Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor Mrs R F Cheswright.

The Chairman welcomed the press and public to the meeting and those who were watching the live webcast.

He reminded Members that, “purdah” rules applied until the Sawbridgeworth by-election was held on 23 December 2010.  Purdah rules existed to ensure that there was no risk of public funds being used and/or actions undertaken to support one particular political party or individual.

The Chairman advised that he had agreed to accept two urgent items of business onto the agenda in respect of E/10/0416/A – Urgent works to a Grade II* Listed Building at 30 High Street, Bishop’s Stortford, Herts, CM23 2LXto avoid undue delay in determining this matter in the interests of the structural integrity of a listed building.  This item would be determined as Agenda Item 5p, following the other enforcement matters.

The Chairman also advised that the item relating to application 3/10/1746/SV – Modification of Section 106 Unilateral Undertaking (ref 3/07/1546/FO) to omit clause 5.1 removing the requirement to provide a Car Club at Former TXU Site, Mead Lane, Hertford, SG13 7AH for Weston Homes Plc had been withdrawn.

The Chairman further advised that the item relating to application 3/10/1574/FP – Change of Use of land to Horse Keeping.  Erection of Cattle Shed and Stable Block.  Re-Establishment and Upgrading of Existing Access and Driveway at Land at Sacombe Corner Wood, Frogmore Hill, Watton at Stone for Mr Gary Madgin had been withdrawn.

The Chairman invited the Head of Planning and Building Control to provide Members with a further update in respect of the East of England Plan.

Councillors R I Taylor declared a personal interest in application 3/10/1728/FP in that he was a police community volunteer.

Councillor M R Alexander declared a personal and prejudicial interest in application 3/10/1774/FP in that he used to work for the company that was the applicant and he also received a pension from that company.  He left the room during consideration of this matter.

Councillors B M Wrangles declared a personal interest in application 3/10/0619/FP in that she was an acquaintance of the applicant.

Councillors R N Copping declared a personal interest in application 3/10/0619/FP in that he often was a customer of the garden centre.

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby declared a personal and prejudicial interest in application 3/10/0619/FP in that her house overlooked the site and she was a customer of the garden centre.  She left the room during consideration of this matter.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 17 November 2010 (Previously circulated as part of the Council Minute book for 08 December 2010).

RESOLVED - that the Minutes of the Development Control Committee meeting held on 17 November 2010 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Mr Robeson addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mrs Scholey and Mrs Fish spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/0386/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Director reminded Members of the recent planning history of the application.  He stressed that no decision had been reached on these proposals and it was entirely appropriate for Members to consider all the information before them and then reach a decision.

The Director referred to the planning documents Members should take into account when determining this application.  He referred, in particular, to East Herts Local Plan national planning guidance in PPS4 and the sequential test considerations.  He stressed that Members should not directly compare sites but should consider the availability, suitability and viability of sites to determine which was sequentially preferable.

In response to a query from Councillors M R Alexander and R Gilbert, the Director detailed the land ownership arrangements on the Crane Mead site.

The committee were in agreement with the view of the Chairman that, in this case, there was an alternative site, the Crane Mead site, which could be identified as a well connected ‘edge of centre’ site.  The application site is an ‘out of centre’ site.  It was necessary therefore for the committee to consider that alternative site to establish whether it was sequentially preferable.  He indicated that the committee should consider separately the issues of availability, suitability and viability.

In relation to the first of these, availability, Councillor J J Taylor proposed and Councillor R N Copping seconded a motion that the Crane Mead site was available for development.

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

Councillors M R Alexander, K A Barnes, S A Bull, A L Burlton, D A A Peek and R I Taylor requested that their abstention from voting be recorded.

With regard to suitability, Councillor J J Taylor stated that the Crane Mead site was within a short walking distance of the edge of Ware town centre and was suitable.  Councillor R Gilbert sought and was given clarification in respect of local plan policies in relation to the Crane Mead site.

Councillor J J Taylor proposed and Councillor R N Copping seconded, a motion that the Crane Mead site was suitable to meet the needs of improved choice in Ware and on the grounds that the site did not have to be of the same scale and form as the applicant’s proposal and the onus was on the applicant to demonstrate that development on the more central site could not meet the same or similar need as the site for application 3/10/0386/FP.

