Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor P Ruffles.  It was noted that Councillor G Lawrence was substituting for Councillor Ruffles.

The Chairman advised Members that the Principal Planning Enforcement Officer was retiring after 13 years with the Authority.  On behalf of the Committee, she wished the Officer a long and peaceful retirement.

Councillors D Andrews, Mrs R Cheswright, K Crofton and G Williamson declared disclosable pecuniary interests in applications 3/14/0528/FP and 3/14/0531/FP, on the grounds that they belonged to an organisation where a leading Officer of the applicant had a degree of control.  They left the room during consideration of these matters and the Vice–Chairman chaired the meeting during consideration of these applications.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 20 August 2014.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 August 2014 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendment:

Minute 189 – 3/13/2223/FP – Demolition of The Bungalow, The Stables and Hazelwood Farm and the erection of 57 residential units together with access and associated ancillary works at High Road, rear of North Drive, High Cross, SG11 1AD for David Wilson Homes, North London.

Insert the following as additional reasons for deferral in the 14^th paragraph and the resolution – ‘…..highways access, overdevelopment and materials of construction’.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Gough addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/13/1925/OP, planning permission be granted.

Councillor S Bull, as the local ward Member, expressed concern over the proposed 3 storey buildings in Buntingford.  He stated that he would have liked to see one and two bedroom bungalows as part of this application.  He also commented on whether there was any plan from Hertfordshire Highways to widen the A10 as the 3 mile section between Buntingford and Westmill was often congested and there were two dangerous summits.

The Director referred Members to the additional representations summary for the conditions and the detail of the Section 106 legal agreement.

Members were also advised that Officers had added a third recommendation that the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee and a minimum of one of the two local ward Members (whilst informing both ward Members at all stages of any relevant action or decision), be authorised to make amendments to the heads of terms and all relevant matters in relation to the legal agreement and to add or remove conditions and directives and make such changes to the wording or them as maybe necessary to secure a satisfactory development.

The Director also referred to the constrained nature of the A10 to the south of Buntingford.  Members were advised that this was an issue that had been identified as a possible barrier to employment development in the town in the employment report relating to Buntingford. 

Councillor J Jones stated that the former depot was an eyesore in need of improvement.  He commented that it was a pity that the distribution depot had not come to fruition as employment was a big issue in Buntingford.  He emphasised that this was a Brownfield site identified in the emerging District Plan and he was disappointed that the much needed care home had been removed from the scheme.

Councillor J Jones stated that this was a cramped development at 37 dwellings per hectare.  He stressed that there would be insufficient play provision as part of the application and this needed to be addressed.  He welcomed the Section 106 contributions for the safer access for pedestrians onto London Road and the improvements to the bus service.

Councillor J Jones concluded that he was supportive of this outline application.  He expressed concerns that a 30 year lease on the Bury play area was insufficient and the £80,000 for refurbishment of this area was also insufficient.

The Director advised that the applicant would be moving towards a firmer agreement with the occupier of the Bury should the application be approved.  This was an outline application and the developer was unwilling to consider swapping an element of the proposed employment use for a care home following an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 231.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Waite addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of applications 3/14/0528/OP and 3/14/0531/OP, were the Authority in a position to determine the applications, the Council would be minded to grant planning permission without the caveats detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director also recommended that, in respect of applications 3/14/0528/OP and 3/14/0531/OP, the Head of Planning and Building Control, Planning and Legal Services Officers be authorized to further engage with the appellants, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee and a minimum of one of the two local ward Members (whilst informing both ward Members at all stages of any relevant action or decision) and that, subject to that consultation, Officers be given delegated authority to formulate, alter, amend and update the Council’s statements and evidence (including appropriate legal agreement matters and conditions), to be submitted to the appeal inquiry in accordance with the relevant timescales.

Councillor S Bull, as the local ward Member, stated that, even without the proposed developments, Buntingford had experienced a 50% growth since 2011.  He reminded the Committee that 1021 dwellings had already been built or had been approved since 2011 and an appeal inspector had stated that over 800 additional dwellings was unsustainable without increased employment.

Councillor Bull commented that employment land did not necessarily mean employment would be taken up.  He concluded that roads were becoming congested and transport was poor at best and schools and doctor’s surgeries were also full.  He urged the Committee not to inflict further housing development on Buntingford.

In response to a query from the Vice–Chairman, the Director advised that the applicant had appealed non-determination on the basis that the Council had not made a decision on the applications within the statutory timescale.  A public inquiry had been called and would commence in January 2015.  The associated evidence was due for submission in October and November.

Members were reminded that the Council’s position was currently unclear as the Committee had not determined these applications.  Members were being asked to establish that position at this meeting.  The Committee was referred to a significant amount of additional information in the additional representations schedule. 

Members were advised that the three main issues were employment, education provision and highways matters and, subsequent to the dispatch of the Committee report, the appellant had agreed to the provision of £6000 funding towards a school site search exercise and a phasing restriction preventing Area 3 (3/14/0531/OP) coming forward for development prior to the identification of a first school site, subject to a long stop date.

The appellant had also agreed to funding provision of £15,000 towards highway modelling and funding provision towards an employment provision fund with the amount to be agreed.  Finally, the appellant had agreed to funding of £75,000 towards the establishment of a local Hopper bus service, paid prior to the occupation of more than 10 dwellings in Area 2, in addition to the sustainable transport contributions.

