Agenda item

(A)      3/12/2150/FP – Recommended for Approval.

(B)      3/12/2151/AD – Recommended for Approval.

(C)     3/12/2152/FP – Recommended for Approval.

(D)     3/12/2153/FP – Recommended for Approval.

George Cutting addressed the Committee against the applications.  Carole Leslie and Joanne Rams spoke for the application.

 

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of applications 3/12/2150/FP, 3/12/2151/AD, 3/12/2152/FP and 3/12/2153/FP, planning permission and advertisement consent be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

 

Councillor P Gray, as a local ward Member, stated that the strength of feeling against these applications was clear, given the large petition and numerous letters of objection that had been received.

 

Councillor Gray expressed concerns in respect of loss of privacy, increased traffic volumes due to the cash machine and deliveries to the site.  He stated that approval of this application would result in the closure of other shops, particularly the NISA Local Store, which contained a vital community asset in the form of a post office.  He urged the Committee to be brave and reject all four of the planning applications at The Archers.

 

The Chairman read out a number of comments from Councillor C Woodward, who was the County Council Member for the area.  Councillor Woodward had commented that the applications were contrary to policy ENV1 (d) of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 in terms of noise and overlooking.

 

He had also stated that the applications were contrary to policy ENV29 on the grounds that there were too many signs as part of the applications, which would be out of keeping with the style and character of the building and its environment.

 

The Director reminded the Committee that the principle of the use of the site was not under consideration and the change of use from A4 (pub) to A1 (retail) was a form of permitted development that did not require planning permission.

 

Councillor N Symonds, as a local ward Member, stated that the air conditioning units would produce noise that would be 10 decibels above the permitted level and the proposed fencing would not prevent distress for neighbouring residents.

 

Councillor T Page, also as a local ward Member, stated that all the applications covered by the report would have a highly detrimental effect on the social fabric and economic wellbeing of the neighbourhood in the vicinity of the site.  He stated that a Tesco store on this site would take trade away from retail units in the town centre and would therefore be contrary to the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

Councillor Page stated that the timber fencing around the proposed air conditioning units would create an eyesore and would be out of keeping with the existing street scene.  He referred to the risks to health of water droplets and vapour being emitted into the atmosphere.

 

Councillor Page stated that a safe route to schools would be compromised and the ATM machine would act as a magnet for criminality in the vicinity of the site.  He also expressed concerns in respect of car parking problems being made worse by these applications.

 

The Director stated that Environmental Health Officers were satisfied that there were no issues of concern with regard to noise.  Officers could not perceive that any significant weight could be assigned to concerns that there may be water discharge from the proposed equipment.

 

Councillor G Jones expressed concerns that the opening of the Tesco store would adversely affect the viability of local stores.  He stated however, that he did not think the installation of the air conditioning units or the other current planning application proposals would cause any significant problems at this site.  He therefore concluded that he had no alternative other than to support the Officer’s recommendations on these four applications.

 

In response to a query from Councillor M Alexander, the Director stated that business competitiveness was not a planning issue in this case.  Members were reminded that once a particular use was established on a site, the operator could change at anytime so weight should not be assigned to the particular operator in this case.  The Director also stated that the weight to be given to any argument based on the speculative impact of these applications on another community facility must be very limited.

 

The Director stated that the reasons for refusal based on noise or the impact of the applications on the street scene were not reasons that Officers considered to be sustainable.

 

Councillor T Page proposed and Councillor N Symonds seconded, a motion that application 3/12/2150/FP be refused on the grounds that the application was out of character with the existing street scene and was therefore contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared LOST.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken in respect of application 3/12/2150/FP, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

 

Councillor N Symonds expressed concerns that application 3/12/2151/AD would result in increased traffic and light pollution and would encourage boy racers and young people to congregate in the vicinity of the site, thereby causing problems for the police and disturbance for local residents.  She also stated that the lights would be illuminated on a 24 hour basis whereas local street lighting was switched off at a set time.

 

The Director stated that the proposed signage was very modest in nature and, in terms of community safety, a lit location was widely accepted as being preferable to an unlit one.  Members were advised that the proposed lighting was not unusual when compared to many similar buildings across East Herts.

 

Councillor N Symonds commented that, in areas where County Highways had switched off street lighting, crime had gone down as people did not like unlit areas and generally avoided them.  She stressed that the site would become a magnet for local youths.

