Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor G Jones.  It was noted that Councillor T Page was in attendance as substitute for Councillor Jones.

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

The Chairman thanked the Conservation Officers and the Head of Planning and Building Control for a very useful training session on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas.

The Chairman advised that the following applications had been withdrawn from the agenda:

·                   3/11/1616/FP – Erection of 14 dwellings and new veterinary surgery with associated landscaping and access roads and demolition of existing house at 306 – 310, Ware Road, Hertford for Tudorwood Ltd.

·                   3/11/1818/FP – Erection of stock proof post and rail fencing, post and barbed wire fencing, scalpings to entrance and dropped kerb, (retrospective) at land adjacent to Lower Hatfield Road, Hertford for Mr George Smith.

The Chairman further advised that application 3/11/2048/FP would be moved up the agenda and determined after application 3/11/1924/FP.

The Chairman reported that Officers were arranging a visit to the Sainsbury’s Store in Hertford around the end of March 2012 and details would be e-mailed to Members as soon as possible.

Finally, the Chairman advised that localism training was being organised and should take place in April 2012.  Members would be notified of the details in plenty of time prior to the training taking place.

Councillor M Newman declared a personal interest in application 3/11/2156/FP, as he was Chairman of the Executive for Hunsdon Scout Group and was associated generally with the Scouting movement in East Herts.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright declared a personal interest in application 3/11/1932/FP, on the grounds that she was acquainted with the owner of the property that was the subject of the application.

Councillor E Buckmaster declared a personal interest in application 3/11/2156/FP, in that his son was a Member of the Sawbridgeworth Scouts Group.

Councillor L Haysey declared a personal interest in application 3/11/1641/FP, in that she was a Member of the Hertingfordbury Conservation Society and was acquainted with the architect for this application.

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby declared a personal interest in application 3/11/1641/FP, in that she was acquainted with both the applicant and the architect for this application.

Councillor Rutland-Barsby also declared a personal interest in application 3/11/1932/FP, in that she was acquainted with the owner of The Gage, Bucks Alley, Little Berkhamsted Hertford.

Councillor W Ashley declared a personal interest in application 3/11/2006/FP, in that he was acquainted with two of the people who had written to the Authority in respect of this application.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 1 February 2012 (Previously circulated as part of the Council Minute book for 22 February 2012).

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 February 2012 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant entering into a legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/11/1927/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

Councillor M Newman commented that this application had demonstrated the excellent co-operation that often existed between this Authority and Parish Councils.  He stated that the comments of the Parish Council had been pragmatically addressed by Officers.  He endorsed the Officer’s report and in particular the contributions made by County Highways.

In response to a request from Councillor Newman, the Director stated that Officers would be happy to consult him in relation to the traffic calming measures due to be put in place prior to the occupation of the development. 

In response to concerns from Councillor Newman relating to the condition regarding renewable energy, the Director stressed that this condition was fairly standard and was one that Officers applied to most major developments across the District.

Councillor M Newman proposed and Councillor Mrs R Cheswright seconded a motion that application 3/11/1927/FP be approved subject to the provision of six affordable dwellings of which 33% should be rented (2 dwellings) and 66% shared ownership (4 dwellings).

The Director commented that, in terms of viability, such a split would prove to be beneficial to the developer as the shared equity element of the application would prove to be cheaper to implement should the application be approved.

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

The Committee accepted the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that, subject to the applicant entering into an amended legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, application 3/11/1927/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – that, subject to the applicant entering into an amended legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of the following amended matters:

1.            The provision of six affordable dwellings comprising of 4no. 2 bed units and 2no. 3 bed units of which 33% should be rented (2 dwellings) and 66% shared ownership (4 dwellings);

2.            A financial contribution of £38,210 towards secondary education, £2,484 towards childcare, £722 towards youth and £2,776 towards libraries;

3.            A financial contribution of £28,000  towards the provision for traffic calming and safety enhancement measures and to promote sustainable transport measures;

4.            A financial contribution of £5,100 towards Parks and Public Gardens, £13,250 towards Outdoor Sports Facilities and £2,295 towards Children and Young People;

5.            15% of the dwellings shall be constructed to ‘Lifetime Homes’ standard;

6.            The provision of fire hydrants.

in respect of application 3/11/1927/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Hannah Radwell addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Peter Salsbury spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2048/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby expressed some sympathy regarding the purpose of the development.  However, she did have some concerns regarding the dominant effect of the proposals on Hampton House and the loss of car parking.

