the planting of Wild Flame wild flowers and then the access track to provide that
Additional set aside from the bridal way and from um all boundaries to be honest um I think I think that would increase the buffer and would be better um with our ld3 core strategy policy particularly um I think that the hedging proposed um I very much welcome the
Mixed species native species hedro um I’m pleased to see the height of that being managed to ensure visibility of screening I would like to ensure that that is also on the eastern boundary of the site particularly towards the settlements to the east Northeast of the site and the north which currently have
Views we didn’t get quite to that point but we could see um the other area of concern I have is the 56 met the removal of the hedro there whether that that can be reinstated with the sort of triangular form um so there’s a Gateway without a kind of complete 56 meter Gap
In hedro um I don’t know if that’s possible I’m not sure if that’s on the landscape plan I couldn’t quite make that out and particularly the red line boundary for that area is particularly wide as it runs along the western boundary um just want to make sure that
Those tree areas are captured in that landscape plan that’s submitted um on balance um I am struggling with this one um so I’d like to hear what other people have to say thank you other speakers please councelor Stone thank you chairman um I support very much what councelor baker said
About the speed limits it would be helpful if it could be reduced from 40 to 30 but just to remind members today it does take a long time to change a speed speed limit and um already well over a 100 um traffic regulation orders for Herer so we are talking about a few
Years even if it’s approved by the police and others but I think it’s a good idea um just a question to ask the officers there was been mentioned in the reports of flooding uh in the area and I wondered with all the flooding from Storm Hank last week whether there was
Any particular flooding in Mar near the polyan and what impact that may or may not have I wonder if the officer could address that please um but in general I’m supportive of the application um though I didn’t visit these poly tunnels um for the site visits yesterday I have visited
Quite a lot of other poly tunnels around the county and the soft fruit farming is certainly one of Hera’s great success stories I would say and with all the employment and other benefits so in general um um I I support this application but I’d like to have some
Reassurance on flooding and also um some further comments on the speed of traffic because there are going to be a lot more a lot more traffic in the area because a lot more houses being built in M according to the report as well as the tractors thank you thank you councilor
Stone Mr gentlemen uh thank you chair um in regards to um flooding certainly nothing’s been brought to my attention mention I have been on site um over the last two weeks I’ve been on site several times um and there’s been no no flooding on the site sou I would however say that
In um in the last two weeks Haywood Lane has been closed because of flooding um one of um the public speakers picked up on this that that road is regularly closed um which runs along the Quarry by the river lug um and at the same time
Often the Morton on lug Road um that can be closed as well that’s all from the river flooding um and at times when it does flood the um again the the local resident picked up on this um traffic has to find alternative routes depending
On what’s open um and so it is it is experience that in terms of the traffic generation is it is experienced in a wider area not just um not just the village but that is a result of um local flooding other speakers please are there no further speakers on this
Item right we have a proposal and a seconder for the sorry chair could we just have an answer from the planning office with regard to counselor Stone sorry you did just do that didn’t you yes sorry yeah it’s normally me that falls asleep just given just two things just
To pick up on one um there is a requirement in condition five for the um wheel cleaning we’re washing on already proposed so it’s already in a condition that’s okay I just thought i’ I’d clarify that um and I think we take away the applications been assessed on
The basis of the 40 m hour so we understand that’s acceptable but would take on board we can’t add a condition or try to address the requirement of a trro um obviously Katie’s here in terms of Highway Authority some changes that will come with the with the committed site residential site
Along that road as well but um it’s not something we can progress through this but noted Wales seems to be able to get speed limits in quicker than um sorry can I just clarify with the change that came through yesterday with regard to condition seven we take
The decision today based on that you will enforce that and as a delegated uh uh approval of that report that would be come through as condition seven yeah the amended versions in the recom in the updates as an amended recommendation right any further comments from the officers none no right
Will go to the local member thank you Mr chairman um very little more to say because I think we’ve heard um a very thorough version of of everything a lot of queries have been raised and answered two points I was going to make Kelly gibons has just
Answered both of them so um no nothing further J we have a um proposer and seconder of the recommendation as outlined in the agenda papers can I ask those in favor please Joe that those against none against um extensions thank you that is carried move on as quickly as we can onto
Item off oh right just a moment to change the officers e can we take our seats please got to have that tea oh oh no yeah if councilor Stone could take his seat please and could members of the public please if they’re not um sitting here please leave the leave the room please
Right we’ve go now to item eight which is um barley nap Farm can the um speakers who um um public speakers please take their places Mr Miss Suter on behalf of Peter Church Parish Council um uh Mr eock and Mr Tomkins I leave good morning I welcome you to the
Meeting I’ll call you when uh the officer has made her presentation um can I now ask Miss Elsie Morgan to make her presentation on item eight thank you chair and thank you to those members who joined on site yesterday morning the application is made in full and seeks planning permission and listed
Building consent for the proposed restoration of the grade two listed Farmhouse and the conversion of the attached granery to an Annex the conversion of a Stone Barn to two dwellings and the construction of two new buil uh build dwellings in lie of an extant prior approval under class Q of
The general permitted development order for the conversion of the existing model portal framed agricultural building into two dwellings the application site indicated by the star is located 1.5 km Northwest of the village of Peter Church accessed via long Lane and a farm track serving the existing buildings The Farmstead
Comprises the grade two listed Farmhouse traditional Stone Barn with cart shed and modern portal framed agricultural shed I will present each aspect of the proposal in turn next slide please in this instance the site lies outside of any identified settlement under the core strategy or NDP and it is therefore
Considered to be within open Countryside accordingly policy ra3 is relevant in order to assess the principle of the new housing in this location having regard for the two uh proposed new builds no exceptional circumstances have been Advanced to satify satify policy ra3 and I find the principle of new residential development
