Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Simon Heanes addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/1331/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor M Wood, as the local ward Member, addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He stressed that residents were particularly alarmed by this application.  He referred to the objection from Bishop’s Stortford Town Council.

Councillor Wood stated that any changes to the area must enhance the estate and there should be clear benefits for residents.  He emphasised that parking problems would be significant in terms of on–street parking should this application be approved.  He stated that there would be conflict between residents for the available on–street parking spaces.

Councillor Wood concluded that the loss of a space used by children for ball games would mean it would be a reduction in quality of life for the children and their parents.  He urged Members to refuse the application.

The Director advised that, for clarity, Members should be aware that this site was not a garage site.  The site was a hard surfaced open area and the likely impact on parking was not as a result of the proposed demolition of garages.

The Director advised that, whilst the design of the proposed development was different to the existing dwellings, Officers felt that the design was acceptable in this location.  In addition, the relationship between the proposed development and existing dwellings would be similar to that found elsewhere in the area.

Councillors G Jones, A Burlton and J Jones all made reference to the detrimental impact of the application in terms of car parking.  Councillor K Crofton referred to the loss of play space for children, as well as the loss of space for parking cars.

The Director commented that there was likely to be no net gain or loss of parking provision, but that two additional dwellings would be provided.  Members were advised that parking surveys were often conducted on weekday nights as that was accepted as being the most likely time when most residents were present and therefore parking pressure was at its greatest.  Members were reminded that the open space was not specifically designed and layed out as a play space and signs were in evidence prohibiting ball games.

Councillor G Jones proposed and Councillor J Jones seconded, a motion that application 3/13/1331/FP be refused as the proposed development would result in the loss of existing parking provision and increase the demand for on-street parking in the immediate area.  The proposal would also be harmful to the amenities of existing residents and would therefore be contrary to Policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.  The loss of an existing informal open space would also be harmful to the character and amenity of the surrounding area.

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 as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/13/1331/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development would result in the loss of existing parking provision and increase the demand for on-street parking in the immediate area. As a result the proposal would be harmful to the amenities of existing residents, contrary to Policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and National Planning Policy Framework.

2.    The proposed development would result in the loss of an existing informal open space which would be harmful to the character and amenity of the surrounding area, contrary to Policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and National Planning Policy Framework.