Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Hallman addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Mr Thorn spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of application 3/14/2223/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted. 

The Director referred Members to the additional representations schedule for a typographical error regarding condition 12.  Members were also referred to the schedule regarding the inclusion in the Section 106 agreement of a management company in respect of the landscaped and play areas on the site.

Councillor G Williamson expressed concerns that, amongst the issues on which Members based a deferral of the application at the August 2014 meeting of the Committee, only one of these had been addressed in this revised application.  He commented that what was now on offer in terms of play equipment was pretty insignificant and he had at least hoped for a decent open space play area large enough for children to kick a ball around in.

Councillor Williamson sated that, whilst he had sympathy with residents whose homes had been flooded, he did not believe that building 57 dwellings was the right approach to address this issue.  He stated that the weight given to the mitigation factors regarding this application had been inappropriate.

Councillor D Andrews stated that it was sad to see that the applicant had not given significant attention to addressing the issues raised by Members as shortcomings.  He commented that he was disappointed that there would not be open sustainable drainage solutions rather than closed systems.

Councillor Andrews stated that he would like to see a half metre ransom strip adjacent to North Drive provided as part of this application.  He was also very concerned regarding the access to the site via North Drive.  The Director stated that, if there were issues that Members felt that Officers had not picked up from the deferral at the August 2014 meeting, a further deferral would allow Officers to address these outstanding matters.

The Director reminded Members that the Authority was a landowner at North Drive and therefore, in addition to the planning controls, it was in a position to directly control access. Officers were of the view that this was not an issue where further steps could be taken. 

Councillor Andrews stated that he had significant highways concerns and stated that he used the main road by car and by bike and he stressed that, due to the chicanes, this could be a frightening experience.

Councillor J Jones stated that the applicant had proposed some pretty insignificant play equipment and there was no other play provision in High Cross.  He maintained that the applicant should reduce the number of units to make way for a proper dedicated play area.

Councillors K Crofton and D Andrews emphasised that Hertfordshire Highways needed to reconsider the access for this application site due to the proximity of the chicanes.  Councillor Andrews commented that when there were problems on the A10 or the M11, the route through High Cross effectively became the A10 and could also be the sole North to South or East to West route through East Herts.

The Director confirmed that Highways Officers had indicated that they would not be minded to relocate or remove the chicanes and assessments were always based on the normal operation of the highway, i.e. unusual circumstances would not be taken into account.

Members were advised that the site was located within the settlement boundary of the village and this had to be taken account when considering the principle of the development and any concern that is represented overdevelopment.  In respect of policy LRC3, The Director commented that the application did include a degree of amenity space and the modest scheme for informal play did conform with the policy requirements of the Authority.

Councillor G Williamson proposed and Councillor D Andrews seconded, a motion that application 3/13/2223/FP be refused on the grounds that the application constituted overdevelopment in a category one village and there were insufficient recreational requirements and the application was therefore contrary to policies OSV1 and LRC3 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.

Councillor K Crofton proposed and Councillor P Moore seconded, a motion that application 3/13/2223/FP be deferred to enable further consideration in respect of the density of the proposal; access to the site; the provision of adequate play space and prevention of access onto North Drive via the provision of a ransom strip.

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 3/13/2223/FP, planning permission be deferred to enable further consideration in respect of the density of the proposal; access to the site; the provision of adequate play space and prevention of access onto North Drive via the provision of a ransom strip.