Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor E Bedford.  It was noted that Councillor N Symonds was in attendance as substitute for Councillor E Bedford.

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

The Chairman reminded the Committee of the Localism training due to take place in the Council Chamber from 6 pm on the 21 June 2012, and emphasised the importance of Members attending to keep their training up to date.

The Chairman advised that the following application had been withdrawn from the agenda:

·                                 3/12/0424/FP – Closing of railway foot-crossing and construction of a new footbridge with ramped accesses at Johnsons Railway Crossing, Bishop's Stortford.

The Chairman advised that applications 3/11/2209/FP and 3/11/2210/LB would be determined first, prior to application 3/12/0259/FP.

Councillor A Burlton declared a personal interest in application 3/12/0495/FP, in that he was a trustee of Bishop’s Park Community Centre and the proposed ATM Machines would impinge on land where the Community Centre might have a planning application for a fence.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright declared a personal interest in applications 3/11/2209/FP and 3/12/2210/LB, in that she lived near to the site.

Councillor G Lawrence declared a personal and prejudicial interest in applications 3/12/0542/FP and 3/12/0543/LB, in that he was a personal friend of the applicant.  Councillor Lawrence left the chamber during the determination of this matter.

Councillor T Page declared a personal interest in application 3/12/0495/FP, in that he was a Member of Bishop’s Park Community Association.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 23 May 2012.

RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the meeting held on 23 May 2012 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Parish Councillor Martin Slack addressed the Committee against the application.  Mr Trevor Dodkins spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of applications 3/11/2209/FP and 3/11/2210/LB, planning permission and listed building consent be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director referred to the additional representations summary and reiterated a number of points that had already been commented on in detail by the public speakers.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that Braughing had been designated a category 1 village, against the wishes of many residents.  She commented that this application was wholly inappropriate in Braughing and expressed concerns that more development tended to take place in category 1 villages.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright referred to the character of Braughing and suggested that the proposed development did nothing to benefit this.  She reminded the Committee that the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 stipulated that developments in category 1 villages should be sensitively designed.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that one size did not fit all and such large scale modern developments should not be imposed on the villages of East Herts.  She commented that the application would have a devastating impact on the village, particularly as Braughing’s streets were very narrow.  She was also concerned in respect of the anticipated 35 – 50 vehicle movements passing many listed buildings and pubs on the only appropriate route through the village.

In response to a query from Councillor A Burlton, the Director confirmed that the Council’s Solicitor was now comfortable with all aspects of the Section 106 legal agreement.  Councillor S Bull commented that he was of the opinion that Braughing had taken its fair share of development and he had every sympathy with the residents but could not think of any planning policies for refusing the applications.

The Director stressed that it would be wholly inappropriate for the Committee to draw a line and say no more development in any location in the District.

In response to queries from Councillor S Bull and N Symonds, the Director stated that the density of this development would be approximately 33 dwellings per hectare and the details of the colours of building materials was open for agreement with the developer.

Councillor M Newman commented that pragmatism was key to approaching this application.  He stated however, that the planning conditions should be rigidly enforced and commented on whether more could be done by Officers in that respect.

The Director advised that the Authority could take enforcement action but was not legally obliged to do so.  Officers had to make a judgement on the harm that would be caused and whether it was appropriate to take enforcement action.  Officers had to weigh up all the relevant issues as the Authority was not able to enforce against every transgression.

In response  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/0259/FN, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

In response to a query from Councillor P Moore, the Director confirmed that the condition covering hours of work related to the standard hours of no works before 7.30 am Monday to Saturday or after 6.30 pm weekdays and until 1 pm on Saturday with no works permitted on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Councillor P Moore commented on the significant noise that could result from piling works.  The Director confirmed that Environmental Health Officers had powers to act if building works were causing a statutory noise nuisance.

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 3/12/0259/FN, 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 3/12/0495/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor N Symonds stated that these works had been completed for 2 weeks and this was a retrospective application.  The Director confirmed that the works had been carried out during the application process although no work had been carried out before the application had been submitted. 