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

Councillors M R Alexander, A L Burlton, S A Bull, J Demonti, G E Lawrence, D A A Peek, R I Taylor and B M Wrangles requested that their abstention from voting be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 449.

Mr Apostolos addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Mr White spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1728/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

Councillor N Wilson, as the local ward Member, urged the Committee to uphold the Officer’s recommendation for refusal.  He referred to two public consultations arranged to address public demand.  Neither meeting had resulted in an assurance in relation to the continuance of the only school in this ward if this school was unable to expand.

Councillor Wilson commented that an application for an 80 bedroom hotel adjacent to a school was inept in planning terms.  He stressed that the application had not addressed local concerns and would result in serious community problems.

Councillor Wilson stated that residents accepted that development would occur on this site.  He commented however, that priority must be given to educational and community need in what was the largest residential ward in Hertford.

Councillor W Ashley sought and was given assurance that Members were satisfied with how Officers had reached their recommendation in relation to the sequential test.  Councillor B M Wrangles stated that this was not a high quality layout and the application was out of keeping with the locality of the surrounding area.

Councillor Wrangles also stated that, in relation to the proposed retail provision, there were already two excellent local shops.  She expressed concerns that the application made insufficient provision for children’s play space and landscaping.  She also referred to the busy nature of Stanstead Road and Ware Road, with both roads suffering from tailbacks during rush hour periods.

Councillor Wrangles commented that Stanstead Road had a weight restriction and a speed limit of 30 mph.  She stated that the hotel was the greatest concern for residents and the application was contrary to policy STC6 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.  She also stated that she would have preferred a section 106 obligation for a residents parking scheme.  She stressed that residents of this ward were against the application and had the support of Mark Prisk MP.  Councillor Wrangles acknowledged that some form of development would occur on this site, however, this application was detrimental to residents and the surrounding area.

The Director stated that any section 106 obligation would have to be reasonable and must meet the appropriate tests for such obligations.  In relation to parking, Members were advised that a section 106 obligation could not seek to solve an existing parking problem.  An obligation could however, seek to address problems if these would be exacerbated by a planning application.

The Committee accepted the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1728/FP be refused planning permission for the reason now detailed.

RESOLVED - that in respect of application 3/10/1728/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reason:

1.           The applicant has failed to prove that there are no sequentially more suitable sites in Hertford or Ware likely to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 450.

Mr Pitman and Mrs Snell addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Mr Fenwick and Mr Bayles spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1598/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director stated that Officers had requested an additional condition to ensure that the proposed gas flare did not result in any damage to existing trees on the site.

Councillor J O Ranger, as the local ward Member, commented that there was nothing wrong with anaerobic digesters so long as these were provided in the right location and in the right way.

Councillor Ranger stressed that the crucial issue was the location.  He commented that a key problem was that the buildings would make the site more industrial.  He also stated that the buildings themselves would not look like normal farm buildings.

Councillor Ranger expressed concerns that many of the measurements in relation to the size of the structures were inaccurate in the report now submitted.  He provided a number of examples of incorrect measurements.

Councillor Ranger stated that the residents were particularly concerned in relation to the potential loss of heat from the site.  Residents were concerned in relation to potential future developments that could make use of the lost energy, such as further industrial buildings of residential development.

Councillor Ranger stressed that Members might wish to consider deferring the application to clarify details of the measurements of the proposed development.  He suggested that some of the conditions should be reworded if the Committee was minded to approve the application.

Councillor S A Bull expressed concerns in relation to the highways impact of the application.  He suggested that a condition be added to ensure that the bunding close to the site access track was removed due to the size of vehicles using the surrounding roads.

Councillor Bull expressed concerns in relation to the wildlife implications of the proposals and stated that he would be voting against the application.  Councillor R N Copping commented that he was going to suggest the application be refused for lack of information. 

Councillor R Gilbert suggested that this application did not comply with policy SD3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second April 2007.  He expressed concerns in relation to the emissions of methane and carbon dioxide.

Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink proposed and Councillor R N Copping seconded a motion that application 3/10/1598/FP be deferred to enable Officers to seek further information in relation to the issues raised by Cottered Parish Council, to confirm the reported dimensions of the development and to investigate possible alternative siting options to reduce visual impact on the countryside.

