Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors A L Burlton and G E Lawrence.  It was noted that Councillors A L Warman and D Andrews were in attendance as substitutes for Councillors A L Burlton and G E Lawrence respectively.

The Chairman advised that application 3/10/1235/FP had been withdrawn; that application 3/10/1152/FP had been deferred for further consideration of Traffic Regulation Order issues and that application E/10/0156/ had been deferred by Officers.  

The Chairman reminded Members regarding the arrangements for training on 29 September 2010.

Councillor B M Wrangles declared a personal interest in applications 3/10/1227/FO, 3/10/1226/FO and E/10/0126B in that she was a personal friend of the applicant.

Councillor D Andrews declared a personal interest in application 3/10/1334/FP in that he had a working relationship with the applicant’s wife.

Councillor R N Copping declared a personal and prejudicial interest in applications 3/10/1227/FO, 3/10/1226/FO and E/10/0126B in that he was a regular customer of the garden centre.  He left the room during consideration of these matters.

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby declared a personal and prejudicial interest in applications 3/10/1227/FO, 3/10/1226/FO and E/10/0126B. She left the room during consideration of these matters.

Councillors Mrs R F Cheswright declared a personal interest in applications 3/10/1227/FO, 3/10/1226/FO and E/10/0126B in that she was a customer of the garden centre.

Councillor A L Warman declared a personal interest in application 3/10/1198/FP in that he knew the objector representing Molewood Residents’ Association.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 25 August 2010.

RESOLVED - that the Minutes of the Development Control Committee meeting held on 25 August 2010 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Mr Lupton spoke addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Mr Gough spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that in respect of application 3/10/1198/FP, subject to the applicant or successor in title signing a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director provided Members with a summary of additional representations received after completion of the report and a list of proposed amendments to the report now presented.

Councillor K Darby stated that she did not support the proposal adding that the application did not fit with the character of the area and referred to the considerable number of letters submitted objecting to the proposal.   She referred to the lack of community facilities and the difficulties in relation to traffic into and out of the development.  She queried how the community would be integrated with its neighbours. In summary she stated that there were too many unit, it was incompatible with the area, the traffic issues and the danger of it becoming a “poor” neighbour with the character of the area.

Councillor R N Copping referred to the design of the garages and issues relation to social housing.  The Director provided clarification on these issues and stated that on balance with a number of “tweaks” officers were able to recommend approval of the scheme.

Councillor R Gilbert referred to the density of the development and of the traffic issues difficulties which would be created in Bullsmoor Lane and Vicarage Lane.   The Director stated that the traffic issues relating to the scheme had been taken into account as part of a traffic assessment undertaken by the applicant and endorsed by Hertfordshire Highways.  He suggested that a Directive be added to the conditions relating to Bullsmoor and Vicarage Lane.  

Councillor K Barnes was concerned that 127 Bengeo residents had been consulted and that the proposals should have required a consultation for the whole of Bengeo.  He was concerned at the loss of a green field site and of the fact that Bengeo was a rat run.  He felt that the development was “huge”, that local people were not happy with the proposal and the traffic issues. 

Councillor D Andrews felt that flats were in appropriate in that part of Bengeo and was very concerned about parking and a possible shortfall in the Council’s policy.  He stated that 97 units was too large.

The Director addressed Members’ concerns regarding the traffic aspects, parking policies and the size of the development. 

Councillor S A Bull felt that the application was out of keeping with the area, the density of the units and the need to challenge highways officers on their views.

Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink accepted that the area was designated for housing but was concerned about the adequacy of the parking and stated that Officers should ask for something closer to its maximum parking standards.  She queried  ...  view the full minutes text for item 271.

Mr Barnes spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1377/FP planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Director explained that there was no in principle decision to grant planning permission for a residential development at this site.  At the meeting in June 2010, some Members had expressed support but there were concerns about the lack of detail and the amount of development proposed.  The application was then deferred to allow the applicant the opportunity of submitting a detailed application to address concerns with regard to the lack of detail and for a bat survey to be undertaken.    The Director explained that the application site was on Metropolitan Green Belt land and that any decision to approve the application must have very special circumstances.

Councillor J J Taylor stated that at the meeting on 2 June 2010 the applicant was under the impression that outline permission had been granted.  She felt that a residential development on Green Belt land was not appropriate as there were no special circumstances.  She acknowledged that the land was an “eye-sore” and that this would tidy up the area but this did not constitute planning permission.  Councillor Taylor felt that acceptance of the application would encourage further development on green belt sites. 

