Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors J Jones and K Warnell.  It was noted that Councillors P Boylan and P Ruffles were substituting for Councillors J Jones and K Warnell respectively.

The Chairman announced that the following applications had been withdrawn:

·               3/17/2897/OUT - Outline planning application for up to 105 residential dwellings, with associated landscaping, amenity space, vehicle and pedestrian access from High Street, and associated works. All matters reserved except for access at Land west of High Street and south of Dovehouse Lane, Walkern, SG2 7PF for Welbeck Strategic Land II LLP c/o agent.

·               3/17/2216/OUT - Outline application for 27 no. dwellings at Land west of High Road, High Cross for Caddick or c/o agent.

·               3/18/0105/OUT - Outline planning application for the erection of up to ten dwellings (all matters reserved) at Blind Lane, Ardeley for Mr Owen York c/o agent.

To receive any Members' declarations of interest.

Councillor P Ruffles declared an interest in application 3/17/1867/FUL, on the grounds that a similar application had been determined by Hertfordshire County Council.  He stated that as this was not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he would remain in the room but would take no part in the debate or vote.

Councillor D Andrews declared interests in applications 3/17/0414/REM and 3/17/0424/REM, on the grounds that he knew personally a senior Officer in the company that was the applicant in both applications.  He confirmed that although these were not disclosable pecuniary interests, he would leave the room for both items and would take no part in the debate or vote.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/1867/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 referred to the additional commentary in the late representations summary as well as the comments of Hertford Town Council circulated by email.  The Head advised that none of the additional comments had altered the recommendation.

The Head advised that, in green belt terms, the engineering operation was appropriate and significant weight has been applied to the extant permission.  Hertfordshire Highways were content that the highway network could cope with the additional loads and Officers were satisfied that the landscape impact would be acceptable and had therefore recommended the application for approval.

Mr Wansell addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Ms Osborn spoke for the application.  Councillor S Rutland-Barsby addressed the Committee as a local ward Member.

The Interim Legal Services Manager commented on a decision taken by Basildon District Council that had been quashed on the basis that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must be carried out due to the scale of the waste due to be deposited.  Members were advised that guidance was now much clearer in terms of what waste could be deposited on a site for the purposes of a golf course.

Members were advised that an EIA would not assist with the issue of vehicle movements as that matter would be addressed via a transport assessment and Highways Officers had indicated they were content to abide by the 3 year old assessment.  The Interim Legal Services Manager concluded that Members must determine what they hoped to achieve by any further assessment.

The Head confirmed that Officers had assessed the proposals and were of the view that whilst there would be environmental affects these were not significant enough to justify an EIA.  Councillor J Goodeve commented that much of the transport assessment dated from 2010 and a significant number of new properties had been built, including a new primary school at Simon Balle and on that basis, the traffic study was deficient and needed to be repeated.

Councillor D Andrews expressed concerns regarding detritus and mud that had previously obscured road markings and signage on Ware Road.  He was concerned for the pedestrians and school children using footpaths near Hertford Heath to access Simon Balle School and other schools.  He concluded that his primary concerns centred on the issue of the greenbelt, buildings and openness.  He queried why 400,000 tonnes of material was required for the construction of a golf course.

Councillor M Casey commented on whether Officers had any evidence to suggest that the intention of the applicant was to build a golf course or whether this was a front for a waste disposal operation.  Councillor B Deering commented on the likely number of lorry movements per day to this site.  He emphasised the policy position in that very special circumstances did not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 419.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of applications 3/17/1491/FUL and 3/17/1492/LBC, planning permission and listed building consent 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 of representations from Aston Parish Council and the applicant regarding the designation of the building as a community asset and this was summarised in the additional representations summary.

The Head advised that the layout, scale and detailed design of the development would be sympathetic to the character of the area and would provide wider enhancement to the setting of the listed building and the conservation area and would also secure the long term viability of the listed barn.

Members were advised that local concern over the reduction in size of the public house was outweighed by the evidence of the unviability of the pub over a period of time.  A retained facility on the site would be of benefit to the village which had other similar facilities.

The Head advised that limited parking was a concern but overall Officers considered that the application was in accordance with local and national policies.  

Mr Stimpson addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr West and Mr Ritter spoke for the application.  Councillor S Brown addressed the Committee as the Chairman of Aston Parish Council.

Councillor T Stowe emphasised that he intended to address the Committee as a local ward Member and not as a Member of the Committee.  He addressed the Committee then left the Council Chamber and took no part in the debate or vote.

Councillor D Andrews commented that it was always sad and unappetising to see pubs being shut in the villages Members and residents enjoyed.  He referred to this pub as being closed for a very long time. 

Councillor D Andrews stated that he was content with the concept of infilling but was troubled by the concept of a micro pub.  He sought clarification from Officers as to the viability of a micro pub as there had been doubt expressed in that regard.  Following questions from Councillor R Brunton and the Chairman regarding viability and sustainability, the Head referred Members to policy STC8 and the points raised in paragraph 8.4 onwards of the report submitted.

The Head reminded Members that policy STC8 covered the loss of an asset such as a public house and such a loss would not be permitted which would result in a significant reduction in the level of such provision locally.  Officers had assessed the availability of similar local provision and whether the pub could come forward as a viable option as well as the length of time it had been vacant when making their recommendation for approval.

Councillor P Boylan commented on the apparent lack of conditions regarding the concerns raised by East Herts Environmental Services and access for refuse freighters to top and empty bins from the centralised collection point.  He also commented  ...  view the full minutes text for item 420.

Recommended for Refusal.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/2220/FUL, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application and detailed the relevant planning history.  He referred to the design aspects of the proposed development and commented on the inappropriate design of the new dwellings.  He also stated that policy tests in respect of this application had not been met and the proposed amenity space was not acceptable.  He referred to the car parking objections as detailed in paragraph 8.10 of the report 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 3/17/2220/FUL, 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 3/17/2959/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head responded to a number of minor queries from the Chairman and Councillors D Andrews, T Stowe and P Ballam.  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 3/17/2959/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/2865/REM, 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 referred to the information detailed in the additional representations summary.  Officers were of the view that this reserved matters scheme was in accordance with the outline application.

The Head referred to paragraph 1.4 of the report for the main issues that Members should consider.  Officers were of the view that this scheme was an improvement to previous applications that had been determined in this location.  Members were advised that any outstanding matters could be addressed via the Section 106 process or by conditions.

Councillor R Brunton sought and was given some clarity on a number of points and concerns that had been raised by Hunsdon Parish Council.  The Committee accepted the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/17/2865/REM, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/0414/REM, 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 the proposed parking provision was in conflict with the BCANP policy in respect of car parking and in particular with the proposed tandem parking in front of garages.

The Head also referred Members to paragraph 9.31 of the report submitted in respect of drainage.  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 3/17/0414/REM, 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 3/17/0424/FUL, 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 3/17/0424/REM, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report.