To run counter to the spatial strategy of the development plan plan however the permission granted under application 22062 for the conversion of the barns to two dwellings is a key material consideration of relevance in assessing this scheme this prior approval notice provides a clear evidence of an intention and ability to develop which
Puts the approved class Q scheme as a fullback position Beyond Reasonable Doubt as detailed in the committee report paragraph 6.9 to10 of relevance here is the Mansel case law which firstly clarifies that a case a class Q scheme is capable of being a fullback position as an alternative development
Scheme and secondly confirms the position that a proposal which offers a better Redevelopment opportunity in planning terms than that which could be achieved by a fallback position should be given appropriate weight in this case the class CU provides clear evidence of intention and ability to develop and
It’s considered that this is a material consideration of critical importance and that it should be afforded significant weight essentially this is a comparative assessment between the outcomes of the fullback position and the benefits to be derived from the proposed next slide please The Proposal seeks to construct
Two detached dwellings in lie of the two units approved under the class Q one located on the site of the existing barn and one to the southwest of The Farmstead these are identified on the plans as Unit C and D the portal frame Barn is a typical functional structure of little AR
Architectural value having a generally negative impact upon the setting of The Historic Farmstead being in a prominent location near the listed buildings on site as such their removal and replacement with high quality dwellings is an opportunity to visually improve the site next slide please the first dwelling annotated see
On the proposed plans is the Long Barn which would be a single unit providing four bedrooms this is proposed to be constructed of Timber cladding and corrugated metal roofing to reflect the Agricultural and Rural character of The Farmstead this would utilize the same Ridge height of the existing modern
Agricultural shed and has been designed to reflect the agricultural buildings of architectural Merit on the build on the site the scale and form of the building takes resterant from the existing Stone Barn utilizing a simple rectangular layout The Long Barn would be located on the site of the steel portal barn or be
It at a different orientation however this would relate well to the historic farm group group and ingate integ great with longer views this replacement of the existing built form on the site would be considered a visual Improvement since the modern Barn it offers little in way of Heritage or landscape Merit next slide
Please the second dwelling annotated as D is the embedded unit the proposed location away from the farm lends itself to the provision of a more contemporary design nestled into and making use of the hillside in a landscape and setting Le approach this would be less VIs usually prominent than the Long Barn
Form and read is more in keeping with the immediate surroundings utilizing the gradients of the site to sit onto the hillside the grass roof would visually integrate the unit into the landscape and Aid the built form in extending naturally from the topography the exposed elevation would be constructed
Of Timber to read in keeping with the natural landscape and draw minimal attention through limited glazing next slide please with regards to residential immunity it is not considered that The Proposal would have an adverse impact on the immunity of neighboring residents in terms of loss of privacy overbearing or
Noise given the suficient distance between nearby dwellings the proposed dwellings are orientated in a manner so to not Overlook other occupants within the Farmstead with sufficient private immunity space provided for each unit the environmental health officer raises no objection to the scheme on the matters of noise or nuisance next slide
Please moving on to other elements of the application the barn conversion is primarily assessed against policy ra5 of the core strategy the existing building is considered to be of permanent and substantial construction which is capable of conversion without needing major or complete reconstruction this would result in two
Three bedroom dwellings the barn is cons uh considered and appears on visual inspected inspection to be capable of conversion without major or complete reconstruction and the conversion scheme utilizes the existing material and structure existing openings are retained where possible and any new openings respect the agricultural character of the
Building the existing gray corrugated metal roof and elevational cladding would be replaced by a black corrugated steel and the large barn doors are retained as shutters given the Heritage status of the building uh the additional interventions are considered acceptable in planning balance to secure the future
Use of the historic asset it is evident that the barn retains its agricultural character and the proposed development being within the scope of the existing building and utilizing existing openings in a sympathetic manner the principal building conservation officers comments are of direct relevance with no objection raised accepting that the
Building is no longer suitable for modern farming practices and therefore the sympathetically designed conversion would offer the most viable use going forward next slide please the stone Farmhouse is a grade two listed uh in its own right right and it’s noted that the building requires restoration and updating the this offers
The opportunity to reverse some Modern interventions that fail to respect the historic character as noted by the principal building conservation officer the return to Stone S stand Sandstone roof tiles and replacement of existing modern windows are considered conservation gains other external interventions of benefit include rebuilding the chimney stack in stone
Characterful removal and reopening of appropriate openings insertion of conservation roof lights and rep repointing in lme water the building conservation officer raises no objection to the internal work stating that this is a well-considered scheme respecting the existing character and fabric of the listed asset Additionally the repair and
Conversion of the Redundant granery is considered acceptable retaining existing openings spatial and structural form whilst remaining subservient to the host dwelling given its ancillary relationship in considering the wider Heritage implications in terms of the setting of the listed asset it’s recognized that the proposal would represent an intensification of
Residential use however this has been proposed in a manner that respects the historic character and significance of the listed asset and their setting the proposal offers conservation gains through the removal of the portal frame Barn the repair and conservation of a redundant historic barn and the conservation of a historically important
Farmhouse as such it’s considered that any Heritage harm that would occur is considered to be less than substantial and in the nppf paragraph 208 test it’s considered that this harm would be outweighed by the benefits of the scheme next slide please uh this slide shows in the left
Image a Long View onto the application site with the existing Farmstead visible uh the Right image shows the location of the proposed solar panels and their location and Screen planting on the plan Below in considering the initial comments from the Landscapes uh landcap Cape officer it’s accepted that the