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

The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1598/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1598/FP, planning permission be deferred to enable Officers to seek  ...  view the full minutes text for item 451.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1758/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1758/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1758/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.    Three year time limit (1T121)

2.    Approved plans (2E102) – ‘LP1; SLP2; PGY2; RLSP3; RLSP3a’.

3.    The site shall not be permanently occupied by any persons other than Gypsies and Travellers as defined in paragraph 15 of ODPM Circular 01/2006.

Reason: To ensure that the caravans are occupied by Gypsy and Travellers in accordance with policy GBC3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

4.    A detailed internal layout plan of the site, including the precise siting of caravans, details of the children’s play equipment, hardstanding, access roads, parking and amenity areas; and tree, hedge and shrub planting and where appropriate earth mounding including details of species, plant sizes and proposed numbers and densities shall be submitted at a scale of 1:500 or 1:200, for the written approval of the local planning authority and the said scheme shall include a timetable for its implementation. The approved scheme shall thereafter be carried out and completed in accordance with the approved timetable.

        Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate layout and landscape design, in accordance with policies ENV1 and ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

5.    The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a scheme to dispose of foul and surface water has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

        Reason: To protect the site which is within a Source Protection Zone 3, an area vulnerable to groundwater contamination, in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

Directives:

1.           Other legislation (01OL1)

2.           You are advised of the need to apply for a site license under the Caravans and Control of Development Act 1960. You are advised to contact the Environmental Health Department on 01279655261.

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 GBC2, HSG10, ENV1 and TR7.  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the amendments to the scheme following application reference 3/10/0156/FP is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1774/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director advised that the applicant had been particularly concerned in relation to pre commencement conditions as they wanted to commence development sooner rather than later, in order to replace outdated buildings on the site.

Members were advised that Officers had tried to meet the applicant’s requirements where possible.  The Director stated that the County Archaeologist had stressed the need for pre commencement archaeological works.

The applicant had stated a preference that they would prefer to avoid such works but Officers felt that a condition should be applied to meet this requirement. 

Councillor J J Taylor stated that she regretted the loss of car parking spaces resulting from this application and the subsequent risk of overspill parking in surrounding residential areas.  She commented that she had received no objections from residents of her ward.

Councillor J J Taylor also expressed concerns in relation to the loss of trees and requested that Officers liaise with the Arboricultural Officer to supervise the replacement of the lost trees.

The Director advised that the landscaping included in the application to offset the loss of trees was the main cause of the loss of car parking referred to by the local Member.  He commented that the landscaping was more than an adequate replacement for the loss of trees.

The Director referred to the loss of 43 parking spaces and stated that, given the employment benefits of the application and the improvements on the site, this was an acceptable loss.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1774/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1774/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Three Year Time limit (1T121)

2.            Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority the external surface of the building shall be clad in powder coated metal boarding as specified in the application and all exposed steel, rainwater goods, external doors, window frames and roof sheeting shall be finished in Kingspan Goosewing Grey (RAL 080 70 05).

        Reason: To ensure an appropriate appearance to the development in accordance with ‘saved’ policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

3.            The approved development shall not be occupied until full details of both hard and soft landscape proposals have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works have been carried out as approved. These details shall include, as appropriate: (a) Planting plans (b) Written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment) (c) Schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate (d) Implementation timetables.

        Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design, in accordance with policy ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review, April 2007.

4.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 453.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1405/OP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1405/OP be refused planning permission for the reasons now detailed.

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/10/1405/OP, planning permission be refused for the following reason:

1.    The proposal fails to make adequate provision for affordable housing on the site or financial provision for infrastructure improvements to support the proposed development and mitigate against its impact on the area.  It is thereby contrary to policies IMP1 and HSG3 of the East Herts Local Plan April 2007.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/07/0822/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/07/0822/FP be refused planning permission for the reasons now detailed.

