Agenda item

Recommended for Refusal.

Gordon Dawes addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Michael Smith spoke for the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that in respect of application 3/14/1766/FP, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Councillor M Pope, as the local ward Member, endorsed the comments of the objecting public speaker and he recognised the pragmatic approach of Officers in their recommendation for refusal.  He believed that the development was over intensive and would be detrimental to existing residents.  He stated that the building would be too large and overbearing to be inserted into the middle of a mature residential environment consisting purely of houses.

Councillor Pope concluded that the parking provision was woefully inadequate in an area that already had severe parking issues.  He stated that the affordable housing provision was a token provision that was also unacceptable.  He endorsed the recommendation and queried whether the sheer bulk of the proposed development and the woefully inadequate parking should be added to the reasons for refusal.

Councillor D Andrews referred to the existing under provision of parking in Amwell End.  He referred to the view of the Highway Authority that they would not wish to see a routine increase in roadside parking in the vicinity of this site.  He referred to the inadequacy of the existing train service and anyone living to the north, north–west or to the west of Ware would not find sustainable transport.

Councillor P Moore believed that the offer of 6% affordable housing was totally unacceptable and the affordable housing should be offered on a shared ownership basis otherwise two incomes and a hefty deposit would be required to afford such housing.  Councillor N Symonds agreed that more social housing was needed on this site and the application should be rejected on that basis.

Councillor G Jones stated that the applicant had worked on some of the issues of concern such as the siting and height of the proposed development.  He stated that the application was more acceptable from that point of view.  He commented however that the parking provision was effectively the same as with previous application and his particular concern was that all the spaces would be very much allocated by number and there would be nowhere for visitors to park.  He stressed that inadequate parking provision should be added to the reasons for refusal.

The Director advised that the applicant had submitted a revised plan that moved the proposed development modestly further away from the Hertford Road frontage and Members should temper their considerations as Officers had done in that respect .

The Director stated that the parking standards applied by the Authority were maximum standards and this was one of the more sustainable locations for development in that the site was close to a town centre with sufficient public transport provision.

The Director concluded by reminding Members that affordable housing was a key policy aspiration of the Authority and although the applicant had sought funding for education provision, affordable housing was the main priority for the District and education was a lesser priority.

The Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted, subject to the addition of insufficient parking and the unacceptable impact of the application on the character and appearance of the street scene to the reasons for refusal.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/14/1766/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.        The element of the development comprising the apartment block at the northern end of the site fronting Hertford Road would have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene and the surrounding area by reason of its height, scale, bulk and design.  The proposal is thereby contrary to policies ENV1 and HSG7 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.    Insufficient parking is proposed for the residential element of the development which would result in additional pressure on already restricted parking provision in the local area, harmful to the amenities of existing and future residents.  The proposal is thereby contrary to policies TR7 and ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.    The proposed development makes insufficient provision for affordable housing and therefore fails to address the demand for such housing within the District contrary to policy HSG3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Summary of Reasons for Decision

In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012, East Herts Council has considered, in a positive and proactive manner, whether the planning objections to this proposal could be satisfactorily resolved within the statutory period for determining the application. However, for the reasons set out in this decision notice, the proposal is not considered to achieve an acceptable and sustainable development in accordance with the Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.