Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed Victoria Clothier, Legal Services Manager, to her first meeting providing legal support to the Committee.

Councillor M Casey declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in application S/16/0276/PREAPP, in that he was a shareholder in National Grid Plc.  He left the room whilst this matter was considered.

Councillor R Standley declared that she would leave the room whilst application 3/16/2087/VAR was considered on the grounds that she was a Member of the Network Housing Group Panel.  She explained that whilst she did not consider that she had a disclosable pecuniary interest, she would not participate in the debate to avoid any perception of bias.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 9 November 2016.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2016 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/2072/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application and commented on the unlikelihood of future occupiers being found for the building.  Members were reminded that the site was part of a wider area that was the subject of a planning framework consultation.

The Head stated that the proposed change of use would provide car parking for the existing users of Charringtons House as well as additional public parking.  Officers were satisfied that any harm caused as a result of the proposals was outweighed by the benefits.  Officers felt that the proposed development was acceptable subject to conditions regarding the management of the car park.

Councillor K Warnell commented on the feasibility of an archaeological survey if the foundations of the building remained in place.  He also commented on the mitigation of dust resulting from the proposed demolition work.  The Head stated that Officers had attached a condition regarding archaeological works and issue of dust was covered by Environmental Health legislation but a condition could be added requiring that details of demolition and dust mitigation be submitted to and agreed by Officers.

Councillor B Deering referred to the issue of tree planting and landscaping and queried the availability of 100 spaces on Sundays compared to half that number on Saturdays.  The Head advised that the Charringtons House tenants required more Saturday spaces hence the reduced number of public spaces compared to the higher level of Sunday provision.

Members were advised that due to the temporary nature of the proposed car park, a condition for additional tree planting was unnecessary as it took time for trees to become established.  Officers reminded Members that the Authority retained a degree of control over the site given that it was the applicant.

Councillor B Deering proposed and Councillor K Warnell seconded, a motion for additional conditions regarding additional planting and the mitigation of dust resulting from the proposed demolition of the offices.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/2072/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the following amended conditions:

1.        Three Year Time Limit (1T12)

2.        Programme of archaeological work (2E02)

3.        Approved Plans (2E10)

4.        Materials arising from demolition (2E32)

5.        Conservation Area (clearance of site) (8L13)

6.        Hard Surfacing (3V21)

7.        Tree/hedge retention and protection (4P05)

8.        Prior to the first use of the development hereby approved, the reconfigured vehicular access to the site shall be constructed in accordance with details shown on drawing no. G21852/110 Rev A.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an access appropriate for the development in the interests of highway safety and convenience.

9.        Prior to the first use of the development hereby approved, all on site vehicular and parking areas  ...  view the full minutes text for item 477.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/1251/REM, reserved matters planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head advised that outline permission had been approved and this reserved matters application formed part of the wider Bishop’s Stortford North development proposals.  The scheme was for a revised access and layout of the spine road through the site, landscaping and footways adjacent to the spine road, landscaping within the proposed riverside park open space and landscaping around the circumference of the site.

The Head detailed a number of issues for Members to consider including policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007, the National Planning Policy Framework and Neighbourhood Plan policies.  He referred to the principles of garden cities and referred Members to the additional representations summary.  He advised Members that the legal agreement and first condition that were detailed in the report were not required in this case.

Councillor P Ruffles referred to the comments of the Ramblers Society regarding the plans displaying the public rights of way.  Councillor K Warnell expressed concerns that future residents faced an additional financial burden if Hertfordshire Highways did not take responsibility for new roads proposed as part of this application.  He also commented on noise related matters and stressed that construction traffic should enter and leave the site from outside of the town centre of Bishop’s Stortford.

The Head stated that arrangements would be made for a temporary access to this site directly from the A120 and the details of this would be submitted to and agreed with Hertfordshire Highways.  He also referred to Hazel End Road and the proposed Riverside Park and steps that would be taken to avoid a burden being placed upon Rye Street.

