Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Sleigh addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Wood spoke for the application.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/16/0532/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head of Planning and Building Control referred Members to the issues covered by the additional representations summary.  He advised Councillor M Casey that it was not the role of the Committee to compare applications.  The Head advised that Officers did not feel that the grant of planning permission in this case would set a precedent.

Members were reminded that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) required the Authority to demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land.  The NPPF also stated that applications which constituted sustainable development should be approved unless there would be significant and demonstrable harm. 

The Head advised that Widford contained a range of housing types on a range of plots of varying sizes and this site was not uncharacteristic of the area.  Therefore, the impact of the proposed development was acceptable.  Members were advised that there would have to be a degree of control over the land to secure the access to this site and Officers had considered that the proposed access was acceptable.

Councillor R Brunton stated that he was the local ward Member and he had listened to both the applicant and the objector and had come to this meeting with an open mind.  He sought and was given clarification as to whether there was a risk to the Authority regarding the judicial review from 1997.  The Senior Lawyer advised Members to determine the application based on the current facts and the relevant planning policies.  She stated that the judicial review had quashed an earlier planning permission but no further action had been taken.

Councillor M Freeman commented that the judgement of the judicial review focused on the weight which Members had attached to a consultation response from the Police which had been found to be factually inaccurate.  He emphasised that some comfort could be taken from the fact that the judgement did not comment on the acceptability or otherwise of the development proposal, but rather in the way in which the application was determined and considered by the Committee.

The Head responded to the queries of Councillor R Brunton regarding local plan built heritage polices BH6 and BH12.  He assured Members that both policies were relevant although policy BH12 was not a saved policy and therefore no weight could be attached to it, although similar issues were covered by policies contained in the NPPF.

In response to queries on the sustainability of the development, the Head commented that there had been various appeal decisions where development in settlements in the District had been considered to be sustainable where those settlements contained a range of everyday community facilities.  There was also a presumption in favour of sustainable development under paragraph 14 of the NPPF.

The Senior Lawyer supported the contention that Local Plan Policies were vulnerable where there was no five year housing land supply and planning permission should be granted unless Members were satisfied that adverse impacts outweighed the benefits as per the guidance detailed in the NPPF.

The Head advised that the Council’s Conservation Officer had referred to adjoining listed buildings and had recommended that planning permission be granted as the development would not harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.  There was a range of houses in the locality and this was an acceptable design.  The Head concluded that the site was, to a degree, tucked away and would not be readily perceptible from the street scene and the highway.

In response to further queries from Councillor R Brunton, Members were advised that policy ENV1 was the Council’s general design policy and Officers could not add to the advice already given regarding design.  The Head assured Members that although the use of local labour was not covered by any policy it was accepted as a good practice approach in East Herts.

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 3/16/0532/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the repot now submitted.