Agenda and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest.

None.

of the meeting held on 28^th April 2022 to be approved and signed.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 28^th April 2022 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Vice Chair.

Such inspections of current application sites as may have been recommended by Officers and as may be approved by the Committee.

Members of the Committee should inform the Interim Head of Development Management of any requests for site visits by 5.00 p.m. on the Tuesday immediately prior to the meeting (24^th May 2022) and reasons for the request.

Site visits will be conducted in accordance with the procedure attached which forms part of the Council’s Good Practice Protocol for Members and Officers dealing with Planning Matters.

There were no site visits.

Up to a total of fifteen minutes can be allowed, each speaker being allocated a maximum of five minutes, for members of the public to present a petition, ask a question or comment on any matter on the Agenda or within the remit of the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 10.

None.

Members of the public will be allowed to address the Committee in respect of applications to be considered by the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 11. Members of the public will address the Committee during the Committee’s consideration of the respective item.

None.

The Corporate Director - Planning and Governance recommends that the Planning Committee approves the reserved matters application subject to the conditions set out in Section 9 of the report.

Introduction

The Committee considered a reserved matters application for residential development of up to 120 dwellings seeking approval for landscaping, layout, scale and appearance at University Park Development, Bromyard Road.

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee as it is a departure from the adopted Local Plan.

Report/Background/Late papers

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the site itself, relevant policies, planning history and representations and consultations where applicable.

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the late paper which related to amendments required to the S106 Agreement in respect of the Education Contributions, resulting in a revised recommendation for the officer’s report identified in paragraph 7 of the late paper.

The Interim Head of Development Management also drew the Committee’s attention to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the late paper and confirmed that the definition of SEND is Special Educational Needs and Disabilities.  He also confirmed that the proposals are for 100% affordable housing and include a mix of affordable housing tenures, although the S106 Agreement only binds the applicant to provide 30%.

Committee Members were also provided with a sheet on FAQ’s related to outline planning applications and reserved matters submissions for information.

Officer Presentation

The information was presented as set out by the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

The Interim Head of Development Management referred Committee Members to the outline planning permission indicative masterplan at figure 2 in the report and to the proposed site plan at figure 3.  The application was supported  by a proposed landscaping scheme incorporating green infrastructure across a large portion of the site.

Public Representations

There had been no one registered to speak on the application.

Key Points of Debate

·         The Interim Head of Development Management responded to points of clarification on the landscaping, biodiversity and the management of open spaces on the site.  He made reference to the biodiversity net gain and the fact that there is new legislation being progressed.  There was also to be a management plan submitted which would identify how the open spaces would be managed and safeguarded.  It was pointed out that any change to biodiversity or open space a planning application would need to be submitted.

·         In response to questions from Committee Members on the positioning of dropped kerbs, non-provision of south access road footpath and the provision of street lighting, the County Council Highway Authority representative stated that although the intention was for the roads to be built to an adoptable standard the roads would not be subject to a Section 38 agreement as they do not connect to an adopted highway. Oak View is not currently adopted and the internal roads would remain private until such time as the situation has changed.  She further explained that the developers cannot be forced to offer the road for adoption.

·         Noting the concerns of Members the Chair asked that the County  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Corporate Director - Planning and Governance recommends that the Planning Committee Grants planning permission subject to conditions set out in Section 9 of the report.

Introduction

The Committee considered an application for the variation to drawings listed as approved under Condition 2 of full planning approval reference P18G0322 for the retention of the sales centre storage/wc facilities pod at the rear of the garages on plots 1 and 2 for use as a domestic out building at the former DEFRA site, Whittington Road.

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee in accordance with the adopted Scheme of Delegation.

Report/Background/Late papers

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the site itself, relevant policies, planning history and representations and consultations where applicable.

There were no late papers circulated.

Officer Presentation

The information was presented as set out by the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation for the item.

Public Representations

There had been no one registered to speak on the application.

Key Points of Debate

·         Committee Members agreed that the proposed use made sense and saw no reason to object.

A proposal to approve the application had been made and this was seconded.  There being no further points made the Chair requested the voting of each Member of the Committee who were eligible to vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal was agreed as follows:

For – 9

Against – 0

Abstentions - 0

RESOLVED: That the Committee grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of the report.

Which in the opinion of the Chair is of sufficient urgency as to warrant consideration.

None.