Councillor R Gilbert confirmed that the application was deferred on 2 June 2010 for the application to undertake a bat survey and for him to submit a full application.  He felt that the aim of green belt was to protect and enhance the quality of the countryside and that the proposal would enhance the area acknowledging that the existing buildings could not be refurbished.  Councillor Gilbert suggested that the application should be supported under Policies GBC14 and ENV1.  Councillor Gilbert reminded Members that they had gone against Policy before citing the Paradise Wildlife Park as an example.

Councillor K A Barnes suggested that the application had a lot of merit adding that he thought that the majority of Members in June were in favour of the application.  He referred to supported of the application by Brickendon parish Council and 17 other letters of support.

The Director stated that Members needed to be mindful of approving an application in the green belt on the basis of tidying up the area.  There should be sufficient very special circumstances to outweigh the clear national and local policy of development restraint in the green belt. 

Councillor R I Taylor referred to the fact that the whole curtilage was not going to be developed and that the previous attempts to sell the land for equestrian uses had not been successful.  He referred to asbestos being removed and felt that these were good reasons to allow planning permission.

Councillor M R Alexander queried whether the application, if approved would be referred to the Secretary of State for decision.  The Director confirmed that it would be as it was a departure from Policy.

The Director stated that the main purposes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 272.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1227/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.  The Director explained that the application to vary condition 9 would remove the restrictive requirements of the condition in relation to the garden centre use.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1227/FO be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1227/FO planning permission be granted and the condition be varied as follows:

1.            'The use of the restaurant by customers shall be restricted to the hours 08:00-23:00 Monday-Saturday and 10:00-22:00 on Sunday and Bank Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.'

(Councillors R N Copping and S Rutland-Barsby left the room during consideration of this application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1226/FO planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

Councillor M R Alexander stated that the applicant could apply to vary the application for special events such as New Year and suggested that a restriction should be placed on this i.e. between 4-6 requests to vary.  This was supported.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1226/FO be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1226/FO, planning permission be granted subject to the following condition:

1.    The use of the restaurant by customers shall be restricted to the hours 08:00 – 23:00 Monday – Wednesday, 08:00 – 00:00 (midnight) Thursday –Saturday and 10:00 – 22:00 on Sunday and Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The number of amendments to be up to a maximum of 6 occasions within any calendar year.

(Councillors R N Copping and S Rutland-Barsby left the room during consideration of this application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1178/FP planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed. 

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1178/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1178/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.        Three Year Time Limit (1T121)

2.        Levels (2E05)

3.        Materials arising from demolition (2E32)

4.        Provision and retention of parking spaces (3V234)

5.        Wheel Washing Facilities (3V25)

6.        Prior to the commencement of the development

        hereby approved, details of noise attenuation measures
        to be used in the design and construction of the buildings shall
        be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
        Authority, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the

        approved details.

        Reason: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residents, in accordance with Policy ENV24 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

7.        Prior to the commencement of works on site, details of the design of building foundations shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the

        Local Planning Authority,in consultation with the

        Environment Agency, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved details.

        Reason: To ensure the protection of groundwater from contamination in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

8.        Prior to the commencement of the development,
a surface water drainage plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning                             Authority,
in consultation with the Environment Agency, and
thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved plan.

        Reason: To ensure the protection of groundwater from contamination in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

9.    No external working (6N06)

10.  Construction hours of working- plant & machinery    (6N072)

11.  Tree retention and protection (4P053)

12.  Tree planting (4P154)

13.  No external loudspeakers (2E253)

14.  The buildings hereby permitted shall be used for     Class B1c, B2 and B8 and for no other purposes        including any other purpose in Class B of the          Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use    Classes) Order 1987.

        Reason: To ensure that no alternative use is made of the premises which would be likely to result in a need for additional parking.

Directives:

1.        Other legislation (01OL1)

2.        In relation to condition 7 piling or other foundation    designs using penetrative methods are unlikely to be deemed acceptable.

3.        The attention of the applicant is drawn to the Control of Pollution Act 1974 relating to the control of noise on construction and demolition sites.

4.        If the site is known to be contaminated you should   be aware that the responsibility for safe development and secure occupancy of the site lies with the developer.

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and East Herts Local Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 275.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1209/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1209/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1209/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Three year time limit (1T12)

2.            Samples of Materials (2E12) - amended

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular ‘saved’ policies GBC1, ENV1, BH6 and PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommending that, in respect of application 3/10/1095/FP planning permission be granted subject to the condition now detailed.  The Director also recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1096/LB listed building consent be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1095/FP and 3/10/1096/LB be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that (A) in respect of application 3/10/1095/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following condition:

1.    Three year time limit (1T12).

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and the saved policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular policies GBC3, ENV1, ENV2, ENV5, ENV6 and BH6.  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the limited harm to the character, appearance or openness of this rural area is that permission should be granted.