In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 232.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Hallman addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Thorn 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 3/14/2223/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted. 

The Director referred Members to the additional representations schedule for a typographical error regarding condition 12.  Members were also referred to the schedule regarding the inclusion in the Section 106 agreement of a management company in respect of the landscaped and play areas on the site.

Councillor G Williamson expressed concerns that, amongst the issues on which Members based a deferral of the application at the August 2014 meeting of the Committee, only one of these had been addressed in this revised application.  He commented that what was now on offer in terms of play equipment was pretty insignificant and he had at least hoped for a decent open space play area large enough for children to kick a ball around in.

Councillor Williamson sated that, whilst he had sympathy with residents whose homes had been flooded, he did not believe that building 57 dwellings was the right approach to address this issue.  He stated that the weight given to the mitigation factors regarding this application had been inappropriate.

Councillor D Andrews stated that it was sad to see that the applicant had not given significant attention to addressing the issues raised by Members as shortcomings.  He commented that he was disappointed that there would not be open sustainable drainage solutions rather than closed systems.

Councillor Andrews stated that he would like to see a half metre ransom strip adjacent to North Drive provided as part of this application.  He was also very concerned regarding the access to the site via North Drive.  The Director stated that, if there were issues that Members felt that Officers had not picked up from the deferral at the August 2014 meeting, a further deferral would allow Officers to address these outstanding matters.

The Director reminded Members that the Authority was a landowner at North Drive and therefore, in addition to the planning controls, it was in a position to directly control access. Officers were of the view that this was not an issue where further steps could be taken. 

Councillor Andrews stated that he had significant highways concerns and stated that he used the main road by car and by bike and he stressed that, due to the chicanes, this could be a frightening experience.

Councillor J Jones stated that the applicant had proposed some pretty insignificant play equipment and there was no other play provision in High Cross.  He maintained that the applicant should reduce the number of units to make way for a proper dedicated play area.

Councillors K Crofton and D Andrews emphasised that Hertfordshire Highways needed to reconsider the access for this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 233.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Brooker addressed the Committee in support of 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 3/14/0607/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted. 

Councillor M Alexander congratulated the applicant and Officers for the improved design which was much more sympathetic to the area.  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 the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/14/0607/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 subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement or providing a Unilateral Undertaking pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/14/0992/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted. 

In response to a query from the Chairman, the Director advised that the application proposed to extend the opening hours of the store from 6 to 15 hours on Bank Holidays only, between 7 am and 10 pm, which were the usual weekday/ non holiday opening hours for the store.  Members were advised that there was no proposed change to Sunday trading hours.

The Director also reported that the applicant considered that they were currently at a trading disadvantage compared to their main local competitor in Hertford.  Members were advised that there were a number of additional conditions detailed in the late representations summary.

In response to a query from Councillor N Symonds, the Director advised that the condition had been set by an appeal inspector to protect the amenity of nearby residential properties.  Members were advised that no concerns had been raised in respect of Highways or Environmental Health issues.

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 the applicant entering into a legal obligation, or providing an acceptable Unilateral Undertaking pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/14/0992/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mr Dixon addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/14/1121/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor M Newman emphasised that approving this scheme would deliver half of the required provision that Hunsdon had to provide each year under the obligations of the emerging District Plan.

Councillor Newman stated that this application required a subjective balancing of all of the considerations and he was of the view that Hunsdon would be better off with this new dwelling rather than four redundant derelict buildings.

Councillor J Jones commented on the attractive design of the proposed development which, in his view, would enhance the village. 

The Director stated that this application was against policy GBC3 in the rural area beyond the Green Belt.  Members were advised that new residential dwellings were inappropriate in such situations.

The Director advised that, should this application be approved, the height of the house at 7.4 metres would be higher than the existing buildings at 6.7 metres.  The proposed development was therefore significant in height and scale in comparison to the existing buildings.

The Director reminded Members that an application had been refused in 2007 for two dwellings on a site immediately to the south of this location.  Members maybe of the view that the circumstances were comparable or worse due to the commercial element of the refused application, which had been dismissed on appeal.

Councillor M Newman proposed and Councillor J Jones seconded, a motion that application 3/14/1121/FP be approved and the conditions be formulated in consultation with the local ward Member.

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 3/14/1121/FP, planning permission be granted subject to conditions to be drafted and agreed in consultation with the local ward Member.

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.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/14/0928/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

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

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/14/0928/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Lockwood addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/14/1183/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor P Moore concurred with the public speaker that this was the most beautiful location and this property was the most unattractive home in that location.  She stated that all the plots were very substantial and commented that the proposed development would not result in overlooking as Ashleigh was not in close proximity to any other site.

Councillor M Newman emphasised that a lot of thought had gone into the aesthetics of the proposed development and the application would markedly improve the appearance of the dwelling.

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

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/14/1183/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mrs Badger addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Dodd spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/14/1090/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor J Jones stated that the objecting speakers’ patio and sun lounge was a cramped area and he had some sympathy in respect of her concerns.  He commented that her photographs had given an interesting perspective regarding the impact of this application.

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

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/14/1090/FP, planning permission 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/12/0238/B, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor M Alexander thanked the Principal Planning Enforcement Officer for his valued contributions over the last 13 years and wished him a long and happy retirement.  The Principal Planning Enforcement Officer thanked Members for their support.

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/12/0238/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that, in respect of E/12/0238/B, 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.

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.