Agenda and minutes

The Chairman advised that the next Officer organised training session would take place on 29 February 2012 at 5.15 pm and would cover Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas.

The Chairman also advised that Officers had approached Trevor Roberts Associates with a view to arranging a 3 hour external training session to cover issues arising from the Localism Bill.  This would take place in March 2012 at a date and time to be agreed.

Finally, the Chairman advised that applications 3/11/1511/FP and 3/11/1635/FP would be moved up the agenda and determined first.

Councillor M Alexander declared a personal and prejudicial interest in application 3/11/1635/FP, in that he was a Board Member for Riversmead Housing Association.  He left the room during consideration of this matter.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 4 January 2012.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 January 2012 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mr Gary O’Leary addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/1511/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that the planning inspectorate had confirmed that a valid appeal had been lodged against non-determination of the application.  The Committee was advised that Members should determine the application as they would have done had this appeal not been lodged.

The Director stressed that although Officers had considered the application on the basis that the applicant met the criteria for gypsy and traveller status, there had been no evidence submitted to support that status.  Members were advised that Officers reserved the right to challenge the status of the applicants at any subsequent appeal.

The Director referred to a number of typographical errors in the report and these were covered in the additional representations schedule circulated in advance of the meeting.  Members were advised that Officers felt that appropriate weight had been given to appropriate Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) policies, based on the gypsy and traveller accommodation assessment carried out by the Authority.

The Director reminded Members that the Council’s Conservation Officer had recommended that the application be refused due to the likely impact on the adjacent listed buildings.

Councillor L Haysey, as the local ward Member, addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She stated that the report was very succinct and the application was an excellent case study of planning in terms of extant appeals and potential future appeals.

Councillor Haysey stressed that this was a wholly unacceptable form of development in the green belt and the Committee should continue the recent support given to the local residents by refusing this application.

Councillor M Alexander referred to the amount of time spent by Officers in relation to this application.  He reminded the Committee that this scheme was contrary to Green Belt policy.

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby also praised the Officers and, so there was public record of Members’ gratitude for their work in relation to this site, expressed her particular satisfaction with Officers securing a high court injunction on the Saturday of a Bank Holiday weekend.

The Director advised that policies HSG10, OSV3 and PPS5 should be added to the reasons for refusal on this application, and that PPS5 was particularly relevant in relation to the protection of the listed buildings and heritage assets.

Councillor M Alexander proposed and Councillor S Bull seconded, a motion that the Committee accept the Officer’s recommendation as detailed in the report now submitted.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/1511/FP, planning permission be refused for the following amended reasons:

1.           The proposal represents inappropriate development within the Green Belt and, together with the provision of necessary access improvements and visibility  ...  view the full minutes text for item 588.

Recommended for Approval.

Joanne Belsey addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Mr Ian Richardson spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/1635/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that the suggested hours of operation in relation to this application were 11 am to 3 pm.  Members were referred to condition 3 as being incorrect on page 117 of the report now submitted.

Councillor M Pope, as the local ward Member, addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He stated that although this application represented a worthy scheme, Hoe Lane Garages, Hoe Lane was the wrong location.

Councillor Pope stated that anything other than a domestic use for the garages was inappropriate due to its proximity to a major junction of a busy road.  The site was also in close proximity to a pub, a vet’s surgery and a number of residential units occupied by elderly and vulnerable residents.

Councillor Pope stressed that this application would exacerbate parking problems on Hoe Lane, which were attributed to users of the vet’s surgery, the pub and students using Hertford Regional College and also commuter parking for users of Ware Station.

Councillor Pope stated that a pedestrian crossing for Hoe Lane was crucial for pedestrian safety.  He stressed that although leaving furniture at the site was to be by appointment only, it was inevitable that people would turn up outside these times.

Finally, Councillor Pope expressed concern over the possible dumping of furniture and white goods close to the site.  He also referred to the possible fire risk and conditions being made more favourable for vermin.

Councillor S Bull commented that Riversmead Housing Association was a very responsible organisation and Hertfordshire Highways had not sought to restrict planning permission for this application.  Councillor Bull also stressed that the scheme, if approved, would be temporary for one year.

Councillor B Wrangles stated that, although this was a worthwhile scheme, the site was too close to residential houses.  She commented that an industrial location might be a more appropriate location and hoped that, should the application be approved, the local Member would carefully monitor the use of the site.  Councillor Wrangles stated that she would be abstaining from voting.

