Agenda item

Recommended for Approval

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/21/2879/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report submitted.

The Service Manager (Development Management and Enforcement) summarised the proposed development and said that the application was being reported to the Committee as the applicant was East Hertfordshire District Council. The Service Manager detailed the proposed works to the rear outbuilding and summarised the proposed internal layout of the self-contained units.

The Committee was advised that 34 Queens Road was a two storey semi-detached property located in the built up area of Ware. Members were advised that the scheme included the provision of an access ramp, a bin store and the creation of two off street parking spaces as well as two associated cross overs.

The Service Manager referred to an extant planning permission relating to this property that dated from 2020 and this allowed for the conversion of the property into two flats with extensions. She said that this current application did not propose any extensions and the property would be regarded as a hostel use.

Members were advised that the main issues for consideration were the principle of the development, the design and layout of the scheme, impact on the amenity of adjoining residents and also the impacts on the highway network and parking provision.

The Service Manager said that the principle of the conversion of the property into two units for temporary accommodation was considered to be acceptable due to the provision of additional housing and accommodation for groups who had specific housing needs, which was in accordance with national planning policy.

The Service Manager said that each unit would be self-contained and was of a sufficient size to meet the nationally prescribed space standards and the ground floor flat would have step free access. Members were advised that the physical alterations to the building were very modest and matched the existing building and were therefore considered to be acceptable in design standards.

The Service Manager said that there were no applicable issues relating to loss of light as there would be no external alterations to the building. Members were advised that concerns had been expressed that the proposed use would give rise to anti-social behaviour which could diminish neighbour amenity. Officers did not believe that these concerns could be substantiated due to a lack of evidence and the small scale of the proposed units.

The Committee was advised that the proposals included the provision of two off street parking spaces, which was in accordance with the Council’s parking standards. The Service Manager said that the Highway Authority had raised no objections on highways safety grounds. She said that the loss of on street car park was mitigated by the off street spaces and Officers were satisfied that the application was in accordance with the development plan and it was recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

Jonathan Geall addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Ruffles said that a lot of concern had been expressed in the representations. He commented on the importance of the exterior maintenance of the property and in particular the garden land. Councillor Ruffles said that it seemed to be an ideal community for temporary accommodation and he was comfortable with this application in this location. He said that it was important that the property was looked after by the Council due to its prominent position.

Councillor Beckett referred to the lack of detail in respect of construction make up. He asked if the two parking spaces that would be in place of grass would be constructed using permeable materials. He asked about insulation upgrades and referred to the efficiency of the gas boilers. He expressed a concern that gas had been considered by the applicant instead of an electric solution.

Councillor Fernando said that residents had some concerns about the two crossovers and a reduced amount of parking. He said that parking was available on the other side of the road and the provision of the two parking spaces was sensible for visitor parking. He asked about the tenancy arrangements or contracts that residents would be given by the Council.

The Service Manager said that the Council would be taking full responsibility for maintaining the gardens. She said that there were no proposals to extend the building and there were therefore limits to energy efficiency adaptations that could be made. Members were advised that there was a gas boiler condition that would ensure that energy efficiency would be of a suitable standard.

The Service Manager said that the proposed plans did not indicate any loss of soft landscaping other than the two car parking spaces. She said that the provision of the spaces still left quite a substantial amount of green space. Members were advised that a condition would be imposed which required the green landscaping to be maintained.

The Service Manager said that the Committee could strongly encourage the use of an alternative to gas by the applicant but this could not be enforced by condition. Councillor Kemp said that care had to be taken about the feasibility of retro fitting sustainable energy solutions such as heat pumps. He asked if either of the car parking spaces would be fitted with an electric car charging point.

The Service Manager said that the plans did not make reference to the inclusion of a car charging point and it would be difficult to insist that the applicant provided that from a policy position given the scale of the development. She said that the matter of permeable paving could be woven into the proposed landscaping condition.

Councillor Beckett proposed and Councillor Fernando seconded, a motion that application 3/21/2879/FUL be granted, subject to the conditions detailed at the end of the report.

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

RESOLVED –that in respect of application 3/21/2879/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed at the end of the report.