Members were advised that public footpaths to be provided on the riverside park would link with the existing network.  The provision of other elements, such as the open space elements of the proposed development were covered by the existing legal agreement.  Members were reminded that Hertfordshire Highways were seeking to limit its future liabilities with regard to the adoption of roads.  With regard to management costs of roads, the highway authority preferred not to adopt roads with roadside verges with trees between the carriageway and footway.  A management company approach was not an uncommon arrangement for the maintenance costs of roads not managed by highways.

The Legal Services Manager reminded the Committee of what may constitute a material consideration, and gave an example in that the negative effect on the value of a property would not constitute one.  The Head confirmed that the longer term management safeguards were detailed in the report and the additional representations summary.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/1251/REM, reserved matters planning permission be granted subject to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 478.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/1897/REM, reserved matters planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head advised that this first phase development was on the same site detailed at Minute 478.  He detailed the roundabout access off Farnham Road and stated that the application was for 91 dwellings of which 22 or 24.2% would be affordable.

Members were reminded that based upon the legal agreement requirement of 25% affordable housing, this site would provide marginally under this percentage.  Officers were comfortable however, that the other phases of development would ensure that the overall affordable housing provision would be 25%.

The Head confirmed that this scheme met the aspiration of delivering a high quality development which had been established at the outline stage.  Councillor K Warnell made a number of points in support of the application.  He was concerned however, that the site would be isolated from the Bishop’s Stortford town centre until ASR sites 1-4 were completed.

The Head confirmed to Councillor J Goodeve that the site managed itself in terms of parking provision for the affordable housing units as this part of the site had a dedicated access and associated parking area.  Councillor K Warnell was assured by Officers that contributions towards public transport provision had been addressed by the outline application.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/1897/REM, reserved matters planning permission be granted subject to the following amended conditions:

1.        Approved plans (2E103)

2.        Materials of construction (2E111)

3.        Refuse disposal facilities (2E241)

4.        Prior to first occupation of any dwelling details of the management and maintenance of the communal amenity spaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure adequate provision of maintenance and management of roads, footways and amenity areas and in the interests of public safety.

5.        All hard and soft landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants that, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as originally approved, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscaping in accordance with the approved designs, in accordance with policies ENV1 and ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and national guidance in section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

6.        Prior to the commencement of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 479.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Francis addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/0452/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to a legal agreement and the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head stated that the site was within the settlement boundary of Bishop’s Stortford and was part of site ASR4 in the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.  The site was not allocated as part of the Bishop’s Stortford north sites in the emerging District Plan.  Officers had considered the scheme against the Local Plan, District Plan policies and the policies of the Neighbourhood Plan.

The Head referred to a green margin to the front of the site and commented on improved cycle way provision with the potential for longer term linkages.  He referred to highways matters and the issue of flood risk and concluded that the benefits of the proposed development outweighed any harm.

Councillor D Andrews emphasised his concerns regarding flooding.  He referred to the lack of objection or conditions from the authority responsible for flood mitigation and commented on conditions regarding Sustainable Urban Drainage Solutions (SuDs) or permeable paving.  He also expressed concern that the affordable housing units were to be located in one cluster which was contrary to the guidance in the Affordable Housing SPD that affordable units should be pepper-potted on the site.

Following comments from Councillor M Casey, the Head emphasised that the County Council had been testing options for the delivery of a 3 form entry (3FE) primary school with an access off Farnham Road.  Members were also advised that the preferred flood risk mitigation measures were the solutions at the softer end of the spectrum such as swale ponds.

Councillor K Warnell referred to policy HDP1 and garden city development principles.  Following further queries from Councillors M Casey and the Chairman regarding school provision, the Head detailed the planned arrangements for school provision in the area of this site and the wider ASRs.

