Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor R Standley.  It was noted that Councillor D Oldridge was substituting for Councillor R Standley.

The Chairman advised that the examination in public of the East Herts District Plan would commence at 10 am on 3 October 2017 for a 3 week period and a draft timetable had been e-mailed to Members on 9 August 2017.  He stated that further information for the public was available on the Council’s website.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 19 July 2017.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 19 July 2017, 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 3/17/0881/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application and detailed the relevant planning history.  Members were advised that there were no significant concerns with the application and there had been no objections from statutory consultees.  Officers had no concerns in respect of comments from residents regarding overlooking.

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 3/17/0881/VAR, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mrs Tomlinson addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/14/2304/OUT, had an appeal not been lodged against non-determination of the application, planning permission would have been refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application which was mostly in outline form plus full details of phase 1 including affordable housing, access, car parking and play spaces.  Members were advised that Hertfordshire County Council had only recently confirmed that the education authority was seeking a first school site on London Road as opposed to this site.

The Head stated that the applicant had appealed non-determination and Members were now being asked to indicate what decision they would have made had the application been determined in the usual way.  Members were advised that the appeal for land North of Park Farm Industrial Estate had been allowed and this had granted permission for a further 43 dwellings in Buntingford with the loss of approximately 1.1 hectares of employment land.

The Head referred to the issue of sustainability and, in particular, the likely reliance on the private car to access services and employment.  Members were also reminded of the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

Councillor J Jones referred to the total of 13 developments for Buntingford and commented on the lack of green belt protection plus the lack of a 5 years supply of housing land.  He believed that the application was contrary to policies GBC2 and GBC3 and he felt that the access through a residential area was totally unsuitable.

Councillor J Jones also believed that the access should be from the A10 and should be completed before the rest of the development.  He referred to the comments of the Landscape Officer on page 52 of the report submitted.  He concluded that the infrastructure could not support this and other recent developments and he supported the recommendation. 

Councillor K Warnell expressed concern in respect of noise from the A10.  Councillor B Deering stated that the position of Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) regarding Section 106 was unacceptable and the CCG must release more information regarding health infrastructure requirements.  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 3/14/2304/OUT, had an appeal not been lodged against non-determination of the application, planning permission would have been refused for the reasons detailed in the report.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mr Radford addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Lampard spoke for the application.  Councillor K Crofton addressed the Committee as the local ward Member.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/1145/OUT, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the outline application and advised that all matters were reserved aside from access arrangements.  Members were advised that the site was outside the built up area of the category 2 village of Benington.  The Head referred to the lack of a 5 years supply of housing land.

Members were advised however that, on balance, Officers felt that the harm was not outweighed by the benefits of this application.  Residents would be almost totally reliant on the private car and the Landscape Officer had some very significant concerns.

Councillor D Andrews made a number of points of concern regarding car usage and public transport.  He referred to this being about as poor a location in terms of sustainability as one could get in East Herts.  He commented that there were practically no local services at all.

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 3/17/1145/OUT, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/1388/HH, 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 Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/17/1388/HH, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/0073/REM, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the reserved matters application and detailed the relevant planning history.  Members were referred to the additional representations summary in respect of amendments to planning conditions 6 and 7.  A further application in respect of area 2 was due before the Committee within the next 2 to 3 months.

Councillor D Andrews referred to the points covered in paragraph 6.11 of the report submitted regarding the turning heads and swept path analysis.  He sought clarity from Officers on these matters.   Councillor J Goodeve referred to a deficiency in parking for social housing and parking facilities for electric vehicles.

Councillor J Jones referred to Neighbourhood Plan policy and his concern that the proposed parking was contrary to policy.  He referred to the comments of Buntingford Town Council that the proposed housing mix did not comply with the requirements of the Buntingford Community Area Neighbourhood Plan (BCANP), or the emerging District Plan.

Councillor M Casey commented on why there was a deficiency in parking provision for social housing compared to the BCANP standards.   He also commented at length regarding the details in respect of the housing mix as detailed in the emerging District Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan.

Following comments from other Members regarding parking, the housing mix and electric parking points, the Head stated that these matters could be raised with the applicant.  Officers considered that the benefits of the scheme outweighed the policy conflicts in the BCANP.  Members were advised that a deferral might not be successful in securing amendments as this was dependent on the goodwill of the applicant.

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 3/17/0073/REM, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Green addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/0707/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application and detailed the relevant planning history.  Members were advised that current interim parking arrangements were less than satisfactory with parking on grass verges.  The application clearly served a good purpose in meeting a current parking need.

Members were advised that Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) was concerned that the potential total amount of parking went against the policies of promoting sustainable transport.  HCC Officers felt that the number of spaces should be limited to a similar number of spaces available before the third party car park was taken out of use.

The Head stated that it was desirable to limit access via Anchor Street as this access was poorly configured and was essentially a narrow partly residential street.

Hertfordshire County Council as the lead local flood authority was working with the applicants to resolve concerns about the temporary surface water drainage arrangements.  Members were advised that despite initial concerns in respect of the integrity of architectural remains beneath the new car park, the County Council’s Historic Environment Advisor was now satisfied there were no practical issues in this regard.

Councillor J Goodeve commented on whether the provision of cycle storage could be included as a condition.  Councillor K Warnell expressed disappointment with the retrospective nature of the application.  He commented on water run-off issues and concurred with Officers regarding flooding and the Anchor Street access.

Councillor M Casey commented that the sooner the car park was opened for use the better.  The Head stated that the application served an important purpose in allowing people to park satisfactorily.  Members were advised that negotiations could be entered into with the developer regarding increasing the amount of cycle storage to encourage cyclists.

The Head also advised that allocating a proportion of the spaces solely for short stay parking would require consultation and negotiation that would further delay the opening of the car park.  It could be raised with the applicants in the event that the Committee granted permission for the current application.

At this point, Councillor G Cutting was permitted to address the Committee as a local ward Member.  The Chairman referred to the concerns regarding the access via Station Road and Anchor Street.  He commented that that there had been no personal injury accidents.

In response to a number of other comments from Members, the Head confirmed that the car park was for 5 years although this could be extended via a further planning application.  Members were reminded that allocating a proportion of the spaces solely for short stay at this stage would require consultation and negotiation that would further delay the opening of the car park.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

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

(B)                Planning Appeals Lodged

(C)                Appeals Decided

(D)                Planning Statistics.

RESOLVED – that the following reports be noted:

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

(B)     Planning Appeals lodged; and

(C)    Planning Statistics.