Proposed dwelling 2 occupies a separate location from the main Farmstead and in this sense would be a departure from the existing character of the site and introduce new built form in a currently undeveloped field however it’s considered that the design approach through embedding the unit into the hillside would reduce adverse visual
Impacts in The Wider setting and would not detract from the overarching historic settlement pattern of spor sporadic agricultural units characterized in the area this location and approach is argued to contribute positively to the character and Architectural interest of the rural area through good design whilst allowing The Farmhouse and
Historic unit to remain the principal built form on the site following the submission of the Landscape Management plan and rebuttal letter A further consultation response was provided concluding that the principle of sympath sympathetic renovation and reuse of existing buildings would have minimal impact upon the landscape and recognizing that there
Is a benefit to be achieved through the remove removal of the large portal frame barn and replacement with long barn style dwelling no objection is raised to the metal grass roof of the embedded H uh dwelling tree and Orchard planting and scof soft Landscaping plans with conditions recommended to secure full
Specifications for hard and soft landscaping material color and finishes and the removal of permitted development rights five small solar arrays are proposed to serve each residential unit to the south of the field behind the embedded dwelling um sorry behind existing hedge R these would be ground mounted and would not be
Widely visible with new trees planted to the north to further screen the additions their sighting is considered acceptable given the distance from the listed building and other dwellings and the proposed appropriate screening it’s not considered that they would have wider adverse impact given their low-lying nature and roadside position next slide
Please in terms of Highways impact the local concerns are noted um in terms of increased traffic Mo movements however no technical objection is raised by the highways engineer team leader the number of additional vehicle movements over and above what could already be generated via existing or consented uses would be
Minimal and would not be considered severe in NP nppf terms the site offers sufficient parking and turning space for the proposed residential units with access to be gained via existing Field track uh entrance this is to be surfaced with local Stone gravel with no edging to maintain an agricultural
Appearance conditions are included to secure cycle storage access surface gradient and construction traffic management plan in light of the nature of the highways Network moving on to other comparative benefits of The Proposal though the scheme is considered neutral in terms of its accessibility to services and Facilities given both the fullback and
Current scheme are outside any identified settlements The Proposal includes include sustainable features through design including maximizing solar gain intention to attain Elemental u values air source heat pumps and solar array array to the field south of the dwellings these features would not be secured through the class queue next slide
Please the prow and Rambler Association comments are taken into consideration and the applicant is aware of the formal requirements however it’s recognized that the formal diversion would not be undertaken until the application is determined it is noted that the existing footpath dve dissects the modern barn and therefore the diversion is likely to
Offer improvements moving the track away from the Stone Barn also an informative has been included to remind the applicant of the required procedure next slide please the application has been supported by a bat survey report and phase one extended ecological survey which has been reviewed by the council’s
Ecologist no objection is raised to their findings subject to conditions to secure the relevant recommendations including EPS mitigation license from Natural England during the course of the application Natural England has advised changes to the impact risk Zone boundaries where habitat regulation assessments are required this now includes the proposal site and the H
Process has therefore been triggered the ecologist has completed the appropriate assessment finding no adverse impacts on the Integrity of the river y special Conservation Area um this has been sent to Natural England for formal consultation who have raised no objection the site lies within the flood zone one and as defined by the
Environment agency has a low probability of flooding surface water will be discharged uh to an attenuation Basin uh where possible uh which will then be discharged to the Black Brook to the north of the site through a combined discharge pipe foul water would be managed through package treatment plants
Which would discharge to the Black Brook the drainage layout has been amended to lay pipe work along the Hedge Ro to avoid accidental damage from farming activity and the red line revised to include the drainage systems to secure future management it’s noted that the representations received state that the
Black Brook is a seasonal water course however it’s considered on balance there’s sufficient evidence to conclude that the Black Brook is a sufficient enough water course with a base flow to accept a discharge from the proposed water management system Additionally the environment agency General binding rules stat new
Discharges must be made to a water course that normally has flow throughout the air it should be noted that The Binding rules do not state that the water course must be permanent only that there is normal Thro flow throughout the year the land drainage engineer has raised no objection to the scheme on
This basis next slide please having established that the class Q scheme is a fullback position that can be afforded significant weight in your officer’s view the most straightforward manner of assessing whether planning permission should be granted for the current application is to consider the comparative impacts of the
Schemes it’s been established that the removal of existing modern portal framed barn and the replacement with one long long barn style dwelling and one embedded dwelling would result in conservation and Landscape gains these are afforded significant weight in the planning balance given the listed status of The
Farmhouse it’s recog iiz that there is identified harm in terms of the intensification of the residential use as well as new built forms separated from the agricultural unit however as discussed it is considered that the design approach and detailing of the proposed restoration conservation and the longb dwelling is appropriate in
Retaining the agricultural character of the site with con conservation gains through the reversal of the modern interventions to The Farmhouse the holistic view of The Proposal is considered to offer an appropriate betterment that is afforded significant weight in the context of the listed asset and the extent fallback
Position in order to outweigh the identified harm and policy tension with regard to ra3 in addition to this the embedded dwelling has been designed to minimize adverse visual impact through the use of a grass roof and its response to the Contours of the land other benefits to be secured
Through the proposal include the provision of renewable energy sources sustainable features through the new build and additional green infrastructure plans ing as such it is Officer opinion that the proposal offers an opportunity for a comprehensive and coherent Redevelopment of the site as a whole encompassing the identified benefits as opposed to a