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/07/0822/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reason:

1.           The proposal fails to make adequate provision for affordable housing or adequate financial provision for infrastructure improvements to support the proposed development and mitigate against its impact on the area.  It would thereby be contrary to the provisions of policies IMP1 and HSG3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/0619/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/0619/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/0619/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Approved plans(2E102) - ‘HD09014/40 B’

2.            Within 1 month of the date of this permission, details of measures to provide permeability to flood water within the side (west) fencing of the structure, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The measures shall thereafter be implemented within 3 months of the date of this decision unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

        Reason: In the interests of flood water management and to ensure the development does not obstruct flood water flows from the Bayford Brook and increase the risk of flooding in accordance with Policy ENV19 of the adopted East Herts Local Plan 2007.

3.            Notwithstanding any notation shown on drawing HD09014/40 B, details of any external lighting to be fixed to the structure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority within 1 month of the date of this decision. Such lighting shall be provided in accordance with those agreed details within 3 months of the date of this decision unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

        Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the Green Belt and in accordance with policy ENV1 of the adopted East Herts Local Plan 2007 and national planning guidance in PPG2.

4.            The structure created by the fence and roof hereby permitted shall be used for storage purposes ancillary to the Riverside Garden Centre only and for no other purpose, including any additional sales space.

        Reason: Having regard to the inappropriateness of the development within the Metropolitan Green Belt in accordance with policy GBC1 of the East Herts Local Plan 2007 and the justification for the building.

Directive:

1.    Other legislation

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 and ENV19.  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the other material considerations in this case is that permission should be granted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1601/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1601/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1601/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.           Approved Plans (2E10 - 6038 A900, 6038 A901, 6038 A902 A).

2.           A planted screen to the east and south of the compound fence shall be retained for the lifetime of the development, and full details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 1 month of the date of this decision, including (a) Planting plans (b) Written specifications (c) Schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities, where appropriate.

        Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design, in accordance with policy ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

3.           All soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant recommendations of appropriate British Standards or other recognised Codes of Good Practice. The works shall be carried out in accordance with a timetable to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants that, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as originally approved, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.

        Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscaping in accordance with the approved designs, in accordance with policy ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

Directives:

1.          Other legislation (01OL)

2.          This permission relates solely to the land edged in red on the site plan.  Any storage of materials or equipment beyond the site boundary would also require planning consent, and the applicant is advised that the Council would be concerned over further encroachment into the countryside.

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 GBC1, GBC14, ENV1, ENV2 and BH1. 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 3/10/1901/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1901/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1901/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Three year time limit (1T12)

2.            Approved plans (2E10 – ARCH/2008-214/(-0)003/A, ARCH/2008-214/(-0)004/A, ARCH/2008-214/(-0)005/A, ARCH/2008-214/(-0)006/A, ARCH/

        2008-214/ (-0)007/A, BGC1/HARTHAM/TCP Rev 0, BGC1/HARTHAM/TPP Rev 0)

3.            No further external lighting shall be provided without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

        Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with policy ENV23 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

4.            All existing trees and hedges shall be retained, and protected from damage as a result of works on the site in accordance with drawing BGC1/HARTHAM/TPP Rev 0 and relevant British Standards for the duration of the works on site. In the event that trees become damaged or otherwise defective within five years following contractual practical completion of the development, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed and implemented. In the event that any tree dies or is removed without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority, it shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, by not later than the end of the first available planting season, with trees of such size, species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Authority.

        Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing trees, in accordance with policies ENV2 and ENV11 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

Directive:

1.            Other legislation (01OL)

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 SD2, TR7, ENV1, ENV2, ENV11, ENV19 and ENV23. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.

Mr Thackeray addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/10/1742/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

Councillor R Gilbert stated that he did not feel that the reason for refusal was valid as the number of retail units would remain the same.  He emphasised that this was a large unit that had been divided to facilitate a retail unit and a café or restaurant.  He commented that this would create more vitality in North Street.

Councillor J Demonti stressed that although she would like the unit to remain in retail use, she would prefer to see the unit in use rather than remaining empty.

Councillor K A Barnes expressed concerns in relation to the parking situation in North Street in the evenings, as this was getting worse by the day.  He commented that there were free car parks in the town in the evenings after a certain time but people seemed unwilling to get out of their cars and walk.

The Director confirmed that this was primary shopping frontage and the policy position was very clear in that a change of use from A1 retail to A3 restaurant should not be permitted.  The Committee was advised that this policy sought to maintain an appropriate number of retail units and Members must consider the mix of uses in the overall town centre.