The Head referred to affordable housing and the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and emphasised the importance of meeting the most pressing local housing need.  He also referred to the local Neighbourhood Plan definition of garden city principles and detailed the wording of policy HDP1 in that there would be access to sustainable green spaces.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/0452/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to a legal agreement and the following amended conditions:

1.        Three year time limit (1T121)

2.        Approved plans (2E102)

3.        Programme of archaeological work (2E021)

4.        Samples of materials (2E121)

5.        Landscape implementation (4P131)/ and or further landscape details as may be required

6.        Construction hours and working (6N071)

7.        Prior to the commencement of the development reclamation of the site shall be carried out in accordance with document reference a)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 480.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mr Waite addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Poole spoke for the application.  The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/1391/FUL, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head advised that the site was located within the settlement boundary of Buntingford and an approval of planning permission would result in the loss of an employment site.  Officers were concerned regarding the impact of the scheme on the occupiers of sites to the north and the impact of the proposed development on services and infrastructure.

Officers had recommended the application for refusal due to the loss of employment land, the density and layout of the proposals and lack of suitable linkages to the land to the west of the site.  Environmental Health Officers were also concerned regarding noise and disturbance from the adjacent employment area.

Councillor J Jones expressed concerns that Buntingford needed employment sites and there were plenty of sites which were already earmarked for housing.  He stressed that this site was designated as employment land in the emerging District Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan.  He pointed out that the footpath to the west should link with a footpath to two schools and the associated playing fields.  He concluded that the scheme was purely speculative in nature and the application was of poor quality and was poorly designed.

Councillor M Freeman emphasised that employment land was needed to avoid residents having to use cars for work, particularly in light of the infrequent bus services.  He referred to the opportunist approach of the applicant with this scheme.

The Head responded in detail to a query from the Committee Chairman regarding the demand for employment land.  Members were advised that this land should be retained for employment purposes during the District Plan period as the demand will increase as housing development is delivered in Buntingford.

The Head provided a definition of policies EDE1 and BUN6 in response to a query from Councillor R Brunton.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/1391/FUL, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Miles addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Downes spoke for the application.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/15/0260/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to a legal agreement and the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head explained that for all rural locations in East Herts, including its villages, the degree to which development would be fully sustainable had to be a balance given that the majority of education, employment and retail provision was located in the larger urban settlements and therefore, many residents would travel to these larger centres.  Members were reminded that there was a deficit in the 5 years supply of housing land and applications for sustainable development should be approved unless the harm could be proved to be both significant and demonstrable.

Members were advised of a number of local heritage assets and Officers felt that the setting of these assets would be improved by the proposed development, or at worse, neutrally affected.  The site was well contained by a landscape boundary and the impact was not considered to be harmful and Officers were therefore supportive of the scheme.

The Head responded to comments from Councillor R Brunton regarding policies EDE1 and EDE2 as well as comments from Councillor J Jones regarding the previous brownfield use of the site.  Officers were of the view that the marketing approach that had been taken was acceptable.

Following further comments from Councillors R Brunton, K Warnell and the Committee Chairman, the Head confirmed that the site was separate from Hunsdon and was outside the main body of the village.  A majority of residents used cars to access schools, jobs, doctor’s surgeries or for shopping trips.  Members were advised that there was some roadside footpath provision between the site and Hunsdon.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that subject to the following amended legal agreement:

·               A financial contribution of £32,966 towards Hunsdon JMI School (primary education);

·               A financial contribution of £716 towards youth for the New MUGA/sports provision for Ware Young Peoples Project, Mars Lane, Ware;

·               A financial contribution of £2,350 towards libraries (improvements to the Children’s Area at Sawbridgeworth Library);

·               A financial contribution of £272.30 per dwelling towards Community healthcare costs;

·               The provision of 25% affordable housing (plots 1-3);

·               A financial contribution towards of £18,029 (children and young people, parks and gardens and outdoor green space) towards improvements and refurbishment of existing open and play space in Hunsdon;

·               A financial contribution of £3,190 towards Hunsdon Parish Village Hall;

·               Details of the management and maintenance of amenity spaces;

·               Details of the refurbishment and maintenance of the grade II listed pump house located to the south of the application site. 

in respect of application 3/15/0260/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the following amended conditions:

1.        Two year time limit (1T121)

2.        Approved plans (2E103)

3.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 482.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/2087/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to a Deed of Variation to the existing legal agreement, and the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the modest design amendments proposed by the application and referred to Officers’ concerns regarding the provision of pitched roofing in favour of green roofs.  Green roofs would be retained as originally approved.  He stated that there would be no change to the footprint of the proposed development.

