Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Hargreaves addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/0086/SV, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

Councillor J O Ranger, as the local ward Member, gave a brief historical introduction to the application.  He stressed that there was a significant strength of local feeling that the age restriction must be retained.  He stated that he had been asked by a number of local residents to request that the Committee refuse this application.

Councillor Ranger summarised the planning history of the site.  He stressed that Darling Homes were aware of the age restriction and should have constructed homes that were compatible with that restriction.  He also pointed out that the people who brought such houses were often not on the Authority’s housing register.

Councillor Ranger referred to a local concern in respect of a loss of peace and quiet for residents, should this application be approved.  He stated that this application would not set a precedent as all the properties in the area had a similar age restriction.

Councillor Ranger commented that local residents felt that this application contravened a number of local plan policies.  He requested that Members refuse the application in light of the local need for housing for the elderly and also in acknowledgement of the local feeling that this age restriction must be retained.

The Director advised that there was no local plan policy on which Officers could have recommended this application for refusal.  There was no policy that could be applied to retain the elderly person’s age restriction.  Members were reminded to consider relevant planning issues only.

The Committee was advised that Members must clearly articulate the requirements and planning need for an elderly person’s enclave in this location.  The Director advised that justifying the retention of this restriction would be a very difficult case to sustain.

Councillor J J Taylor queried why the Authority did not have a local plan policy to cover this situation.  She stressed the importance of retaining quiet peaceful areas for the elderly to reside.

The Director commented that the Authority now had far less involvement in housing matters than would have been the case 20 or more years ago when it was a direct provider.

He stressed that the approach of the District Council was now very much a case of working with Hertfordshire County Council and the social landlords in seeking to influence housing policy to meet the needs of residents.

The Director stated this approach was now common place in ensuring provision for various groups within the community.  He commented that an age restriction of 50 plus was a particularly blunt instrument as many people of that age were financially capable of meeting their own accommodation requirements.

The Director advised that the Committee’s decision must be made on planning grounds.  The Director reiterated that there was no planning policy backing for seeking to retain an enclave of this nature.  The East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 sought to achieve cohesive, inclusive and mixed communities where all ages could live together.

Councillor Ranger stated that it was the quiet enjoyment of property that was a key issue in this situation.  The Director stressed that it while it was the role of the planning system to ensure that every resident could enjoy residential amenity at a reasonable level, it could not maintain it unchanged.

The Director stated that if a refusal decision were challenged, an appeal inspector could reasonably refer to any typical residential development where no age restriction had been applied but amenity was acceptable.

Councillor J J Taylor pointed out that such a view could be prejudicial against the elderly.  She stressed that to live in peace and quiet was a basic human right.  The Director advised that the only policy basis that could be applied was ENV1 in that removing the restriction could lead to a harmful impact on the residential amenity of existing and adjacent properties.

Councillor J J Taylor proposed and Councillor M R Alexander seconded, a motion that application 3/11/0086/SV be refused on the grounds that removing the restriction could lead to a harmful impact on the residential amenity of existing and adjacent properties contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

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

The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services that application 3/11/0086/SV be granted subject to the conditions now detailed.

Councillors W Ashley and S Rutland-Barsby requested that their votes against the motion be recorded.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/11/0086/SV, planning permission be refused for the following reason:

1.            The Council is of the view that removing the restriction could lead to a harmful impact on the residential amenity of existing and adjacent properties contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.