Members were advised that condition 1 was no longer required in respect of a 3 year time limit for implementing the proposed development.  Councillor G Jones expressed his concerns that a major organisation had not been sufficiently organised to achieve planning permission before starting work.  Councillors A Burlton and G Jones were supportive of the application.

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 3/12/0495/FP, 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 3/12/0596/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor G Jones referred to the mobile stable that was already in place on the site.  He commented that the location and visibility of the proposed development did not give him any cause for concern.  Councillor M Alexander commended the precise and technical nature of the comments from Much Hadham Parish Council.

Councillor A Burlton stated that applications should not be approved in rural areas beyond the Green Belt on the grounds that hedgerows and trees acted to conceal the proposed development from view.  Councillor T Page commented that approving this application would set a precedent for other similar applications.

The Director stated that a balance must be struck when considering small scale recreational use and the extent to which such development was integrated into the surrounding countryside.  Officers were of the opinion that the proposals under reference 3/12/0596/FP would be unduly prominent and detrimental to the surroundings.

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 3/12/0596/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mrs Amelia Grace addressed the Committee against the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/12/0661/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director stated that the Landscape Officer had not raised any objections to the proposed development with regard to trees and hedgerows.  Members were reminded of the significant planning history of the site, which Officers had considered, particularly the delivery of affordable housing as well as financial contributions which did not result in direct delivery of such housing.

The Director acknowledged that, whilst the proposed terraced dwellings were adjacent to detached dwellings, the nearby Walkern Road had a mix of terraced and semi-detached dwellings which were not wholly unusual in the village.  Members were advised of the affordable housing that this application would deliver, and were reminded that whilst this was a rural area, it was not within the Green Belt. 

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright referred to the serious concerns of Benington Parish Council, and commented that the application was overdeveloped and inappropriate in this location.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee accepted the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that, subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, application 3/12/0661/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – 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 3/12/0661/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, subject to the applicant entering into an agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requiring the finance raised by the conversion of the bed and breakfast building into a dwelling to be reinvested in the public house business in accordance with details to be agreed in the agreement, in respect of application 3/12/0574/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

The Director stated that the Council’s Solicitor had commented that the terms of the Section 106 legal agreement detailed in the report now submitted fell outside of the scope of the Act.  Consequently, it was suggested that any legal agreement was worded on the basis that, prior to the commencement of development, a viability scheme should be prepared and agreed by the Council.

Members were advised that this agreement would set out proposals for the application of the proceeds from the potential sale of the property.  The implementation of the agreement would require the formulation of a trust or management body.

The Committee was advised that the Officer’s recommendation remained unchanged.  However, Members were asked, for the avoidance of doubt, to delegate the matter of the detail of the legal agreement to the Council’s Legal Service Manager, on the basis that the most appropriate format of agreement was put in place to ensure that funds from the potential sale of the residential property were invested in the public house business.

The Committee accepted the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that, subject to the applicant entering into an agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requiring the finance raised by the conversion of the bed and breakfast building into a dwelling to be reinvested in the public house business in accordance with details to be agreed in the agreement, application 3/12/0574/FP be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

RESOLVED – 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 3/12/0574/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Salvatore Amico addressed the Committee against the application.  Mr Steve Haslam spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/0076/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor P Moore commented that the pub’s play area was situated some 50 metres back from the pub so any patrons of the pub would suffer minimal disturbance.  She stated however, that the play equipment was substantially taller than the fence between the pub garden and nearby dwellings.

Councillor P Moore emphasised that children standing on play equipment platforms would easily be able to see over the fences in neighbouring gardens, thereby compromising the privacy of residents enjoying their gardens during the summer months.

Councillor P Moore further stated that no amount of trees or foliage would prevent noise nuisance for neighbours.  She queried what would be the outcome if, after a period of 3 months, the conditions on this application had not been adhered to.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that the balance was wrong between the provision of a pub or a children’s play area.  Councillor N Symonds commented on the likely noise impact resulting from this application.  Councillor G Lawrence queried whether it would be realistic for Officers to effectively police the hours of use of the play equipment.