 

In response to a query from Councillor Mrs R Cheswright, the Director confirmed that the lighting would be trough lighting that would shine up or down onto the proposed shop signage via a hollowed out tube seating arrangement.

 

Councillor T Page proposed and Councillor N Symonds seconded, a motion that application 3/12/2151/AD be refused on the grounds that the proposed signage was out of keeping with the surrounding area and was therefore contrary to policy ENV29 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared LOST.  Councillor G Jones proposed and Councillor D Andrews seconded, a motion that an additional condition be applied requiring that the proposed advertisements should only be illuminated during the opening hours of the store to the public and for 15 minutes prior to opening and after closing in order to safeguard the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with policy ENV29 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  In respect of application 3/12/2151/AD, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted, subject to the amended conditions.

 

Councillor N Symonds stated that, in respect of application 3/12/2152/FP, the ATM machine would result in car doors and headlights disturbing residents late at night.  She stated that the nearby local shop already operated a cash withdrawal service and there was no need for the additional ATM facility on this site.

 

In response to a query from Councillor M Newman as to whether an ATM would exacerbate anti-social behaviour, the Director advised that Officers had no such evidence and stated that a majority of ATM units operated in a fairly innocuous way most of the time. 

 

Members were advised that the Committee should not give weight to the speculative impact of an ATM on another business.  In reply to a query from Councillor M Alexander, the Director advised that it was anticipated that the ATM would be covered by an external embedded CCTV camera.

 

Councillor T Page proposed and Councillor N Symonds seconded, a motion that application 3/12/2152/FP be refused on the grounds that the 24 hour operation of the ATM would result in additional activity with associated noise and disturbance and had the potential to result in anti-social behaviour which together would have a harmful impact on the amenity of local residents.  The proposal was thereby contrary to policies ENV1 and ENV3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  In respect of application 3/12/2152/FP, the Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.  Councillor M Alexander requested that the unanimous nature of the vote be recorded.

 

In response to a query from Councillor M Alexander regarding the external staircase element of application 3/12/2153/FP, the Director stated that Officers were not fully aware of the intended use of this staircase but it was more likely that this was for staff rather than public use.

 

Councillor N Symonds stated that the site was located on a safer route for schools and, as such, there was a speed bump outside this site.  She expressed concerns over the intended lorry movements making deliveries to the site.  Councillor Mrs R Cheswright stated that it was important to ascertain the intended use of the external staircase.

 

In response to queries from Councillors D Andrews and Mrs R Cheswright, the Director confirmed that any changes to an internal staircase would not require planning permission as this would constitute permitted development.  The proposed external staircase did however require planning permission and Officers were currently unaware of its intended use.

 

Councillor T Page proposed and Councillor N Symonds seconded, a motion that application 3/12/2153/FP be refused on the grounds that the proposed development did not respect the amenity of neighbour residents and did not reflect the local distinctiveness of the area and was thereby contrary to policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared LOST.  Councillor M Alexander proposed and Councillor M Newman seconded, a motion that application 3/12/5153/FP be deferred to enable Officers to obtain further information in respect of the use and purpose of the proposed external staircase.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  In respect of application 3/12/2153/FP, the Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

 

RESOLVED – that (A) in respect of application 3/12/2150/FP, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted;

 

(B)   in respect of application 3/12/2151/AD, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted and subject to the following additional condition:

 

3.    The advertisements hereby permitted shall only be illuminated during the opening hours of the store to the public and for 15 minutes prior to opening and after closing.

         

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with policy ENV29 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

(C)   in respect of application 3/12/2152/FP, planning permission be refused for the following reason:

 

1.    The use of the proposed ATM and its 24 hour operation would result in additional activity with associated noise and disturbance and has the potential to result in anti-social behaviour which together would have a harmful impact on the amenity of local residents.  The proposal is thereby contrary to policies ENV1 and ENV3 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.

 

Summary of Reasons for Decision

In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012, East Herts Council has considered, in a positive and proactive manner, whether the planning objections to this proposal could be satisfactorily resolved within the statutory period for determining the application. However, for the reasons set out in this decision notice, the proposal is not considered to achieve an acceptable and sustainable development in accordance with the Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

(D)   in respect of application 3/12/2153/FP, planning permission be deferred to enable Officers to obtain further information in respect of the use and purpose of the proposed external staircase.