Councillor J Jones stated that he was unsupportive of the application due to the loss of sports facilities for housing.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/2087/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to a Deed of Variation to the existing legal agreement, if required, and the conditions detailed in the report.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/1576/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to a Deed of Variation to the existing legal agreement, if required, and the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head detailed the planning history and referred Members to paragraph 3.3 of the report submitted for the changes proposed by the application.  Members were advised that there would be no changes to the number of bedrooms or the number of spaces.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/16/1576/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to a Deed of Variation to the existing legal agreement, if required, and the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Revocation of Hazardous Substances Consent.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application S/16/0276/PREAPP, the hazardous substances consent be revoked.  The Head advised that this was a rare situation following the granting of Hazardous Substances Consent (HSC) in 1992 for the storage of natural gas.

Members were advised that the owners of the site, the National Grid, had not used the site for the storage of natural gas for many years and wished to sell it.  The presence of the HSC served no purpose and might act as a barrier to new development and the revocation was therefore necessary to remove the safeguarding restrictions to enable redevelopment for sensitive purposes such as a residential use.

The Head responded to a query from Councillor D Andrews regarding possible contamination of the site.  He stated that the revocation had no implications for necessary decontamination.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application S/16/0276/PREAPP, the hazardous substances consent be revoked.

The Head of Planning and Building Control submitted a report updating Members on the current situation relating to enforcement matters at the Esbies Estate, off Station Road, Sawbridgeworth.  The report sought to obtain authorisation to pursue further action at the site where previous enforcement notices had not been complied with and/or further unauthorised development had occurred.

The Head summarised what was a long and detailed history of enforcement action, the full detail of which could be found in Essential Reference Paper ‘B’ of the report submitted.  A number of appeals had been submitted and subsequently dismissed by the planning inspectorate.  This report sought Members’ authority to secure compliance with enforcement notices and for future action regarding any further breaches of planning control.

Members were given a summary of the suggested ways forward and were referred to the report for the detailed implications of each option.  The Legal Services Manager confirmed to Councillor D Andrews that the recommendation should be amended on the basis that Officers be authorised to seek rather than serve an injunction.

Following a number of initial queries from Members, the Committee was advised that a QC had informally suggested the proposed way forward and more formal advice would be obtained should Members approve the recommendation.

Members asked a number of questions regarding the financial implications and the option of prosecuting the owners of the various plots.  The Legal Services Manger emphasised that prosecutions would not compel the owners to comply with existing enforcement notices or prevent further breaches.

The Head stated that there was no one combined owner of the plots of land and some plots were in common ownership.  The financial implications were very difficult to quantify regarding each of the suggested ways forward.  Councillor K Warnell made reference to the human rights of the individual owners of the plots on the Esbies Estate.

Members received the report and approved the recommendation now detailed.

RESOLVED – that Officers be authorised to seek an injunction under Section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure compliance with the extant enforcement notices across the site; together with any unauthorised development that has occurred since the service of Notices in 2010, and also to prevent any further unauthorised development at the site.

At this point (9.52 pm), the Committee passed a resolution that the meeting should continue until the completion of the remaining business on the agenda.

The Principal Planning Enforcement Officer submitted a report providing Members with an enforcement update including the up to date situation regarding enforcement statistics and cases that were currently still active but had been opened before 2015.  Members noted the report and the recommendations now detailed.

RESOLVED – that (A) the enforcement statistics be noted; and

(B)   the update in relation to Enforcement Cases that had been opened before 2015 and were still active, be noted.

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

(B)  Planning Appeals Lodged.

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

(D)    Planning Statistics.

The Head of Planning and Building Control highlighted a number of recent appeal decisions and referred in detail to a number of points of interest.

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.