Peacemeal form of development that would arise when the applicant implements the permitted development rights the proposed conversion of the threshing bar to two residential units is considered acceptable and complies with the requirements of ra5 the ReUse and restoration of the threshing barn and Farmhouse has been considered in in
A sympathetic manner so to retain the agricultural character whilst providing the most viable future use for the Heritage assets no other technical objection has been received from statutary and internal consulties and it’s considered that the proposed development Accords with the development plan and it’s therefore recommended that planning permission and listed building consent
Be granted subject to conditions thank you thank you m Morgan now I go to this speakers uh can I ask M alter on behalf of Peter Church Parish Council you have three minutes I’m Sandra Suter from pitt Church Paris Council there was a large parish council meeting with most of the
Residents of long Lane present and very unhappy with the lack of credibility of many of of the reports the parish council objected to the application on the following grounds long Lane is steep and narrow in places only just over 2 m wide the passing places are people’s private d driveways with long reverses
Necessary there are 21 houses on long Lane and this will be another five large houses towards the top the highways report is frankly incredible the land is still being farmed so there can only be a large increase in traffic all Journeys will be by car as it’s over 1 and a half
Miles to the nearest shop or bus stop which has an infrequent service during the construction phase there will be disruption to all of the people who live and work on Long Lane as the lers will totally fill the road the drainage system is inadequate for this development Black Brook is dry for many
Months of the year the environment agency policy states that treated surage must be discharged to a flowing water course this has been totally ignored as most objections mention the lack of water in Black Brook Black Brook eventually reaches the Y at Monmouth making it part of Welsh y Sac which is
Not allowing any development which increases phosphates this development will of course do just that the water supply to Long Lane is high pressure and eratic welsher says that a new main will be necessary this is not been addressed in the application the new dwellings are intrusive and out of keeping with the
Vernacular architecture they’re contrary to all planning law such as sustainability and ra3 building in a rural area due to their elevated position they will have a negative visual impact on neighboring properties’s foot paths and from the road they are also well outside Peter Church Development Area the ecology
Report was questioned there are known to be barn owls nesting in the barn and the and in this sparsely populated beautiful marches Farmland there are large numbers of Badges and other wildlife in summary this application flies in the face of planning law and has gathered an enormous number of
Objections for such a scattered population there is great concern that if this is passed it will open the door to using class Q to allow excessive development in open Countryside thank you can I now ask Mr eock to speak on behalf of objections objectives you have three minutes thank you chair good morning
Members um my name is Bernard eok I’m a chter Time planner and a member of the royal time planning Institute for the last 24 years I’m speaking as a local resident and on behalf of the 48 objectiv um there are three three basic components of the case before you
Firstly the class Cube permission provides a fullback position secondly the TR traditional Stone Barn is curtilage listed and thirdly that it would be beneficial to relocate the clq development to improve the setting of the listed barn with respect to case law Mansel merely confirms that classc permissions can be relied upon as a
Fullback development however the legal Authority on fallback is Ed in gambone a different piece of case law the Primacy of the case law is confirmed by the planning inspectorate in many appeal decisions gambone requires three factors to be considered firstly is there a greater than theoretical possibility ility of a fullback development taking
Place and if there is a greater than theoretical possibility what weight should be ascribed to determine the amount of weight you ascribe gambone requires a qualitative assessment of impact to be made if the alternative development would be less harmful than the fallback only then is a genuine fallback established in
Law advice from historic England and the Institute of historic building conservation contradicts the historic building officer assessment that the Stone bar is C listed the so-called benefit this development would bring is therefore Highly Questionable your landscape officers are also conflicted one officer raised concerns with the submitted landscape and visual appraisal
But the other waved it through without any fundamental changes being made to the scheme conversely Karly tinkler a notable and published expert on landscape matters has raised grave concerns to quote her comments the applicants Alva contains several emissions incorrect assumptions errors and Technical flaws as a result levels of value susceptibility to change
Sensitivity magnitude of effect and overall effect have been underestimated the above in mind the proposed scheme would not be beneficial to the barn and be more harmful to the landscape than the classc development as such gambone confirms that a genuine fallback does not therefore exist in law
And if you proceed your decision could be challenged in the high court in addition the entire foul drainage assessment is based upon the mistake assumtion that Black Brook is non-seasonal but it is dry for at least 6 Months of the Year close to 9 months last year your drainage officers appear
To be blissfully unaware of this simple fact despite many objectives pointing it out the scheme you may very well result in unacceptable pollution to the water environment you are the responsible Authority this error needs to be corrected if you are going to use the fallback position provided by the class
CQ permission for anything it would be better to justify the conversion of the Bastone bar to the two dwellings thank you thank you now can I ask Mr Tompkins to speak on behalf of the applicant thank you you have three minutes thank you chair and good morning
Members I’m speaking on behalf of the applicants Matthew and Julia who have a 50- year long association with the area they hope to make barle nap their home where they can live and work from for their three sons and their family too the application before you is the
Culmination of three years work and which included significant input from the council’s planning Heritage and Landscape officers for which the applicants are grateful early pre-application meetings focused on the principle of development and agreeing building locations whilst later meetings discussed very detailed matters such as the type of tiles to be
Used on the roof of the listed building Matthew and Julia have Incorporated officers advice into the scheme throughout and consider the proposals to be improved for officers involvement the applicants also carried out Community consultation before making a submission meeting with their neighbors presenting at two Parish Council meetings and liasing with the ward
Counselor the core of the resultant proposal is the restoration reuse and enhancement of neglected buildings including the grade 2 Farmhouse and Associated barns the renovation and repurposing of the buildings should ensure they contribute to the fabric of the area for years to come and the applicants are very pleased to note the conservation
