Agenda item

Recommended for Approval

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/21/2547/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed at the end of the report and with delegated authority being granted to the Head of Planning and Building Control to finalise the detail of conditions.

The Principal Planning Officer drew the attention of Members to the additional representations summary and the commentary in respect of the responses from Environmental Health and Hertfordshire Ecology. The summary document also included some commentary from Hertfordshire Highways Officers.

Members were shown an aerial photo of the site and the Principal Planning Officer set out the context of the site and summarised the location of the science and technology buildings to the south of the main campus off Hailey Lane. She said that the proposals included the removal of the biology building and its replacement with a much smaller two storey building.

The Principal Planning Officer said that the proposals included the removal of part of the design and technology building to create a courtyard area. She said that the proposed three storey extension to the science building would run along the road frontage of Hailey Lane.

The Principal Planning Officer said that there would be no extension of the built environment and the proposed development would extend no further towards the road. She detailed the nature of the trees which would be removed and advised that three of the trees to be removed were of significant importance.

The Principal Planning Officer said the main issues for Members to consider were the restrictions on building in the green belt and the impact of the proposed development on heritage assets.

The Principal Planning Officer said that the design and impact on the heritage assets had been considered in the context of the wider setting of the college. She said that there would be no increase in pupil numbers or traffic as a consequence of the proposals.

Members were advised that the Highways Officers had indicated that they considered the emergency access to be over engineered. The Principal Planning Officer said that this matter could be conditioned in that details of the proposed emergency access should be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Highway Authority.

Members were advised that this condition would require that the submitted details should demonstrate how pedestrian movement would be prioritised in accordance with the NPPF and LTP4 and the access should be completed in full accordance with the agreed details prior to the first occupation of the development.

The Principal Planning Officer said that Hertfordshire Ecology had confirmed that they were satisfied that the biodiversity net gain, and bat and great crested newt mitigation measures proposed were acceptable, subject to the conditions and the informative detailed in the late representations summary.

Members were advised that the proposed development was not inappropriate in the greenbelt and any harm was outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. The Principal Planning Officer stated that the design had addressed the need for reducing carbon emissions and there would be no harm to protected species and no other significant concerns.

Mr Stuart Hay addressed the Committee in support of the application. Councillor Becket asked if there could be a commitment from the applicant to use low VOC products given that this building would accommodate some of the youngest people in the District.

Councillor Fernando commented on the carbon dioxide reductions and asked if there was any information in respect of future temporary classroom blocks. The Principal Planning Officer said that there would be an application requirement for any further temporary classrooms.

Councillor Kemp commented that this site in the Green Belt contained historic buildings that enhanced the appearance of the overall site. He commented on the arrangements for vehicles making deliveries to the science and technology block from Hailey Lane.

Councillor Redfern asked for some clarity in terms of how many trees were to be removed. Councillor Ruffles made a point about the preservation of the built environment. He also made reference to a concern that had been expressed by a resident about the openness of the Green Belt.

The Principal Planning Officer said that the applicant had provided a plan to Hertfordshire Highways in respect of how deliveries would be made to the site and this had met with the approval of Highways Officers

Members were advised that 15 trees were to be removed, 9 of which were of a low quality. The Principal Planning Officer said that she would encourage the inclusion of more trees and she summarised the details of an indicative landscaping scheme. She also commented on the impact of the percentage uplift to the built form on the openness of the Green Belt.

Councillor Crystall commented on whether swift boxes should be included within the requirement for bird and bat boxes.

Councillor Fernando proposed and Councillor Beckett seconded, a motion that application 3/21/2547/FUL be granted subject to the variations to conditions 16 and 17 and subject to the other conditions detailed at the end of the report and with delegated authority being granted to the Head of Planning and Building Control to finalise the detail of the amended conditions.

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

RESOLVED –that (A) in respect of application 3/20/2547/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the amended conditions 16 and 17 and subject to the other conditions detailed at the end of the report; and

(B)   delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning and Building Control to finalise the detail of the amended conditions.