Issue - meetings

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Residential development of 167 dwellings (Use Class C3) and associated works including formal open space, internal road network, landscape enhancement and creation of accesses from Heath Lane and St Albans Road; and the demolition of 66 St Albans Road (as amended by drawings received 1st and 6th November 2018, 17th and 18th December 2018 and 3rd April 2019).

Councillor Ian Moody declared that he was acting as Member Advocate on the item and would therefore not take part in the debate and vote.

RESOLVED: That application 18/02722/FP be REFUSED planning permission for the following reasons:

(1)       The application site is within an area designated in the North Hertfordshire District Local Plan no.2 with Alterations as Green Belt, within which there is a presumption against inappropriate development, such as that proposed, unless very special circumstances can be demonstrated. In the view of the Local Planning Authority the proposal is not supported by such very special circumstances. Moreover, it would harm the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy which seeks to maintain the openness of the area. As such, the proposal would not accord with the provisions of Policy 2 of the District Local Plan no.2 with Alterations 1996 or with the provisions of Section 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

(2)       In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the emerging plan is at an advanced stage but is not yet formally part of the development plan for the area. The proposed development and the cumulative effect of other proposed land allocations in this locality, would be so significant, that to grant planning permission would undermine the plan making process by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development that are central to the emerging Plan as demonstrated by the extent of unresolved objections to the proposed land allocation, Policy CD5 of the Emerging North Hertfordshire District Local Plan (2011-2031) (Incorporating Modifications) which mean only limited weight can be applied to this policy. The proposal is therefore premature under the provisions of Paragraph 49 (a) and guidance on weight to be applied to emerging policies under paragraph 48 (b) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

(3)       At the time of determination the planning application, the subject of this decision notice, has not been accompanied by a valid legal undertaking (in the form of a completed S106 Obligation) securing the provision of the requisite infrastructure and financial contributions towards off site infrastructure or on site affordable housing. The secure delivery of these obligations is required to mitigate the impact of the development on the identified services in accordance with the adopted Planning Obligations SPD, Saved Policy 51 of the North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No. 2 - with Alterations or proposed Local Plan Policy HS2 of the Submission Local Plan (2011-2031). Without this mechanism to secure these provisions the development scheme cannot be considered as a sustainable form of development contrary to the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Proactive Statement:

Planning permission has been refused for this proposal for the clear reasons set out in this decision notice. The Council acted proactively through positive engagement with the applicant in an attempt to narrow down the reasons for refusal but fundamental objections could not be overcome. The Council has therefore acted proactively in line with the requirements of the Framework (paragraph 38)  ...  view the full decision text for item 115

Audio Recording – 8 Minutes 25 Seconds

Residential development of 167 dwellings (Use Class C3) and associated works including formal open space, internal road network, landscape enhancement and creation of accesses from Heath Lane and St Albans Road; and the demolition of 66 St Albans Road (as amended by drawings received 1st and 6th November 2018, 17th and 18th December 2018 and 3rd April 2019).

Councillor Ian Moody declared that he was acting as Member Advocate on the item and would therefore not take part in the debate and vote.

Councillor Michael Muir sought legal advice from the Legal Regulatory Team Manager and Deputy Monitoring Officer in regards to this item. He explained that he was the Vice-Chair of the Development Committee at Hertfordshire County Council and he had voted at that Committee on the school expanding from 1 to 2 form entry.

The Legal Regulatory Team Manager and Deputy Monitoring Officer advised that the school expansion was not a matter for the Planning Control Committee and therefore, Councillor Muir was able to debate and vote on the item as there was no declarable interest.

The Principal Planning Officer – Strategic Sites introduced some additional Officers who were in attendance at the Committee to assist in answering questions. These were:

·                Nigel Smith - Strategic Planning Manager;

·                Roger Taylor – Principal Engineer, Development Management (HCC Highways);

·                Russell Monck – Team Leader (West) Growth and Infrastructure Unit;

·                Kate Ma – Senior Planning Officer (School Planning Team – Children’s Services).

The Principal Planning Officer – Strategic Sites provided some updates to the report as follows:

·                Paragraph 4.3.150 of the report - the Inspector’s schedule of Further Main Modifications had been received on 10March and these were put on the Council’s website on 11 March;

·                Consultation Responses – since the Committee Report was published, approximately 59 further public objections had been received, which included a further response from Codicote Parish Council, from Save Rural Codicote, together with a letter from Richard Buxton Solicitors on their behalf and second letter was received about three hours ago.  In addition, a further letter of objection had been received from Stephen McPartland MP. The matters raised in these additional objections were summarised in paragraphs 3.20 to 3.32 of the report;

·                There was discrepancy within the report regarding the s106 contribution towards the upgrade and improvement of existing bus stops on the High Street.  At paragraph 4.3.81 of the report it referred to the figure of £56,000, whereas the correct figure agreed was £76,000;

·                With regards to an email Members received from the Herts and Middlesex Wildlife trust, the Officer had spoken with Herts Ecology. Herts Ecology recommended a further condition, to establish the presence, or not, or protected species before works commence on site.  The Condition read as follows:

‘Prior to commencement of development, an ecological walkover survey shall be conducted to assess the potential for protected species such as reptiles, amphibians or badgers which may have moved onto the site, depending on its condition. Any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115