She also commented that obscure glazing had been included to address overlooking.  She stated that Hertford had a significant number of historic buildings and this was a very modern development.

Councillor M Newman referred to the issue of car parking and commented on whether Officers could clarify the usage levels of the Baker Street car park.  The Director advised that the residential elements of Hampton House were at first and second floor level and obscured glazing was proposed to mitigate potential overlooking.

The Director stated that the Authority’s Parking Officers had confirmed that Baker Street car park was one of the least used in Hertford.  He stressed that residents’ usage would typically take place outside of the controlled hours in a car park that was very much on the periphery of the town centre.

Councillor R Cheswright referred to the disappointing and unimaginative design of the proposed development and invited Officers to comment on the potential loss of light for Hampton House residents.  The Director stated that a judgement had to be made on the extent to which the new development had a visual or dominant impact on surrounding residential properties.

The Director stated that Hampton House residents would face a situation not uncommon to many situations across the District whereby residents at first and second floor level would see residential development at the same level.  Members would have to consider whether the need and benefits relating to this application outweighed the potential harmful impacts of the proposed development.

Councillor B Wrangles commented that there was a need for this type of housing provision and although the design was out of character, the application fitted into the modern housing needs of today.  She further commented that the parking issues could be resolved and referred to parking provision on London Road. 

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby proposed and Councillor J Taylor seconded, a motion that application 3/11/2048/FP be refused on the grounds that the application would have a domineering effect on Hampton House and due to the poor quality of design.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared LOST on the Chairman’s casting vote.

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 3/11/2048/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 3/11/2050/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

In response to a query from Councillor A Burlton, the Director confirmed that the application site for the full length of North Street was the same as for the previously approved application.

Councillor Burlton queried how the traffic was to access side roads leading off North Street, namely Water Lane and Barrett Lane.  The Director confirmed there was alternative access via Bridge Street.  Members were reminded that the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) was still in force and should ensure that traffic circulation was maintained in this part of Bishop’s Stortford.

In response to a number of comments from Councillor T Page, the Director summarised the application that was before Members for a decision.  He stressed that Members must only consider the planning issues relevant to this application when making a decision.

In response to further concerns from a number of Members and a specific request from Councillor Burlton, the Director stated that Officers could attach a condition whereby the applicant would have 14 days to submit a plan detailing the position of the market stalls to ensure vehicular access was maintained between North Street, Barrett Lane, Water Lane and Bridge Street.

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

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/2050/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following amended conditions:

1.            The use hereby permitted shall cease on or before 28th February 2013.

        Reason: To allow the impact of the proposed road closure on the free flow of traffic in the area to be monitored and assessed in the interests of highway safety.

2.            The use of the market hereby permitted shall be restricted to the hours of 0500 to 1600 on Thursdays and Saturdays only.

        Reason:  In the interests of highway safety.

3.    Within 14 days of the date of this decision, a plan detailing the position of the market stalls to ensure vehicular access can be maintained between North Street, Barrett Lane, Water Lane and Bridge Street, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter the development shall accord with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure continued access and convenient use of the public highway.

Directive:

1.    You are reminded that the temporary TRO (Traffic Regulation Order) terminates on the 30 December 2012 and you will therefore need to apply for an extension to the TRO for the remaining period of this permission if the market is to continue in the centre of North Street.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 651.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2216/FO, 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 3/11/2216/FO, 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 3/11/1641/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 3/11/1641/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 3/11/1932/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 3/11/1932/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Refusal.

Lee Griffin addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Nick Jones spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2156/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons now detailed.

The Director referred to the letter that had been circulated to Members in advance of the meeting.  Members were advised of the amendments to the application in that the Scout Hut would be further away from nearby houses and would also be lower down within the site. 

The Director also advised that the applicant had lowered the proposed roof height by 0.8 metres.  These changes had not been subject to the usual consultation but Officers felt that Members would not be unduly concerned as the changes would reduce the impact of the application.

Councillor E Buckmaster, as the local ward Member, stated that the future of the scouts in Sawbridgeworth was very much at risk.  He referred to the very special circumstances that had been highlighted by the public speaker.  He also stated that the concerns of the Officers centred around inappropriate development in the Green Belt and the proximity of the site to local residential dwellings.

Councillor Buckmaster commented that almost every church, pub, school and community hall was surrounded by residential dwellings and would experience many more comings and goings than a scout hut in this location.  In reference to parking concerns, he believed that there was sufficient parking within two minutes of the site.

