Agenda and minutes

The Chairman advised Members that Officers hoped to arrange a Member training session at 5.15 pm on 9 January 2013, prior to the next meeting of the Committee.  Officers would advise Members of the topic for this training in due course.

Councillors M Alexander and P Moore declared disclosable pecuniary interests in application 3/12/1518/SV, in that they were Board Members for Riversmead Housing Association.  They left the room whilst this matter was considered.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 7 November 2012.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2012 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Recommended for Refusal.

Steve Baker addressed the Committee against the application.  Neil Osborn spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1657/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that Officers felt that the 8^th reason for refusal could be deleted as sufficient information had now been received to address the impacts of the application on bats and dormice.  Members were also advised that the wording of the 1^st refusal reason had been amended as detailed in the additional representations schedule.

Councillor S Bull, as a local ward Member, commented that this application site was 1 of 8 under consideration for development in Buntingford.  He stated that this application should not be approved unless it had been demonstrated via consultation or technical studies that this site was necessary for development or was preferable to the other 7 sites.

Councillor S Bull emphasised that the studies and evaluation of the other sites had not been completed and any applications for similar development in Buntingford should not be approved until all these studies had been completed.

Councillor S Bull commented that the applicant had referred to East Herts Council’s inability to demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing as a valid reason why this application should be approved.

Councillor S Bull referred to a number of policies that this application contravened, namely GBC3 as the application site was outside the settled area of Buntingford.  He also referred to policies ENV1, SD1, TR1 and TR7 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

Councillor S Bull stated that any sites for development must complement other sites and there must be a balanced approach to development to achieve the best possible outcomes for Buntingford.  He emphasised that the lack of bus routes to where this site was located and the dangerous prospect of residents using the nearby footpaths made this application unsustainable.

Councillor S Bull emphasised that the Environment Agency concerns regarding a nearby pond and the flood risk to existing properties had not been addressed and the lack of public transport would mean a heavy reliance on the private car.  He referred to the possible conflict between on–street parking and access for emergency vehicles.

Councillor S Bull stressed that the transport assessment was flawed as this related to towns with a regular train service and access to employment opportunities.  He reminded Members that Buntingford had no such provision and it was a flawed approach to make comparisons with towns that did.

Councillor S Bull concluded that this application had not been properly assessed in relation to the District Plan.  He stated that no sites in the rural area beyond the Green Belt should be approved in the vicinity of Buntingford until the District Plan process had been completed.

Councillor S Basra, as the other local ward Member, agreed with all the points put forward by Councillor S Bull.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 476.

Recommended for Approval.

Alastair Close addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant entering into an agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/12/0977/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.  The Director of Neighbourhood Services also recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/0978/LC, conservation area consent be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that Hertfordshire County Council would not be requesting any contributions in addition to those relating to highway matters.  Members were advised that there would be no requirement for the Section 106 obligation for the provision of fire hydrants as the County Council felt that there was already sufficient provision.

The Director referred Members to the additional representations schedule for further extensive comments from English Heritage, namely that, they could not support the application.  Officers had however, assessed the application in relation to the backdrop of a vacant site with empty buildings that did not enhance the visual quality of the area.

Members were also advised that no further comments had been received from the design panel that had commented on the designs initially submitted as part of the application for a food store on this site.  The Director concluded by stating that no comments had been received from Bishop’s Stortford Town Council or Birchanger Parish Council on the revised proposals.

Councillor G Jones stated that the changes covered by this application when compared to the previous application for a food store were all for the better.  He referred in particular to the removal of the residential element of the proposals, the reduced height of the proposed development and the increased car parking provision.

Councillor G Jones referred to the numerous design proposals put forward by the Applicant, indicating that Aldi had adopted a very flexible approach to this application in response to comments and criticisms of the original application.  He stated that this application represented a significant improvement over the previously approved application on the site.

Councillor A Burlton supported the comments of Councillor G Jones.  He also stated that this site would be very unlikely to flood and the proposed development was a much lighter building than the former BT building on London Road.

