Agenda item

To consider such other business as, in the opinion of the Chairman of the meeting, is of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration and is not likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/11/2137/SV, Members confirm that, if they had been able to determine the application, they would have agreed to the variation of the Section 106 agreement to remove the financial contribution detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director advised that, at the August meeting of the Committee, Officers had recommended a variation of the Section 106 agreement pursuant to application 3/04/0657/OP, to remove a highways contribution of £125,000 towards the Bishop’s Stortford Transportation Plan.

The Director reminded the Committee that Members determined that a variation of the Section 106 agreement be deferred to enable Officers to negotiate with the applicant with regard to the potential for phased or staged payments of the current highways contribution.

The Committee was advised that the applicant had not responded to Officers requests regarding negotiation but had lodged an appeal against non determination of the application.  The Director stated that Officers were now seeking to ascertain Members’ views on the likely decision of the Committee if Members had determined the application, so that Officers could advance a case at the forthcoming appeal.

Members were advised that, should the Committee resolve to waive the highways contribution of £125,000, then the applicant would be requested to withdraw the appeal.

In response to a query from Councillor G Jones, the Director advised that if Members decided to waive or amend the Section 106 highways contribution, the applicant would have to apply separately to Hertfordshire County Council and there was a separate appeal process if the County Council rejected that application.

Councillor G Jones stressed that the proposed development would impact on highway infrastructure and there should be a contribution towards such infrastructure.  He stated that the Section 106 agreement was not a deciding factor in terms of whether the application was implemented if planning permission was approved.

Councillor G Jones stated that the Hertfordshire County Council agreed figure of £88,590 could be applied and he stressed that the highways contribution should not be removed completely.  The Director emphasised that the Committee could reduce the Highways contribution to £88,590. Members were advised however that two sets of consultants had stated that the application was not viable with a highways contribution of either £125,000 or £88,590.

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that there was no suggestion that the development was unviable because of the highways contribution or that removal of that contribution would make the scheme viable so there was no reason why the contribution should be completely removed.

Councillor N Symonds stated that the flats on London Road were virtually completed, whereas the office block currently looked awful.  She stated that the highways contribution should be waived to ensure that all development on the site was completed.

In response to a query from Councillor M Newman, the Director stated that it was appropriate for Members to consider the viability assessments then consider whether to seek a Highways Contribution and at what level.

Councillor G Jones proposed and Councillor Mrs R Cheswright seconded, a motion that, if they were able to determine the application 3/11/2137/SV, Members would have refused to agree to a variation of the Section 106 agreement to remove the financial contribution.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – Members confirmed that, if they had been able to determine application 3/11/2137/SV, Members would have refused to agree to a variation of the Section 106 agreement to remove the financial contribution for the following reason:

1.           The financial contribution towards sustainable transport measures is required to properly mitigate the impact of the additional traffic and activity generated by the development and to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes. The proposal would thereby be contrary to policy IMP1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the aims and objectives of the NPPF.