Councillor D A A Peek sought and was given clarification as to whether approving this application would weaken the Council’s policy position on similar applications in future.

Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink proposed and Councillor A L Burlton seconded a motion that application 3/10/1742/FP be granted on the grounds that the application would enhance the vitality and viability of the town centre.

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

The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/10/1742/FP be refused planning permission for the reasons now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/10/1742/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            Three Year Time Limit (1T12)

2.            Approved Plans (2E102) FM1, 184/00-10 A, 184/00-11 A, 184/00-12 C, 184/00-13 B, 184/00-20 A, 184/00-21 A, 184/00-22 A, 184/00-23 D, 184/00-30 A, 184/00-31 A

3.            Materials of construction (2E11)

4.            External Timber Work (2E16) – delete ‘development’ and replace with ‘shopfront’.

        Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, and in accordance with policy BH14 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

5.            Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted a scheme for the ventilation of the premises, including the extraction and filtration of cooking fumes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The approved scheme shall be carried out prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted.

        Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the building and the amenities of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 459.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/10/0443/A, 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 sites relating to E/10/0443/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/10/0443/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction 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 building from the land.

Period for compliance: 6 months.

Reasons why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

1.          The cumulative effect of the outbuilding, together with the extensions previously added to the property and other outbuildings erected at the site, has disproportionately altered the size of the original dwelling to the detriment of the character and appearance of the dwelling and the rural character of the area.  It is therefore contrary to saved policies GBC3 and ENV5 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

2.          The application site lies within the Rural Area as defined in the East Hertfordshire Local Plan wherein there is a presumption against development other than required for agriculture, forestry, small scale local community facilities or other uses appropriate to a rural area. The development is prejudicial to this policy, set out at policies GBC2 and GBC3 within the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/10/0269/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 sites relating to E/10/0269/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/10/0269/B, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 38 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the removal of the unauthorised advertisements from the land.

Period for compliance: 14 days.

Reasons why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

1.    The advertisements attached to both the exterior and interior of the building are detrimental to the historic character and appearance of the Listed Building, a designated heritage asset.  The unauthorised advertisements are therefore contrary to policy HE9 of PPS5.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/10/0416/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor A L Burlton stressed that the fabric of the building was falling into disrepair prior to a recent decision of a Licensing Sub-Committee to reduce the permitted hours of operation.

Councillor R Gilbert stated that the recommendation should relate to 30 - 34 High Street, Bishop’s Stortford.  He also commented on whether the enforcement notice could request that the rendering be put back once the building had been weatherproofed.

The Director stressed that an urgent works notice was only aimed at securing the weatherproofing of the building.  Members were advised that Officers would be working with the owners to secure proper repairs in due course.

The Committee supported the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/10/0416/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/10/0416/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to serve an urgent works notice under Section 54 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the implementation of urgent works required in order to protect the building from further decline.

Period for compliance:  14 Days

Reason why it is expedient to issue an Urgent Works notice:

1.            The exposed condition of parts of the building is damaging to its historic fabric and threatens its long term retention. The building is at such risk from further decline that, should the owner fail to comply with the Notice, the Council will be required to carry out works in default.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing a summary of planning appeal performance for the six month period covering April to September 2010.

The Director stated that appeal performance was once of the worst figures for a number of quarters.  He stressed that Officers had not been able to identify any particular reason for the drop in performance in relation to appeals.

Councillor D A A Peek stated that he felt that the Council was doing a good job and commented on whether Officers could liaise with other local authorities in relation to appeals performance.

The Committee noted the report as now detailed.

RESOLVED – that the performance of the Council in relation to planning appeal decisions be noted.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report inviting the Committee to reconsider its position in relation to the refusal of the proposals now detailed, which were now the subject of an appeal.

The Committee was advised that an informal appeal hearing was due for late March 2011.  The Director advised that Officers felt that the Authority was vulnerable in respect of the second reason for refusal on the adequacy of car parking provision.  Members were advised that Officers felt that the second reason for refusal should not be pursued.

The Committee received the report.

RESOLVED - that the Council does not continue to contest the issue of parking provision for the development proposal at appeal and confirms to the Planning Inspectorate that it will be offering no evidence in relation to this matter.

(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.