Councillor D Andrews sought reassurance in terms of what could be done to prevent the misuse of the car park in terms of commuter parking.  The Director referred to the normal approach of a car park management plan with the details being submitted to Officers for approval prior to the commencement of development.

Members were advised that this plan might include an element of charging and restrictions on the hours of use and Officers could attach a condition to cover the implementation of such a plan.

After being put to the meeting and votes taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 477.

S106 – Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1584/SV, planning permission be approved for the discharge of the Section 106 agreement.

The Director referred Members to the comments detailed in the additional representations schedule.  Members were advised that Bayford Parish Council had not objected to the removal of this condition on the understanding that there was no permission for any commercial activity on the site.

Bayford Parish Council had indicated that they would oppose any person attempting to start a new business on this site.  Members were further advised that that the applicant had written to say there were no proposals for any retail or commercial use of the site.

In response to a query from Councillor T Page, the Director confirmed that Section 106 obligations remained in perpetuity on a site, unless an application was received to vary or remove such an obligation.

In reply to a query from the Committee Chairman, the Director stated that any change of use would require planning permission, except for very small scale retail, such as the sale of produce from a table outside a smallholding.  The Director advised however, that the site could be utilised for agricultural or horticultural use at any time.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright sought and was given clarification as to why Hertford Town Council had felt the application was not sufficiently clear for the Town Council to reach a decision regarding their comments on this application.  The Director stressed that had the Town Council had the benefit of the report now submitted when commenting on the application, the Town Council Members might have been in a better position to comment.

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

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/12/1584/SV, planning permission be approved for the discharge of the Section 106 agreement.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1662/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor A Burlton commented on paragraph 7.2 of the report now submitted.  He queried why an exception was being made on this application given that no justification had been submitted in respect of the proposed variation of the condition.

The Director confirmed that whilst no justification had been submitted with the application, Officers had however, been advised that there had been a delay in the signing of the Section 278 agreement under the Highways Act.

Members were advised that there were 3 prospective occupiers of the site and the applicant was seeking to ensure that at least half of the site was occupied before the footway was widened.  Officers were of the opinion that this application was acceptable under these circumstances.

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 3/12/1662/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Refusal.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1551/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

Councillor G Jones stated that this application had been to Committee before and he was of the opinion that there were no issues of size of intrusiveness and he would support this application.  Councillor D Andrews agreed with Councillor G Jones and stated his support for the application.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright commented on whether planning conditions could be applied to prevent the site being used for large 5 bedroom houses.  The Committee Chairman stated that some very substantial conditions would have to be applied if Members rejected the Director’s recommendation for refusal.

In response to comments from Councillor A Burlton regarding development in the Green Belt, the Committee Chairman and the Director confirmed that the site was located in the rural area beyond the Green Belt.

Councillor M Alexander expressed concerns as to how the issues raised by Much Hadham Parish Council would be addressed, in particular, the issues of electricity supply, the disposal of waste and the height of the proposed development.

The Director advised that the issue of waste disposal could be covered by conditions so that details were submitted to Officers should the application be approved.  The issues of electricity and water supply were covered by different legislation and such infrastructure did not require planning permission in any event.

Councillor T Page cast doubt on the sustainability of the application if the site did not benefit from water or electricity supplies.  He referred to the issues of waste disposal and animal welfare.

Councillor M Newman commented that an e-mail had been sent to Members explaining how horse waste was to be disposed of from the site.  He referred to how exposed this site was, particularly as the bordering hedgerow was thin at the moment due to it being winter time. 

Councillor M Newman stressed that policy GBC3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 permitted the use of such sites for agricultural or forestry buildings or for small scale development for sport or recreation.

Councillor G Jones referred to an e-mail sent to all Members on the 30 November 2012 that sought to address all the questions raised by Members in the debate.  He stated that this e-mail had indicated that the site did benefit from a mains water supply.

Councillor G Jones proposed and Councillor D Andrews seconded, a motion that application 3/12/1551/FP be granted on the grounds that this application raised no issues of size of intrusiveness in the rural area beyond the green belt.

