Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor G Jones.  It was noted that Councillor T Page was substituting for Councillor G Jones.

At the invitation of the Chairman, the Director of Neighbourhood Services advised Members that Officers had received a request from an applicant’s agent to brief Members in respect of the former Sainsbury’s Depot Site in Buntingford, on behalf of Fairview Homes.  Members confirmed that they would be happy to receive this briefing.

In response to a query from Councillor M Alexander, the Chairman confirmed that the intention was that this briefing would be arranged to coincide with a meeting of the Committee.

Councillors M Alexander and P Moore declared disclosable pecuniary interests in application 3/13/2297/FP, in that they were Board Members of Riversmead Housing Association.  They left the room whilst this matter was considered.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 5 February 2014 (Previously circulated as part of the Council Minute book for 19 February 2014).

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 2014 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendment:

Minute 527 – a) 3/13/1936/FP, b) 3/13/1937/LB, c) 3/13/1939/LB, d) 3/13/1938/LB, e) 3/13/1987/AD, f) 3/13/1986/LB – Applications at 15 – 17 North Street, Bishop's Stortford for Cote Restaurants LTD – Delete in 7^th paragraph – ‘and the wider "green finger" extending up through Grange Paddocks'.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Bonner addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Moult spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/13/1399/OP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor J Ranger, as a local ward Member, highlighted the numerous opinions that had referred to this site as being the wrong place to build houses.

Councillor Ranger requested that, if Members were minded to approve the application, the third bullet point of the Section 106 planning obligation should be amended to include the £10,000 requested by Aspenden Parish Council for the upgrading and upkeep of the proposed playground and recreation facilities.

Councillor Ranger stated that Aspenden Road was inadequate and was far too narrow in 3 locations.  He referred to clear evidence of vehicles mounting the pavement or leaving tracks on the verge in order to pass other vehicles.

Councillor Ranger concluded that the decision of Hertfordshire Highways not to object had to be queried and Section 106 funding should go to County Council Highways so that Aspenden Road could be widened at the 3 pinch points.

Councillor J Jones, also as a local ward Member, referred to the correspondence Members had received in respect of this unwanted and inappropriate planning application.  He stated that the site was inappropriate and Aspenden Road was also inadequate as an access road.

Councillor Jones stated that part of the site was in flood zone 2 and was adjacent to flood zone 3.  He concluded that Buntingford needed applications for employment rather than inappropriate speculative applications for housing development.

Councillor S Bull stated that there were many reasons why this application should be refused and he agreed with the comments of Councillors J Ranger and J Jones.  He read out a letter from a local neighbour who had 20 years experience as a chartered town planner.

Councillor P Moore was advised by the Director that no part of the site was located in the Green Belt.  Councillor Moore stated that she had visited the site 3 times and walked the field where the proposed play area was to be located.  She commented that the field had clearly flooded recently and Aspenden Road had also been flooded in January 2014.

Councillor Moore commented that Environment Health’s suggestion for acoustic fencing and mechanical ventilation implied that residents would not be able to open windows due to the close proximity of the A10.  She referred to the issue of odours and the 60 metre buffer zone suggested by the developer.

Councillor Moore queried whether families would ever be comfortable with children playing outside due to the river running though the site and also the grass bank leading directly to the crash barrier for the A10.  She concluded that the site was unsuitable and inappropriate for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 596.

Recommended for Approval.

Mrs Mullender addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Wilson and Ms Moore spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/2036/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor M Carver, as the local ward Member, referred to the objections from residents of Perry Green, Green Tye, Little Hadham, Much Hadham and Hunsdon, as well as objections from Much Hadham and Hunsdon Parish Councils.

Councillor Carver referred to a total lack of understanding from Hertfordshire Highways in respect of the severe access and environmental impacts of this application on the rural setting and an unclassified country lane.

Councillor Carver referred to the 3 mile long Bourne Lane as having 5 blind bends, 12 passing points and no pavement.  He stated that this road was regularly used by walkers, cyclists, horse riders and joggers.  He also commented that a 2012/13 police survey had identified significantly higher speed data than that identified by the limited traffic survey undertaken by the applicant.

Councillor Carver stated that the narrow road network had numerous potholes and had suffered significant irreparable damage to the embankments, verges and lane edges.  The local road network had also been deemed unsuitable for large increases in traffic associated with a major visitor attraction.