Conservation officers support for these elements and the benefits he feels are gained there from the other main part of the scheme is the erection of the two new dwellings which are proposed in lie of an extand class CU permission at the site for the conversion of a large portal framed
Cattle shed to two dwellings one new dwelling house C is a smaller barn-like building whose design is based on a traditional Herer Long Bar and this would sit on the site of the existing cattle shed the other house D is embedded into the West flank of the hilltop concealed by trees with planting
And and his grassed roof this would appear as part of the existing cluster of buildings too the scheme also includes comprehensive landscape ecology microgeneration enhancements which would result in The Proposal which truly responds to The council’s Climate emergency and biodiversity emergency specific elements include significant new hedro planting new trees and a solar
Array planning law supports approval of a scheme which is environmentally preferable to an established fullback position your officers report set this sets this out in detail notably the conservation officer and Landscape officer both recognize that the removal of the cattle shed and its replacement with the two new pill dwellings which
Are of a much smaller scale and high quality design would bring about enhancement to the landscape and to the setting of the listed buildings councilors the overall benefit of this appropriate sustainable and balanced proposal outweighs the impacts and we respectfully request your support thank you very
Much thank you and if you if you could take your seats back in the public gallery please thank you and now the local member is councelor PRI um Philip price and uh if he will make his uh opening presentation uh you’ll have 10 minutes Council thank you
Chairman I thank the members for turning up to the site meeting yesterday morning to get an on-site perspective of why this became a controversial application that needed to be referred here today whilst very cold you did get to see the area in all its Glory with the
Sun shining and a clear sky and what a location this site is a number of concerns have been brought to my attention by a considerable number of objectors all of which are covered in the report before you because the report has been a long time in the making every Point has good description
And plausible reasoning that suggest why would you not support the application in full I would just point out that I was not the ward member at the time that this has been mostly in the concept of coming forward as it has been a very long time in the
Making the first issue is how much traffic if any increase will be generated and will the long Lane coming up from the village of Peter Church cope with it I leave you that for you to debate secondly there is the position of how Q planning is interpreted it appears that Q planning
Was obtained prior to this application and is now described as the fallback position whereby that permission granted the development of the Agricultural steel and asbest building asbest building into two properties prop is I think it reasonable for you to satisfy yourself exactly what that fallback position is in terms of visual
Development and whether or not it takes on the form of the exact building as it is clearly the original intention of permitted development rights under class Q was that any development was to maintain the shape format and structure of the building in question what has happened to over time
Is that a qclass permission has had the goalpost moved to the extent that further planning applications can be applied for that changes this interpretation in this case this application is to realign the permitted development rights and apply a betterment interpretation that in the eyes of many local objectors has an outcome that in
Any specific individual application would not be allowed it is suggested by a local planning consultant that has objected in responses to the consultation that in planning case law there are areas of difficulty with how the Clash Q position and this application may not align in planning and case law it is Clear sorry I flicked up too high I’m sorry a minute it is clear that the time lapse for this application is unacceptable to the determination With Many Items having been addressed reassessed and changed and positioned across many organizations and consult te seem to have arrived at a
Place where every part of the report has edged towards accepting every strand of change the applicants have had pre-planning application advice and considerable input and change over the period and the planning officer report looks very acceptable with what is before you whilst there are a few considerations that are challenging I
Think the potential potential enhancement from the fallback Q class to this report is what concern what causes most concerns when I was first acquainted with this application back early last year and with feedback from my previous experience on Council I was led to understand that the shape and form of
Acute class consent under permitted development rights had to retain the building as is I can see that over time changes to these routes have taken on a new Direction how far these changes have gone can be seen by the arguments put forward in this report I would neither like to live in
Or have next to me the fallback development of the class Q permission dwellings as I think this is not helpful to the landscape or the other developments on site but that is just my opinion but does that allow for taking down the old building and allowing one
New build and one other embedded house someway from the original building this is for you to deter determine whether planning and case law allows it whether there is a betterment unto whom or whether there is less harm to the landscape is for you to consider paragraph 6.22 seems relevant to
This the parish council are not supporting this application they have a number of concerns many itemized at par 5.3 and as put to you by the parish council speaker today the Welsh water responds to the consultation in November 22 States the water supply system in the immediate vicinity has insufficient capacity to
Serve the development and will also cause detriment to existing customers water supply how has or is this being dealt with they other reference the gray water discharge to the Black Brook following the site visit yesterday I walked down to the stream to see if this is a
Problem I felt that the sheer distance involved that a considerable amount of discharge could go to ground longer before reaching the stream if it were allowed to drain and whether or not the stream goes dry in certain time a year it clearly has the capacity for a large
Flow and has had has over the years as it is very well established and not just a ditch with a good flow of water on the day issues over long Lane itself and capacity for what might be a small increase in traffic will be something you should consider you arrived and left
And can make up your mind about that the listed house and barn conversion into two dwellings I fully support and will bring back life to the properties in need of repair and refunction can only be seen as the right thing I asked for this application to be considered a
Committee as originally I felt the initial plans for pods and embedded dwelling were not accepted acceptable in an open Green Field site as the plan has developed over time you have the decision to take whether or not this is worthy of approval thank you thank you councilor price can I ju
Just clarify a couple of things about Q because I mean I think a lot of people don’t fully un understand it and interpretation it’s something that um I don’t think most planners or um are very happy with I’m certainly not and I’ve seen some pretty horrendous things done
