Agenda item

Recommended for Refusal.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/18/1544/FUL, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Service Manager (DM) Quality and Performance), on behalf of the Head of Planning and Building Control, summarised the application for a new B1 Office building in the rural area beyond the Green Belt and some distance beyond the settlement boundary for Little Hadham.  Members were reminded of the location of the site and the relevant planning history.

Members were advised that new economic development was permitted so long as this was sustainable in line with policy EDE2 in reference to the rural economy.  The Service Manager confirmed that Officers concerns were based on whether the site was sustainable for new employment generating uses.  Officers had referred in the report to the likely exclusive use of the motor vehicle to access the site.

The Service Manager referred to commentary from the applicant in respect the public bus provision along the A120.  Members were reminded that this provision was limited and there was limited public footpath on one side of the busy A120 and no footpath on Church End.

Members were advised that the visual impact of the proposed development and the proposed extension to the extent of the commercial development away from existing development had led Officers to recommend refusal due to likely harm to the rural area.

Mr Helme addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mrs Izod spoke for the application.

The Service Manager confirmed to Councillor M Casey that the site was originally a farm and the site had also been home to the bottling plant for Hadham Water.  Since that business had ceased to exist, a number of applications had been determined on their own merits to convert the buildings on the site to commercial properties.  Members were further advised of a long and complicated planning history for this site.  Officers believed this location to be unsustainable due to the likely predominant reliance on the private motor vehicle to access the site.

Councillor J Kaye made a number of comments regarding whether this was a brownfield site and he also commented on his concerns in respect of roads and the bridleway.  He believed that a lot depended on the car traffic in and out of the site during the daytime.

Councillor Andrews referred to bus timetables and commented that there was a workable bus service.  He stated however that there was a significant walk from bus stops and passengers would have to cross the A120 twice.  He also referred to the bridleways and footpaths being challenging in the autumn and winter months.  He also sought clarity around the brownfield nature of the site.

Councillor P Ballam commented on the infrequent 351 bus service between Hertford and Bishop’s Stortford.  She also commented on the rural area bridleways being dangerous for horse riders, cyclists and pedestrians as they were also being used by motor vehicles.

The Service Manager detailed the NPPF description of brownfield sites and she referred in particular to previously developed land.  Members were reminded that rural area policy did allow for limited infilling in sustainable locations.  The Service Manager summarised the transport assessment that had been carried out for this application, the results of which were summarised in paragraph 8.28 on pages 90 and 91 of the report submitted.

Councillor J Jones commented on the creation of employment in a rural area as a result of this application.  He asked if Officers could clarify the situation as regards District Plan policy and the provision of employment in a rural area.  Councillor Jones believed that the transport assessment figures for the A120 would soon be out of date due to the imminent commence of works on the Little Hadham bypass.

Councillor B Deering commented on the importance of employment opportunities in rural areas.  The Service Manager commented on the development strategy covering development within group 2 villages, all of which were located within a rural area in the District.  Members were advised that small scale employment was an acceptable form of development in rural East Herts. 

The Service Manager confirmed that what might be acceptable as a small scale employment use in one area of East Herts might not acceptable elsewhere in the District.  Members were advised that the relationship between the A120 and bus routes could very likely change once the construction of the bypass was completed.

The Chairman referred to the traffic being exceptional in this location on the A120.  He believed that traffic could exit the site onto the A120 due to the lulls in traffic on one side of the road or the other whilst vehicles were being held at the Little Hadham traffic lights.

Councillor D Andrews commented on the diversion of bus services down the A10 away from the villages of Thundridge, Wadesmill and Colliers End.  Councillor J Jones commented that there was still a bus service covering the old A10 route.  Councillor T Stowe believed that the traffic impact of this application might prove to be a nightmare in this area.  He commented on the likely increase in traffic speeds on the A120 once the bypass was constructed.

Councillor M Casey proposed and Councillor T Stowe seconded, a motion that in respect of applications 3/18/1544/FUL, the Committee support the recommendation for refusal, subject to the reasons detailed in the report submitted.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee supported the recommendations of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/18/1544/FUL, planning permission be refused, for the reasons detailed in the report submitted.