Councillor Carver stated that the proposed changes constituted overdevelopment and were not in keeping with the surrounding area and undermined the architecture of Dane Tree House and the architecture of Henry Moore.

Councillor Carver concluded that, although the works of Henry Moore needed protection, the high degree of tranquillity of the area should prevail.  He referred to his concerns regarding the significant parking considerations and commented that the site was unsustainable as a tourist location in respect of water, sewage and drainage.

Councillor Carver urged Members to refuse the application due to the severe traffic impacts on the environmental quality of the rural aspects of Perry Green and Green Tye and due to the over commercial development of the site being contrary to policy GBC3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.  The application would also have a significant detrimental effect on the quality of life for both local and surrounding communities.

Councillor G Williamson referred to paragraphs 3.3 and 1.12 of the Officer’s report and he challenged the applicant’s assertions that they did not anticipate an increase in visitors or vehicles and hoped to reduce the impact that traffic and circulating traffic had on the surrounding area.

Councillor K Crofton stated that the proposed development would deliver improvements in facilities for visitors and staff and he felt that staff car parking improvements could not be bad.  He referred to the importance of a secure temperature and humidity controlled environment on the site.  He concluded that this was a sensitive and acceptable application that would enhance the reputation of Henry Moore.

Councillors A Burlton and T Page addressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 597.

a)      Recommended for Approval.

b)      Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the referral of application reference 3/13/2064/FO to the Secretary of State under the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director also recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/2062/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

In response to a question by Councillor M Carver, as the local ward Member, the Director advised that there had been a directive on the 2011 application that the applicant engage with the water supply authorities in respect of water supply and pressures.

Members were advised that no conditions or directives on this issue had been applied to these applications as Officers had not been advised that this was necessary by the relevant authorities.  Officers could apply that directive once again if Members felt this was necessary.

In response to a comment from Councillor N Symonds in respect of more tree planting and landscaping within the car park, the Director stated that Officers could include this request within the landscape design condition detailed in the report.

In response to comments from Councillor Carver and a request by Councillor A Burlton, the Director stated that a directive instructing the applicant to engage with the appropriate water supply and disposal organisation to identify any existing problems, and where they may be exacerbated by the development, seek to identify and implement solutions to them.

After being put to the meeting and votes taken, the Committee accepted the recommendations of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that (A), subject to the referral of application reference 3/13/2064/FO to the Secretary of State under the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted and subject to the following additional directive:

3.           The applicant is requested to engage with the appropriate water supply and disposal organisation to identify any existing problems, and where they may be exacerbated by the development to seek to identify and implement solutions to them.

(B)   in respect of application 3/13/2062/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/2297/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor M Pope, as the local ward Member, stated that Gilpin Road was a narrow Victorian street that was not designed for the motor car and could barely cope with the demands of residents’ car parking.  He believed that Gilpin Road was already unable to cope with additional demands placed on it by commuters, student parking and parents of pupils at Presdales School.  He also expressed concerns in respect of access for emergency vehicles and the difficulties likely to be experienced by construction traffic.  He urged Members to refuse the application.

Various Members expressed concern as to how construction traffic would be able to negotiate Gilpin Road, one of the most congested roads in Ware, with cars parked on both sides of the road. 

The Director stated that this application did include 9 spaces for general parking in this area, meaning that the end result was a neutral or slightly better situation in terms of general off-street parking provision.

The Director advised that Officers had suggested a condition to be imposed on any permission that details of construction traffic and parking management should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Authority.

Members were advised that Hertfordshire Highways had not objected in respect of car parking and the applications did provide two valuable affordable dwellings in the form of one 1 bedroom flat and one 2 bedroom flat.

Councillor N Symonds proposed and Councillor T Page seconded, a motion that application 3/13/2297/FP be refused on the grounds that the proposed development would result in increased demand for on-street parking in an area where there was already significant demand and limited capacity.  The proposed development would therefore be harmful to the amenities of existing residents and would be contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/13/2297/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.            The proposed development would be likely to result in increased demand for on-street parking in an area where there is already significant demand and limited capacity.  As a result the proposal would be harmful to the amenities of existing residents, contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Summary of Reasons for Decision

In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended).  East Herts Council has considered, in a positive and proactive manner, whether the planning objections to this proposal could be satisfactorily resolved within the statutory period for determining the application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 599.