But government have imposed this policy on on on local authorities and we have to do do you want make any comments about this given I know planners are very unhappy about it and and um but we have it and there’s little we can do about that so
Yeah I think I just say it’s em been embedded for a while you know we’ve been class Q since I think class Q since 2016 and before that class MB so it’s been part of that um permitted regime for some time now and this is something that’s evolved from that process um o
Over that time I think we we’ve discussed it a couple of times in this committee already we’ll open debate councelor Thomas right part Q now in my ward I’ve just had a part A Part Q conversion turned down because in the opinion of the planning officer it’s not convertible without considerable amount of
Work now this is an agricultural building a cattle shed I looked at it you a yesterday and remembering my my trade was converting buildings I it it was never really convertible into a house so I suspect that I don’t know how it was allowed to get part CU but it really shouldn’t have
Done unless I’m misreading the ACT secondly you are taking that um building down and you’re going to put another building a more traditional style of building on the footprint but in fact it only just just sits on the very edge of the footprint you can see that quite clearly
From the plan we could see that yesterday so that I’ve got a problem with and I’ve got a major problem with this construction of a house away away from the the um rest of the buildings I think that is really taking I know it’s it’s it’s probably you know it looks a
Very nice design etc etc but I’m totally in agreement with with the ward counselor that this is going to open a complete Avalanche if you look just from where we were stood yesterday I can see six Little Farms that this could easily oh well they’ve got it we’ll apply for this
I think this is just one uh it is a step far too far this is just to my actual opinion greed on the part of the person developing this site there’s no need for it I don’t really I have no problem with moving the cattle shed and putting up
Another building which is looks far more traditional I have absolutely no problem with converting the barn the house and the graner absolutely they’re going to fall down otherwise and this is this is the only way of saving beautiful old buildings but this is totally I think unacceptable this interpretation of Park
Q and we’ve heard from um the expert who came up um and he he considers we leave ourselves totally open so I’m afraid I’m not going to um go along with this development at all be on that because we the only way to get rid of this extra house is to refuse
Mr M mckin thank you chair I just uh just a point for clarification really in terms of the presentations um we had two references to case law U Manel and garam in fact they are the same case uh so I just want to make that make that clear uh they’re
Just labeled in a different way yeah can I can I say that was the intention of the government to bring in policy Q for no other reason other than increase the number of houses that are built other reason um you might like it but that’s what the government intended
Um to change the policy in that way Mr chairman I I don’t disagree and I don’t disagree with part Q There are some um conversions that are bril but the rules State they have to be convertible and the present cattle shed is not convertible whichever way shapee
Or form and to to use Park Q to take it down and put something else back in its place yes put up another building similar to what the old barn is like no problem but to go and put a building 100 MERS away in a field which is you got this beautiful
Area was it Vega Hill up there massive massive common thousands of people walk up there I’ve been up there quite a few times it’s most beautiful Valley looking down back down towards Peter Church and I just think you it’s it’s ridiculous it really is ridiculous to sort of stretch
Barue to this level and I don’t think the Act was ever intended for that councelor Foxton thank you chair and thank you for the presentation barut Farm is a very special jewel in the crown of farmsteads in Peter Church in the Golden Valley we were fortunate to have a clear day to
Appreciate the spectacular views worthy of consideration if we can see far-reaching views from The Farmstead then The Farmstead itself is visible from far and wide I’m in no doubt that the gray two listed Farmhouse attached granery and conversion of the stone barns um is ultimately safeguarding and
Extending the life of The Farmstead the existing farm buildings are unspoiled and ripe for con for um conversion and in my understanding class Q ensures the modification is limited to the existing footprint of the original structure of the bars however I fear the new dwelling in open Countryside will not enhance
The settlement and might even create a precedence which you refer to um in the future for other developments and I commend the location of the solar panels too thank you thank you other speakers councilor B thank you Mr chairman an extremely interesting application uh the site visit yesterday was extremely
Useful and Miss Morgan’s comprehensive report plus the information she provided to us yesterday all helped to enable me to form a positive view of the application I think I speak for all of us when we express our concerns regarding class q but it is what it is and we’re stuck with
It the detached um or rather the proposed detach new building to the hillside again is an extremely interesting Prospect and it it obviously falls under ra3 in the core strategy but it could be considered to be acceptable as it was of an Innovative design tucked into the hillside grass roof and we’ve
Heard that it’s possible it could set a precedent but of course we don’t set precedent in planning do we each application is determined on its own merits so I think we should forget about precedence the restoration of the listed Farmhouse is well overdue I mean that
Will end up if it’s if it’s developed into a an extremely attractive building the surrounding barns as we saw yesterday one of the ex gattle shed is virtually falling down and I think we were told that the frame of that building will be utilized within the new uh
Restoration I think that was right um but of course with with the development on the site um it’s got to improve these Barns and that’s I suppose where glass CU comes in use for uh however we we’re told all about the long Lane I’d never driven up there before um
It was a narrow steep Road um and it’s certainly long but um I didn’t meet anyone coming the other way and on the way out we followed a tractor all the way down so there was no major problems and there appears to be passing places here and there along the lane and the
Current residents appear to manage so why shouldn’t some extras and so my view is that um this application in its entirety should be approved with with the conditions thank you thank you is that a proposal or proposal is there a second for that councelor Foxton right other speakers please evate are there any
None right we have oh sorry councelor Simons thank you chair um this is presenting real problems to me um I absolutely can understand the class Q I understand the fullback position I understand that this is betterment I do have absolute concerns about development in open Countryside we
Are being asked to set aside our core strategy policy um as part of the planning balance um I I am concerned about the drainage into the Brook on the information that’s been supplied by from the public Gallery I am not convinced that our are we being asked to consent this