Councillor A Burlton queried whether parking was a problem in the area as the garages hadn’t been used for cars for some years.  He expressed concerns as to whether the site would be used for furniture refurbishment as this would be detrimental to the environment.  He also queried how the applicant would prevent vandalism, particularly as furniture was easier to set on fire than cars.

Councillor M Newman commented that the garages were already being used for furniture storage, albeit in an unregulated fashion.  He stated that the traffic should not be an issue with staff arriving in the morning and customers arriving by appointment only.  He believed that putting what appeared to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 589.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2041/FO, subject to a deed of variation in respect of the original Section 106 agreement dated 3 March 2011 to ensure that its requirements were properly related to this proposal, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director referred Members to the information detailed in the additional representations schedule circulated in advance of the meeting.

Councillor A Burlton commented that a 30% increase in the size of approved buildings at plots 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 Upper Green Road and at 54 and 56 Upper Green Road could not be considered as a minor material change.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/2041/FO, subject to a deed of variation in respect of the original Section 106 agreement dated 3 March 2011 to ensure that its requirements were properly related to this proposal, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Variation of a S106 Legal Agreement – Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2032/SV, the Section 106 legal agreement be varied as detailed in the report now submitted and authority be delegated to the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, to agree the detailed wording of the proposed variation.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that (A) in respect of application 3/11/2032/SV, the Section 106 legal agreement be varied as detailed in the report now submitted; and

(B)   authority be delegated to the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, to agree the detailed wording of the variation.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/1559/FP, 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 supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/1559/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Variation of a S106 Legal Agreement – Recommended for Refusal.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2031/SV, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

In response to a number of queries from Councillor M Newman, the Director advised that once housing market assessment work had been concluded as part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) process, the Authority would be in a better position to identify housing need across the District.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/2031/SV, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Variation of a S106 Legal Agreement – Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2046/SV, the Section 106 legal agreement be varied as detailed in the report now submitted and authority be delegated to the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, to agree the detailed wording of the proposed variation.

In response to a query from Councillor A Burlton, the Director advised that the applicants were entitled to seek to amend Section 106 legal agreements, but that the Committee retained discretion on whether to approve or refuse such applications.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that (A) in respect of application 3/11/2046/SV, the Section 106 legal agreement be varied as detailed in the report now submitted; and

(B)   authority be delegated to the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, to agree the detailed wording of the variation.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/1387/FP, subject to the applicants entering into a legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and summary of reasons approved by the Committee at its meeting of 12 October 2011.

The Director updated Members regarding the signing of the Section 106 legal obligation on this application.  He stated that the proposals included a single dwelling which, when the plot for it was sold, would finance improvements to Great Hormead Village Hall, Great Hormead.

The Director advised that Officers had sought to control this situation with the legal agreement restrictions detailed in the report now submitted, in particular, a requirement  that the house should not be occupied until the new village hall was occupied and available for use.

The Director stated that the applicant’s solicitor had correctly indicated that the trustees of the village hall were bound by other legislation outside of the planning regulations.  However, the applicants’ Solicitor was concerned that the currently proposed restrictions would prevent the development from coming forward.  On that basis, Officers had recommended that permission could be granted subject to an agreement that specified that the funding could only be used in relation to the proposals contained in this planning application, but did not require completion of the works to the hall in advance of the new house.

The Director advised that additional consultation had not been carried out locally as this report related to a trigger for a Section 106 legal obligation as opposed to a planning application.

The Director stated that Officers could carry out further consultation if Members felt this was necessary, but would prefer to have the Committee’s views as to whether Members were broadly supportive of this application before considering whether to conduct further consultation.

In response to a query from Councillor Mrs R Cheswright, the Director confirmed that the safeguards being proposed by Officers were to ensure that the funding could only be used for the fundamental revitalisation of Great Hormead Village Hall and not for other works that the Great Hormead Village Hall Management Committee might seek to carry out.

In response to a query from Councillor M Newman regarding the alternative approach suggested by the Authority’s solicitor, the Director stated that a further alternative approach to this matter was to require that the proceeds of sale of the residential plot were lodged with East Herts Council.  The legal agreement would then require that details of the arrangements for the subsequent release of the funding should be submitted to and agreed by the Authority. 

The Director advised that the applicant would need to permit East Herts Council to register an interest in the site and any associated costs of this approach would have to be met by the applicant.

Councillor G Jones proposed and Councillor S Bull seconded, a motion that there be no change to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 595.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Danny Simmonds addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2019/FP, 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 supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/2019/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2057/FP, 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 supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/2057/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

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

(B)  Planning Appeals Lodged.

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

(D)     Planning Statistics.

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.