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

Councillor M Alexander proposed and Councillor M Newman seconded, a motion that application 3/12/1551/FP be deferred to enable Officers to seek additional information in respect of detailed matters relating to the development including waste disposal, provision of services and parking.

After being put to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 480.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1463/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor S Bull stated that he was delighted that, prior to the commencement of the development, details of a scheme to make the new sports hall available for public and community use would be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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 3/12/1463/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Refusal.

Francis Aspin addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1395/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Director referred Members to the additional representations schedule in respect of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).  Members were referred in particular to the wording in the NPPF in respect of the value of community facilities and the role of the planning system in retaining such facilities.  The additional representations schedule also contained further comments from the applicant, which were broadly in line with his comments to Members at the meeting.

Councillor M Alexander referred to an application some 8 to 9 years ago when permission was granted to extend this premises to include 6 bedrooms, as the premises was generally buzzing with trade at that time.  He queried whether the current problems were solely due to the economic downtown.  He stated that he would be supporting the Officer’s recommendation for refusal.

Councillor D Andrews, as the local ward Member, stated that the Kick and Dicky had been a very vibrant and popular public house with a good atmosphere, however, this was certainly not the case now.  He referred to the loss of passing trade following a couple of extremely cold winters, expounded by the fact that this premises was in a small hamlet and had relied exclusively on that passing trade.

Councillor D Andrews reminded Members that, providing the A120 was not affected by accidents, the only way to access the Kick and Dicky was via untreated roads.  He referred to two nearby pubs that were located on well gritted routes with better car parking facilities and access.  Councillor D Andrews stressed that both of these pubs were in a much better position to promote themselves.

Councillor D Andrews referred to the level of local interest in this application; however, the pub’s status as a true neighbourhood facility was being called into question as the neighbourhood had not been using the Kick and Dicky for some time.

Councillor D Andrews stated that references had been made locally to the need for a pub or restaurant in the area.  He stressed however, that the 30 or so houses in Wellpond Green were insufficient to support such a provision.  He referred to other pubs in more densely populated neighbouring villages.

Councillor T Page stated that, in respect of sustainable countryside policies, the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 followed government policies in relation to sustainability and this pub was clearly no longer sustainable.  He stated that the application should be approved for the change of use.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that it was always a shame when a public house became unsustainable, especially in a rural area.  She commented however, that as the pub had been up for sale for two years without any immediate prospects of it being purchased, there seemed to be little alternative than to approve this application.

Councillor S Bull  ...  view the full minutes text for item 482.

S106 – Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/1518/SV, the wording of the Section 106 agreement be varied in respect of Schedule 3, Annexe B (Affordable Dwellings – Mix of Tenure) to reflect the change in tenure of this unit.

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

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/12/1518/SV, the wording of the Section 106 agreement be varied in respect of Schedule 3, Annexe B (Affordable Dwellings – Mix of Tenure) to reflect the change in tenure of this unit.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/12/0111/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0111/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0111/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/12/0115/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor G Jones stated that he was appalled by the condition of what was a grade II listed building.  He commented that half of the roof was missing and the roof supports looked like they might not last much longer.

Councillor G Jones praised the efforts of the Enforcement Officers in taking steps to ensure this building was protected.  He expressed concerns that it had taken this report and the threat of enforcement action to get a commitment from the applicant to take steps to prevent further deterioration of this building.

Councillor M Alexander reminded Members that enforcement action was always the very last resort for the Authority.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0115/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0115/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/12/0277/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Director referred Members to the comments detailed in the additional representations schedule.  Members were advised that a letter had been received from the applicant’s agent stating that an application for a replacement dwelling on the site would be submitted as soon as possible.  Officers were however, still seeking authority to take enforcement action if required. 

Members were advised that no formal notice would be served if the required application was submitted in a timely manner and was subsequently approved.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0277/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0277/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action on the basis now detailed.

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

(B)  Planning Appeals Lodged.

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

(D)     Planning Statistics – ‘To Follow’.

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.