On the understanding there’s a condition attached that will do further investigative work before any development could consent on this could you just clarify that for me please sorry yeah there’s there’s a condition requiring the detail drawings to be submitted um I think the other other work has all been explored with the
Drainage consultant and with ecology as part of that wider HRA matter and and it is a requirement of of The Binding rules outside of of that as well I think the issue is that we have been given evidence and I am not fully convinced that our drainage experts have
That level of detail of that site and that for me is a a real concern I’m hearing two opposing sides that there is for the majority of the Year flow and then I’m hearing actually six months to nine months no flow I’m I’m I’m feeling a little bit
Conflicted here without some sort of I don’t want to defer this I appreciate we have to make a decision um it’s been going on too long and it’s causing problems for everybody but I don’t know how I feel on this I’m afraid taking legal advice I think I mean the application’s
Been sort of held for quite some time whil we’ve been resolving the HRA issue so the the the issues that have been raised locally have been been taken into account by um by the ecologist and and you know the drainage engineer to get to a point of of no
Objection as I’m sure you’re aware can take some some time in that respect as well there is the environment agency binding rules that they need to adhere to as well um and building RS will pick up on that as well in terms of of of the drainage Arrangements um I’m
Assuming that the class Q would also use a arrangement in terms of a fullback position is just that we have more control over that with this application um bearing in mind the level of sort of technical scrutiny it’s been to and it’s also been to Natural Inland to do that
Absolutely take on board you know local residents have raised a different opinion but I think you in terms of what officers have seen and have been able to explore you know they’ve come to a conclusion that there is no objection we’ve done the appropriate assessment it’s been to Natural England with no
With it’s received a no objection from them got no objections subject to conditions from the drainage engineer um plus there is also EA binding rules that need to be taken into account so I think all of those matters can I’m not sure we can add additional condition to look at
At monitoring Etc thank you appreciate that Kelly sorry I’m afraid we don’t have um politi from the gallery thank sorry sorry if you’re going to interrupt the meeting this is a qu a judicial process and I’d have to ask you to leave if you’re going to participate tried to participate right any other
Speakers oh Council Davis thank you chair um this has been uh um quite an interesting um proposition um we had a fantastic presentation from um uh Miss Morgan uh yesterday’s site visit was really good uh and there are some conflicting issues here uh drainage being one of them uh
From the site the the the class Q issue uh and and also the proposed new building um uh lots of and lots of concerns raised by the locals um uh over this site uh I think of which a lot of them have been addressed um part of my
Concern was the proposed new building in the field off to the uh west of the site um but having seen the uh architectural developments that have been proposed with the grass roof Etc I think that probably elays a lot of my fears uh and I propose that we accept this um
Officer’s proposal to accept the planning um request for this thank you can I say we we’re not setting a president as far as as this is concerned because we we’ve done it in building one something in Colwell which I personally objected to at the time but cly sorry
Which I rejected to at the time but it as I say it wouldn’t be a right any other speakers sorry I’m afraid no I’m afraid um coun C we all this first about going into the Black Brook with the with this water and stuff if the sewage is kept
Separate from the storm water there surely Enough by the size of the site to put it into sways has that been looked into to alleviate that so that only the storm water goes into the brook has that been looked into it hasn’t well I’ve seen put
Into um so that’s with that’s not been uh looked into we’ve got a package treatment plant managing the foul water which is discharging to the B Brook it’s combined um system so the surface waterers going to an attenuation Pond uh through the combined pipe into the
BR why is it got to be combined because that causes a lot of problems why can’t it be kept separate storm water in so so the from a package treatment plant the pack the the fou drainage is is treated and then discharged so they’re not so the discharge so the um surface
Water is attenuated the smaller amount I suppose of the foul drainage goes into into into the directly into the book through that through that system um we have got a condition if you know that allows us to look at the details of that drainage Arrangement um I think it’s been agreed
In principle with the the details there with me keep find this condition um so so priority occupation the development are new dwellings hereby approved the following shall be submitted and approved that’s a detailed surface some water drainage design plans and construction drawings including those Associated um calculations so we
Can take it away and we can raise that issue and ask the question I’m happy to to do that um but in principle the way that it’s been promoted and been dealt with as part of the HRA is that it goes into a combined and then and but it is
The same pathway so I’m not concerned about the HRA side of it changing but we can look at the technical details of that if you we take that away right now we move on to sorry just simply that um a package system can be and soakaways can be used
You can do not have to put it into a Open Water course the regulation State you can put it into an Open Water course but in this situation I think it’s mad to take it down to a dry Brook so just clarify yeah the percolation testing has been undertaken
And it was ruled out that they could use soakaways so it has to go right we’ve got that clear now right any further uh no I don’t think so I think we’ve had a good debate on that I’ll go then to the local member you can see why this was brought
To committee because it is very very controversial on a number of on a number of um points let’s just look at what we’ve just been discussing my point was that it is a very long way down to the Black Brook from the site and whilst we have no evidence of what the
Permeability of the land is in relation because we don’t have it in the report it says it hasn’t um it it failed I do not believe for one moment on the side of that particular site that a drainage pipe that runs form many hundreds of yards on a French drain type um
Principle would soak away into the land way before it ever got near to the Black Brook um and that would address the issues that are raising concerns with many of the local members local residents now that I’m sure that can be resolved um I don’t know about the other things um Q the
Class Q whether it’s acceptable or not um the chairman is saying that this is um already um in principle acceptable it was the one thing that I’ve had many conversations with residents that they think it’s not acceptable over a period of many months um so um it is up for you
To decide whether it’s acceptable to take it or not I think this site should be allowed to develop but whether or not this is the right development um will remain to be seen and I’m sure if you don’t accept it today it will will come back in a different form in at some