Councillor M Tindale, as the local ward Member, stated that this application had caused significant controversy for sometime with strong opinions for and against the application.  He referred to the importance of ensuring the survival of rural village pubs where possible, whilst also protecting the character of rural areas.

Councillor M Tindale commented that Officers had successfully captured the balance of the issues relevant to this application, although he was surprised with the recommendation to grant planning permission.  He emphasised the key issue remained the size and scale of the play equipment and this had not changed since the previous application.  Councillor M Tindale stressed that the concessions from the applicant since the previous application had been very modest. 

Councillor M Tindale further commented on whether the application could be deferred so that genuine concessions could be made by the applicant regarding the size and scale of the play equipment.  He stated that an approval at this stage would be wholly inappropriate, although he did not want to see the pub close, if a refusal resulted in a lost appeal and enforcement action.

The Director stated that the applicant had confirmed that the use of the equipment would cease at 8.30 pm.  Members were advised that Officers had acknowledged the harm to the rural area and the potential for noise and disturbance that could result from this application.  Officers had tried to strike a balance of the issues when completing the report.

The Director stated that a key issue was the viability of the public house.  The applicant had pointed out that a key income for the pub was the summer visitors, whose children  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/0370/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director stated that this application sought to amend the planning conditions for an application that Members had already indicated they were minded to approve. 

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that this application was another example of an applicant taking little notice of the wishes of Braughing’s residents for smaller 3 bedroom dwellings.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, there being an equality of votes, the Chairman exercised her casting vote in support of the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/0370/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 applications 3/12/0587/FP and 3/12/588/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor S Bull praised the applicant and stated that the application should be supported as the outcomes for the rural area could only be positive.  Councillor G Jones was also supportive of the application.  He expressed concerns however, relating to the extent of the incursion into the rural area beyond the Green Belt.

Councillor G Jones commented on whether permission could be approved either on a temporary basis or specifically on the basis that the occupant of the site was Connect Scaffolding.  Councillor N Symonds stated that such applications were needed on the outskirts of Bishop’s Stortford and approving this application would ease problems of unemployment and youth unemployment in East Herts.

The Director advised that government guidance stipulated that personal permissions should not be granted to businesses, on the grounds that businesses often changed hands which would undermine the planning conditions.

Members were advised that a temporary permission could be applied so long as the time period was a reasonably long timescale, such as 5 years, which would allow a degree of clarity for the operation of the business.

Councillor M Newman proposed and Councillor S Bull seconded a motion that applications 3/12/0587/FP and 3/12/0588/FP be approved for a temporary period of 10 years.

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

The Committee supported the recommendations of the Director of Neighbourhood Services, subject to the planning permission being for a temporary period of 10 years.

RESOLVED – that (A) in respect of application 3/12/0587/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the following amended conditions:

1.    The use hereby permitted shall cease on or before 25^th June 2022 and any structure and engineering works hereby permitted shall be removed on or before that date and, the land shall be reinstated to its former condition or in accordance with details to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

        Reason: The development is a temporary expedient only having regard to the viability and operation of the business.

2.    Approved Plans (2E10) Insert 211211DWG007 Rev A and 211211DWG008 Rev A

3.    Within 3 months of the date of this permission, full details of soft landscape proposals shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The 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.  Thereafter the development shall proceed in accordance with the approved details.

        Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design, in accordance with policies ENV1, ENV2 and ENV11 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/1874/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 3/11/1874/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 3/12/0506/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 3/12/0506/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 3/12/0529/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 3/12/0529/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Furze addressed the Committee against the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/0461/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director referred to the additional representations schedule, which detailed the additional suggested conditions referred to by the public speaker.  Members were advised that Officers considered that these conditions were not enforceable and would not therefore be in accordance with the advice given in Circular 11/95.

