Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Jane Orsborn addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation with the Council and Hertfordshire County Council pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the matters detailed in the report to the 7 January 2015 meeting of this Committee, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the previous report, the additional conditions detailed in the supplementary report and the additional representations summary.

The Director advised that the application had been deferred to enable further consideration of the relevance of the policies detailed in the Bishop’s Stortford Neighbourhood Plan for Silverleys and Meads.  The Director referred to additional conditions on pages 15 – 17 of the report plus an additional condition in the additional representations summary that had been designed to soften the impact of the fencing which had been implemented.

The Director referred to the options as regards affordable housing provision and reminded Members that the site at Bishop’s Stortford North seemed to be the most appropriate location if funding was secured for affordable housing away from the application site.

Councillor K Warnell, as the local ward Member for Bishop’s Stortford Meads, stated that if there was to be more housing on Dane O’Coys Road, there needed to be provision for pedestrians as there was currently no pavement at all.  He also commented that this area formed a wildlife buffer zone between other development and the Areas of Special Restraint (ASRs) and it would be a shame to lose this green space.

Councillor Warnell commented on how the proposed dwellings would integrate with ASRs 3, 4 and 5 and the existing properties on Dane O’Coys Road.  He argued that the proposed development would be out of keeping with the existing street scene and the local area.  He concluded that Hertfordshire Constabulary preferred social housing to be scattered throughout a development rather than being concentrated in a single area.

Councillor D Andrews stated that there needed to be a sensible mix of housing and he would be reluctant to support an application where there would be no social housing on the site.  He agreed that any social housing should be mixed in with the whole development.

Councillor T Page referred to the validity of the Bishop’s Stortford Silverleys and Meads Neighbourhood Plan.  He took comfort from the fact that the emerging plan could be given some weight in decision making on planning applications.

Councillor Page emphasised that the application had not been scored against buildings for life 12 standards which was a key condition supporting policy HDP2 of the Neighbourhood Plan.  He expressed concerns regarding amenity space and the size and distribution of the proposed dwellings as well as the provision of parking spaces and the admitted difficulties for those seeking to access town centre facilities.

The Director referred to the advanced stages of preparation as regards the Neighbourhood Plan.  Members were reminded that whilst weight could be attached to this document, it had to be moderated as a referendum was still to be held and there had to be a yes vote before the Neighbourhood Plan could be adopted.  Members were reminded of the general background picture regarding the policy elements that should be adhered to when determining planning applications. 

The Director advised that whilst the application had not met all the policy requirements of the emerging Neighbourhood Plan, the Government had brought forward other work aimed at securing the sustainability of homes through building control regulations.  Members were advised that, as regards parking provision and allotment provision, any harmful impact of the proposals was considered to be modest and that, overall, the benefits of the application outweighed the harm.

The Director stated that guidance produced by the Authority favoured the dispersal of social housing throughout a site but, for larger sites, up to 25 affordable housing units could be provided in one group.  Officers had acknowledged that the availability of facilities was reduced for this site but the future amenity provision linked to the emerging Bishop’s Stortford North development had to be taken into account.

The Director further advised that some improvements would be made to the road network as part of this application.  Members were reminded that this location was part of an allocated site in the local plan which had been identified as suitable for development.

Councillor N Symonds stated that she felt that affordable housing should be provided on this site instead of shared ownership properties.  Councillor K Croften commented that shared ownership did constitute affordable housing and the applicant had made a good case for this being the most suitable outcome for this development.

In response to queries from Members relating to affordable housing, the Director spoke at length regarding the policy position of the Authority regarding this issue.  Members were reminded that the applicant was supportive of a 75 % affordable rented and 25% shared ownership if that was the option Members preferred.  Members were also reminded that Bishop’s Stortford North afforded an opportunity for the delivery of more affordable housing units.

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

RESOLVED – that subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation with the Council and Hertfordshire County Council pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the matters detailed in the report to the 7 January 2015 meeting of this Committee and the provision of on-site affordable housing in accordance with the Councils policy requirement of 75% affordable rented: 25% shared ownership, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the previous report, and the additional conditions detailed in the supplementary report and the additional representations summary.