Future time um I’m still not sure about um the Welsh water scenario nobody’s addressed it is there water availability up there is there a v massive expense to get water there is there going to be bore holes if there are do we run into the same sort of problems that we have
Had in other um applications on the Uplands of the Golden Valley whereby people have sunk deeper um deeper War holes to take the water from the Lesser deep ones um it’s happened many times in the last 20 years um I don’t know it’s got to be addressed if you if you pass this
Application today it must be a consideration as to how that’s going to be dealt with because many residents up in a long Lane long Lane you’ve heard them there’s 20 odd um properties along there and I understand there’s a property um an application has just come
In for outline for another 10 houses in the same vicinity a bit lower down water is a problem that we all expect to have um it must be resolved we just cannot Grant permission without having um knowledge and acceptance of how it’s going to be dealt with so um if you’re
Going to pass it I want a condition that says um how this is going to be dealt with without detriment to any other residents in in Long Lane and Peter Church um other than that it’s the um the long Lane itself um it was mentioned you don’t have a problem and there’s
Passing places but every single passing place in Long Lane is somebody’s drive it’s not a matter of there’s a there’s a lay by for you to pull in you know in a sight line of seeing another vehicle coming they’re all people’s drives so um I I leave it with you you you’ve you’ve
Discussed all of the individual aspects that are causing major concern here um I still have a few concerns that I won’t be um conditioned or considered and um I’ll leave it with you to make the decision thank you we’ll move on now to the uh vote we
Have a proposal and second for um for the recommendation as outlined in the in the report can I ask those in favor please show those against two against abstentions three okay then that is carried we’ll move Now quickly to a short one which the vice chairman will take over for
This because it’s I’m the loop good afternoon everyone okay we’re vacating the room please button on your right hand side thank you uh the ninth the ninth um yeah attender item nine please we’re looking at West earnings kington harer h53 h e proposed demolition of existing side and rear extension erection of
Replacement side and rear extensions and a new porch can I just ask the officer presenting uh thank you chair and good afternoon everyone uh the slide shown uh demonstrates the context in which the site is found on the southern outskirts of the town of kington The Wider context highlighting the character
Of the surrounding area next slide please this image shows the site outlined in red with an aerial photo photograph to further demonstrate the surrounding context it’s located to the east of the U 91029 and forms part of a linear collection of dwellings running north to south along Kingswood Road next next slide
Please uh this further demonstrates the location within the context of surrounding dwellings next slide please this slide illustrates the existing dwelling in both plan and scaled elevations the next slide next slide please next slide Dem rates The Proposal of for the demolition of the existing rear extension and the ex and the
Attached garage this will be followed by the erection of a replacement rear extension new extension to the side and a new porch the rear extension would protrude 4.5 m in width 8.9 m in height with a maximum Ridge height of 4.5 M there’s also a small roof flat roof utility room
Protruding off this measuring 2.2 2x 4 M the proposed front porch would measure 2.2x 1.5 M with a ridge height of 3 m clad in stone and plain clay tile roof the existing attached garage will be demolished to be replaced with a single story structure which will run at Circa
45° to the main dwelling house this element will measure 6.5 M long 6.8 M wide with an overall height of 2.3 M next slide please this slide demonstrates an illustrative illustrative render of the proposed development including the materials these materials are Stone and render to match that of the host dwelling in
Addition to Roofing which is also to match next slide please the proposed rear extension and porch have been designed in a manner that reflects reflects the host dwelling utilizing matching render Stone and play CL plain clay tiles this will ensure continuity in appearance the proposed flat roof utility extension will be clad
In vertical Cedar boarding under a simple ply membrane roof it’s considered that the proposal is entirely acceptable um and policy constraints with regards to design and scale would not depart from the character of the host dwelling or the surrounding area no concerns have been raised in regards to the impact the
Extension would have on the immunity of neighboring dwellings by way of loss of light and overlooking and sense of overbearing scale however this must give be given due consideration given the small scale of height of the proposal it is not considered the extension would lead to an enlargement considered overbearing to
Such an extent it would cause harm to the immunity of neighboring dwellings it’s further noted that the existing garage is to be demolished and replaced a single story extension this would result in a loss of a single parking location however this will not in my opinion have an adverse effect on
The amount of off-road parking as there is sufficient parking space in front of the property this therefore Accords with the uh core strategy policy plan mt1 although the application is is within the river L catchment the proposed file will Outlets it is considered that the proposal will not demonstrably increase in the
Intensification of the use of the property there are no other matters pertaining to the proposal which require discussion or assessment and taking the above into account is considered the proposal generally Accords with the provision of the Heritage local plan core strategy together with the O overarching aims and objectives of the
Nppf in closing as the proposed development complies with both heritage heritage of course strategy policies and that there are no technical objections to the proposal the proposed development is accordingly recommended for approval with the recommended conditions found in the officer’s report thank you oh thank you Matthew sorry I didn’t introduce you
Your name is Matthew needles welcome it is yes as we haven’t got anyone um any speakers registered can I please ask the board counselor Terry James to speak thank you um just to say this is there as Dent of being um a a planning officer’s application and lo as I am to
Support a planning officer’s application I I have to say there are no reasons why they should be refused and I I hope you’ll move the recommendation and we can make a get a late lunch canc yes sorry we moveing debate now thank you chair um I think this is
Completely within scale um seems entirely appropriate good design fully agree with the recommendations from the report there are no objections on the council website uh therefore I move that we um support the recommendation thank you second and councelor stone well with that um oh sorry madam chairman can I
Just ask why is this come before committee because he’s an officer ah ah very sorry right so we’ve had a proposal we’ve had a secondary and we now move on to the voting oh you need to come back sorry sum up thank you right right so let’s move on to the vote
Then all those in favor please raise your hand any against any any against no it’s totally unanimous thank you very much and yeah 145 the meeting is now closed thank you