Councillor Buckmaster also stated that flooding would not be a problem as the building would be sufficiently high up within the site so would not be at risk.  He referred to East Herts Local Plan Policy GBC3, which stipulated that development could be permitted on Green Belt land if development was for small scale facilities for outdoor sport and recreation.

Finally, Councillor Buckmaster commented that Councillor R Beeching had also written a letter in support of the application.  Councillor S Bull also spoke in support of the application.

Councillor J Taylor stated that this application constituted inappropriate development due to the visual impact of the proposed development on the Green Belt.  She stated that she would be supporting the Officer’s recommendation for refusal and commented that, whilst there was no doubt that Members supported the scouting movement, this was not a planning issue.

In response to comments from Councillor Mrs R Cheswright regarding the roof height of the proposed development, the Director commented that the height proposed would allow for storage within the roof space, thereby maximising the available floor area.

The Director commented that Green Belt policy allowed for small scale facilities such as changing rooms and spectator facilities.  Members were reminded that this application was for a scout hut where the principal use would remain inside the building.

The Committee was advised that there would inevitably be some ancillary use of the site and Members must judge whether the community use outweighed the potential harm to the Green Belt.

The Director stated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 655.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2110/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 3/11/2110/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 3/11/2185/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 3/11/2185/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Strevens addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.  Mr Doran spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2006/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor S Bull expressed concerns that this application constituted overdevelopment of the site and was contrary to policy GBC3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.  He commented that the Parish Council had objected to the application and believed that the dwelling would be out of reach for first time buyers.

The Director confirmed there were policy restraints on development in rural areas.  Members were advised however, that Officers were comfortable with this particular application.  The Director confirmed that the applicant had adopted a good design approach and this area already contained a number of single and two storey properties.

The Director stated that Members should have regard to policy ENV5 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007, in relation to the character, amenity and appearance of the proposed development and neighbouring properties.

The Director also commented that Officers felt there would not be overlooking or loss of privacy for neighbouring properties.  The relationship of the proposed development to neighbouring dwellings was not dissimilar to many other locations in East Herts.

Councillor S Bull proposed and Councillor J Demonti seconded, a motion that application 3/11/2006/FP be refused as the proposed development was contrary to policy GBC3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

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

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 3/11/2006/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 3/11/1849/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 3/11/1849/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/11/0274/B, it be noted that Officers, in consultation with the Chairman, had exercised delegated powers to act in cases of emergency to serve an enforcement notice on the basis now detailed.

The Committee noted the emergency action taken by Officers, as now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/11/0274/B, it be noted that Officers, in consultation with the Chairman, had exercised delegated powers to act in cases of emergency to serve an enforcement notice on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/11/0246/A, legal proceedings be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for legal proceedings to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/11/0246/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/11/0246/A, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to commence legal proceedings on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the site relating to E/12/0046/A, no formal enforcement action be taken on the basis now detailed.

In response to a query from Councillor J Demonti, the Director confirmed that Officers had not received a planning application in respect of the proposed footbridge and associated development.

The Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for no formal enforcement action to be taken in respect of the site relating to E/12/0046/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0046/A, no formal enforcement action be taken on the basis now detailed.

Enforcement Update.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report updating Members on recently authorised enforcement action.

The Committee noted the report as now detailed.

RESOLVED – that the report be noted.

Tree Preservation Order.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report recommending that a Tree Preservation Order be confirmed as an opposed order to protect trees at Christ Church Vicarage, 15 Hanbury Close, Ware.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the Director’s recommendation that Tree Preservation Order (No. 2) 2011 P/TPO 558 be confirmed as an opposed Order.

RESOLVED – that Tree Preservation Order (No. 2) 2011 P/TPO 558 be confirmed as an opposed Order and the Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to bring it into operation.

Tree Preservation Order.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report recommending that a Tree Preservation Order be confirmed as an opposed order to protect trees inwoodland to the south of Rectory Farm, Meesden.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the Director’s recommendation that Tree Preservation Order (No. 8) 2011 P/TPO 564 be confirmed as an opposed Order.

RESOLVED – that Tree Preservation Order (No. 8) 2011 P/TPO 564 be confirmed as an opposed Order and the Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to bring it into operation.

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

(B)  Planning Appeals Lodged.

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

RESOLVED – that the following reports be noted:

(A)   Appeals against refusal of planning permission / non determination;

(B)      Planning Appeals lodged; and

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