Recommended for Refusal.

Anne Peacock addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/2067/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that the Landscape Officer had objected to the proposed development and had concluded that the application would result in significant change to the landscape character and appearance of this section of Bromley Lane.

Councillor D Andrews stated that he did not agree that the location of the barns detracted from the appearance of the rural area.  He commented that he was supportive of the application as the proposed development was the best outcome for this site.  Councillor N Symonds stated that she was also supportive of the application.

The Director stated that the site was located in the rural area beyond the green belt where new dwellings were classed as inappropriate development unless there were special circumstances to grant permission contrary to policy.

Members were advised that if applications for housing were allowed on all sites containing redundant agricultural buildings in the District there could be significant implications for the character of rural areas.  Members should be aware that the site did not have to be reused and could be allowed to revert to grass or landscape. 

The Director stated that the introduction of dwellings and their associated curtilages was contrary to policy and would have a harmful and inappropriate impact on the rural character of the area.  Councillor M Alexander stated that Members were regularly told that there was no such thing as a precedent in planning.

Councillor T Page stated that all applications were unique and he felt that Members had the opportunity to be pragmatic in respect of this site.  He concluded that he could not see how this application would be detrimental to the local area.

Councillor D Andrews stated that, whilst there were no shops and local amenities to support small dwellings, a larger family dwelling would allow a degree of self sufficiency and having dwellings on this site would be much better than what was on the site at present.

Councillor T Page commented that the application would, aside from providing much needed additional housing, provide some degree of temporary economic benefits for the area and would improve the appearance of the site.

The Director advised that Members should consider whether the benefits from this scheme outweighed the policy presumption against residential dwellings in the rural area beyond the green belt.

Councillor D Andrews proposed and Councillor N Symonds seconded, a motion that application 3/13/2067/FP be granted on the basis that there would be no significant harm resulting from the application, which would not set a precedent and was in keeping with the surrounding area.  The application would enhance the appearance of the site and would provide much needed housing.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee rejected the recommendation of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 600.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Birse addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to no substantive objections being received by the end of the consultation period of 18 March 2014, in respect of application 3/13/1948/AD, advertisement consent be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that, subject to no substantive objections being received by the end of the consultation period of 18 March 2014, in respect of application 3/13/1948/AD, advertisement consent be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/13/0348/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor M Carver, as the local ward Member, queried the proposed period for compliance of 4 months.  He commented on whether consideration could be given to a shorter timescale.  The Director stated that Officers had given this careful consideration and it was felt that 4 months was necessary to allow sufficient time for the removal of the authorised garage/outbuilding and the removal of spoil and reinstatement of the site to its original state.

In response to a query from Councillor T Page, the Director detailed the next steps that Officers would take if Members approved enforcement action.  Members were also advised of the options open to the Authority if there was an appeal or if the notice had not been complied with.

The Authority could go to court and Officers ultimately had the power to take direct action and demolish the unauthorised development, remove the subsequent spoil and place a charge on the land for such work.

At this point (9.45 pm), the Committee passed a resolution that the meeting should continue until the completion of the remaining business on the agenda.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/13/0348/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/13/0348/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Finance and Support Services, be authorised to take enforcement action on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/12/0057/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor S Bull commented that quite a few pubs were being lost in rural areas.  He stated that many pubs displayed similar signs on private land.  He queried whether the Authority could take enforcement action against unauthorised advertisements on private land.

The Director referred to the planning history of this enforcement matter in that a planning application for the retention of existing directional advertisement board to the Axe and Compasses had been refused and this refusal had been upheld on appeal.  The sign had been removed but subsequently reinstated in a similar location.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0057/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0057/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Finance and Support Services, be authorised to take enforcement action on the basis now detailed.

(A)  Appeals against refusal of Planning Permission/ non?determination.

(B)  Planning Appeals Lodged.

(C)     Planning Appeals: Inquiry and Informal Hearing Dates.

(D)     Planning Statistics – ‘To Follow’.

RESOLVED – that the following reports be noted:

(A)   Appeals against refusal of planning permission / non determination;

(B)       Planning Appeals lodged;

(C)       Planning Appeals: Inquiry and Informal Hearing dates; and

(D)       Planning Statistics.