(B)             in respect of application 3/10/1096/LB, listed building consent be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Listed building three year time limit (1T14)

2.            Samples of Materials (2E12)

3.            Listed building (New Windows) (8L03)

4.            Listed Building (New Doors) (8L04)

5.            Listed Building (New Brickwork) (8L06)

6.            Listed Building (New External Rendering) (8L08)

7.            Listed Building (Rainwater Goods) (8L09)

8.            Listed building (Making Good) (8L10)

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and the saved policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that consent should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1252/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1252/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1252/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 

1.    Three Year Time Limit (1T121)

Directive:

1.    Other legislation (01OL1)

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular policies GBC3, ENV1, ENV5 and ENV6.  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the limited harm to the character and appearance or openness of this rural site from the development, is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that in respect of planning application 3/10/1334/FP, planning permission be refused for the reason now detailed.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that the conservatory was modest and that the proposal was in keeping with the character of the area and should be approved.

Councillor R N Copping stated that the conservatory was not large and supported approval of the application.

Councillor D Andrews supported the application.

After being put to the vote, the Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1334/FP be refused and granted planning permission subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1334/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.           Three year time limit (1T12)

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and the 'saved' policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular policies GBC, ENV1, ENV5 and ENV6. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/0917/FP planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/0917/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/0917/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.    Three Year Time Limit (1T121)

2.    Matching Materials (2E13)

Directive:

1.    Other legs (010L).

Summary of Reasons for Decision

The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (East of England Plan May 2008, Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and the saved policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular policies GBC1, ENV1, ENV5 and ENV6.  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relation to E/10/0126/B no further action be taking in respect of the breach of condition 11 and that the Director of Neighbourhood Services in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the removal of the unauthorised marquee from the land.

The committee noted that no further action being proposed in relation to condition 11 of 3/09/0939/FP was in reflection of further work that had been undertaken by the applicant and Officers to ensure that the issues addressed by that condition were satisfactorily dealt with.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of neighbourhood Services that, no further action be taken in relation to the breach of condition 11 on planning permission reference 3/09/0939/FP and that enforcement action be taken be authorised in respect of the site relation to E/10/0126/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that (A) no further action be taken in relation to the breach of condition 11 on planning permission reference 3/09/0939/FP; and

(B)   that in respect of application E/10/0126B the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the removal of the unauthorised marquee from the land.

Period for compliance: 28 days.

Reasons why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

1.    The site lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt as defined in the East Hertfordshire Local Plan wherein permission will not be given except in very special circumstances for development for purposes other than those required for mineral extraction, agriculture, small scale facilities for participatory sport and recreation or other uses appropriate to a rural area. No such special circumstances are apparent in this case, and the development is therefore be contrary to saved policy GBC1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and to national policy contained in paragraph 3.4 of PPG2.

2.    The marquee, by reason of its size, siting and detailed appearance is detrimental to the openness and character of the surrounding area and is therefore contrary to saved policies GBC1 and ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and national planning guidance in PPS1 'Delivering Sustainable Development' para 34.

(Councillors R N Copping and S Rutland-Barsby left the room during consideration of this application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relation to E/10/0072/B enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Committee supported the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relation to E/10/0072/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/10/0072/B the Director of Neighbourhood Services in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 712 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the removal of the unauthorised development from the land.

Period for compliance: 3 months.

Reasons why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

1.            The site lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt as defined in the East Hertfordshire Local Plan wherein permission will not be given except in very special circumstances for development for purposes other than those required for mineral extraction, agriculture, small scale facilities for participatory sport and recreation; limited extensions to existing dwellings or other uses appropriate to a rural area. No such special circumstances are apparent in this case, and the development is not considered to constitute a limited extension. It is therefore contrary to saved policy GBC1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and to National policy contained in paragraph 3.4 of PPG2.

2.    The extensions are of an excessive size in relation to the original dwelling, and of a scale and design that is out of keeping with its character and appearance as a lodge house and to the character of the area as a whole. It is therefore contrary to saved policies GBC1, ENV1 and ENV5 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and to National policy contained in paragraph 3.4 of PPG2.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relation to E/10/0209/A enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed. 

The Director explained that he had been in contact with Circle Anglia Officers explaining their responsibilities to advise tenants in relation to planning issues.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relation to E/10/0209/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/10/0208/A the Director of Neighbourhood Services in consultation with the Director of Internal Services be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the reinstatement of the front garden it its former condition.

Period for compliance:  3 months

Reason why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

1.            The unauthorised development, by reason of the loss of soft landscaping within the site and the extent of hard landscaping carried out is detrimental to the verdant character and appearance of the locality and is thereby contrary to policies ENV1 and ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

(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.

The Chairman, on behalf of Members thanked the officers for their continuing efforts in achieving positive performance.