In response to a query from Councillor M Newman, the Director gave a more detailed explanation as to why these extra conditions would not be enforceable.  Councillor M Alexander was pleased to see conditions 3 and 4 as detailed in the report and he stressed that the Authority must ensure these conditions were enforced for the duration of the proposed use.

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 3/12/0461/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Recommended for Refusal.

Mr Stephen Clayton addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of applications 3/12/0542/FP and 3/12/0543/LB, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that English Heritage had recently commented on the application, recommending that it should be refused.  Members were reminded that the building was Grade II* Listed and as English Heritage had objected to the proposal, any grant of consent would first require a referral to the Secretary of State.

Councillor D Andrews stated that he would be prepared to support the application at this stage, particularly as there was the added protection of the referral to the Secretary of State.  He commented that a refusal would perhaps be a little harsh and requested that Officers drill down on the specific concerns that lead to the recommendation for refusal.

Councillor M Newman, as the local ward Member, stated that the application should be considered on its merits and the issue of the Secretary of State referral should not influence the Committee’s decision.  He commented that the aesthetics of the proposed lantern roof and the overall proposed works was not out of character with the form of the property.

Councillor T Page commented that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stipulated that Members should be mindful to consider the particular significance of heritage assets.  He stressed that the affected area of the listed building was of a lesser significance and the proposed orangery would provide a viable use in that extra sunlight would be provided into the main building.

Councillor S Bull stated that he did not agree with the previous comments of Members and he was of the view that the proposed development was out of keeping with the existing Grade II* Listed Building.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright referred to the changes made by the applicant to the application following discussions with Officers.  She commented that the suggestion of a flat roof was clearly a step too far for the applicant and would not suit the style of the proposed development.

The Director referred to the nature of the planning process in that comments trickled in during the formal consultation process, sometimes very close to when a decision was taken.  Members were reminded that Grade II* Listed Buildings were limited in number and tended to be the more unusual buildings across the District.

The Director stated that the view of the Conservation Officer was that the building was simple in form and design and Officers felt that the proposed development was out of keeping in that the orangery was more grand in design.  The Committee was reminded that the referral to the Secretary of State was a procedural matter and should not be taken into account by Members when making their judgement on this application.

Councillor D Andrews proposed and Councillor M Newman seconded, a motion that applications 3/12/0542/FP and 3/12/0543 be granted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

Recommended for Approval.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/12/0620/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 3/12/0620/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/12/0054/B, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0054/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0054/B, 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/12/0137/B, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0137/B on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0137/B, 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/12/0156/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

Councillor G Jones sought extra information regarding the need for enforcement action on this site.  The Director stated that Officers felt there was insufficient justification for the development.

Members were advised that the unauthorised works were contrary to the aims and objectives of rural area policies and would result in harm to the rural and agricultural character and appearance of the surroundings.

The Director stated that it was expedient to take enforcement action as a retrospective planning application to regularise this development had been refused. The harm caused to the character of the area was felt to be significant in this case and the site owner had not put forward any material considerations as to why a departure from policy should be permitted in this case.

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/12/0156/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0156/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 sites relating to E/12/0154/A and E/12/0155/A, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

The Director advised Members that enforcement and stop notices had already been issued on plots 32 to 35 and 26 to 28 on the Esbies Estate.  The mobile home had been moved from plots 32 – 35 as required by the stop notice.  Members were advised however that the mobile home was now located on plots 26 – 28.

The Director stated that Officers had written to the owners of plot 26 – 28 reminding them that, whilst a single caravan was permitted on plot 28, there should be no caravans or mobile homes on plots 26 – 27 and there should be no hard standing on the whole of 26-28 as this would be in breach of the recently issued stop notice.

In response to a query from Councillor Mrs R Cheswright, the Director said that it was not possible to enforce all the sites on the Esbies Estate ‘en bloc’ as each plot had a different owner and a different planning history.  Councillor M Alexander thanked Officers for their prompt action when issuing the stop notices.

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 sites relating to E/12/0154/A and E/12/0155/A on the basis now detailed.

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0154/A and E/1/0155/FP, 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.

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.