" I thought you might be interested in the decision. Planning application refused!
There were seven members of the planning sub-committee present, plus chairman. The vote was 4 to 3 against the application; the chairman cast his vote in favour, to loud groans from members of the public (fifty-plus). The chairman then explained that in situations where there is a tie he (the chairman) may make a second vote.

"He voted against! Whoopees from the floor!

"The Madley PC spokesperson made an excellent contribution to the debate, as did the chairman of Waste Watchers, although he was a little emotional. Peter Yates had clearly spent hours preparing the papers.

"The reasons for rejecting the application were:
• Traffic volume
• Conflict with South Hereford District Plan
• Negative impact on Gelpack, a neighbouring business
• Impact on local community

"A senior council official then explained that the sub-committee could reject the planning application outright or refer to a "higher" committee. He recommended the latter, as he considered the decision would not stand if there were a judicial review."

In attendance: Mrs. F. White Herefordshire Council
Mrs. E. Kelso Clerk

1. Introduction

The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming all those in attendance, explaining that this meeting is a public meeting and not a meeting of the Parish Council. He further explained that neither this meeting, nor the Parish Council, had any authority to make decisions where planning matters were concerned but the meeting was intended to offer an opportunity for those people who were interested in the planning application currently under discussion, to express their views.

2. Use of land behind 10 – 80 Dorchester Way

Mrs. Fran White from Herefordshire Council’s Parks and Countryside Department, explained the background to the planning application and noted that the land in question is currently in private ownership and was the subject of a planning application several months ago when the owner proposed building houses on the land with a small area of wetland. That application was refused on appeal. The land is designated as future public open space in the South Herefordshire Development Plan and the owners are currently appealing against a similar designation in the Unitary Development Plan now being drafted.

The current proposals for a children’s play area and kick about area on that land, some 30 metres from the back of houses in Dorchester Way is in response to an identified need in the Belmont Parish Plan and the results of a household survey amongst householders adjacent to another small area of open space in Dorchester Way where it meets Stanbrook Road. Compared with current national standards for children’s play areas and open space within housing developments, the Belmont Estate has less available space than the current specifications.

There followed a lively debate covering the need for a children’s play area, the implications for householders nearby and alternative uses for that land. Specific comments included:

“There’s a gang of young people in the play area off Dorchester Way this evening. Why isn’t the Northolme Building available for them?”

“There will be lads hanging around smoking and drinking and urinating in gardens”

“The proposals will encourage the worse kind of people here”

“My four children have to play in the road because there’s nowhere for them to play with a football”

“It’s cruel to place a children’s play area within yards of properties”

“The land isn’t suitable for a play area as it’s not visible from houses”.

“I used to spend time ferrying my children to clubs around the town, why can’t others do the same?”

“There are no children nearby to benefit from the play area” – disputed by others in attendance.

“I’ve not been aware of any real damage by the lads sitting in the play areas. There’s nothing for them here. This meeting is full of older people. Why are the young people not here to say what they want?”

“The Planning Inspector refused the original application on the grounds that the sewerage system wasn’t suitable and suggested that a more appropriate use of the land should be as a wetland or for some other recreational use”

“It would be better to upgrade the Northolme building and site”

“I lived in Wyedean Rise and had to call the police when children were playing football on the grass area there as cars might have been damaged”

“Why does the recreational use have to be for children? What about older people? Why not have a tennis court or bowling green?”

“Who will maintain or police this area? Nobody maintains the area now”.

To draw a consensus from the meeting, the Chairman asked those in attendance to vote on whether they supported the move for the land in question to be acquired by Herefordshire Council. After some debate as to the wording of the resolution, there was a small majority of those voting (19 votes for and 15 against) for the land to be within the ownership of Herefordshire Council. Many people abstained from the vote.

When questioned as to whether those in attendance wanted housing on the land, there were no votes for and an overwhelming majority against this. Some individuals did not vote.

When asked for an indication of those in favour of a children’s play area and kick about on the land, there was an overwhelming majority against (6 votes for and 43 against) this proposal.

Finally, given that people generally wanted the land to be acquired by Herefordshire Council for recreational use, the Chairman suggested that those interested in forming a working party to discuss possible uses for the land give their names and contact details to him.

PS: See Newspage for updated decision on this proposal

HOME