Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Bill Davidson, Mike Rice, Harry Spencer-Smith and Martin Stears-Handscomb.

Councillor Faye Frost was substituting for Councillor Davidson and Councillor Valentine Shanley was substituting for Councillor Rice.

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Bill Davidson, Mike Rice, Harry Spencer-Smith and Martin Stears-Handscomb.

Councillor Faye Frost was substituting for Councillor Davidson and Councillor Valentine Shanley was substituting for Councillor Rice.

To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on the 28 September 2017.

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Control Committee held on 28 September 2017 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chairman.

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Control Committee held on 28 September 2017 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chairman.

To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on the 12 October 2017

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Control Committee held on 12 October 2017 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chairman.

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Control Committee held on 12 October 2017 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chairman.

Members should notify the Chairman of other business which they wish to be discussed by the Committee at the end of the business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency.

The Chairman will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered.

There was no other business.

There was no other business.

Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chairman of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item.  Members declaring a Declarable Interest which requires they leave the room under Paragraph 7.4 of the Code of Conduct, can speak on the item, but must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)       The Chairman welcomed the Committee, officers, general public and speakers to this Planning Control Committee Meeting;

(2)       The Chairman announced that Members of the public and the press may use their devices to film/photograph, or make a sound recording of the meeting, but he asked them to not use flash and to disable any beeps or other sound notifications that emitted from their devices;

(3)       The Chairman reminded Members and speakers that in line with Council policy, this meeting would be audio recorded;

(4)       The Chairman advised that Members would be using hand held microphones and asked they wait until they had been handed a microphone before starting to speak;

(5)       The Chairman requested that all Members, officers and speakers announce their names before speaking;

(6)       The Chairman clarified that each group of speakers would have a maximum of 5 minutes. The bell would sound after 4 1/2 minutes as a warning, and then again at 5 minutes to signal that the presentation must cease; and

(7)       Members were reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and were required to notify the Chairman of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item.  Members declaring a Declarable Interest which required they leave the room under Paragraph 7.4 of the Code of Conduct, could speak on the item, but must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)       The Chairman welcomed the Committee, officers, general public and speakers to this Planning Control Committee Meeting;

(2)       The Chairman announced that Members of the public and the press may use their devices to film/photograph, or make a sound recording of the meeting, but he asked them to not use flash and to disable any beeps or other sound notifications that emitted from their devices;

(3)       The Chairman reminded Members and speakers that in line with Council policy, this meeting would be audio recorded;

(4)       The Chairman advised that Members would be using hand held microphones and asked they wait until they had been handed a microphone before starting to speak;

(5)       The Chairman requested that all Members, officers and speakers announce their names before speaking;

(6)       The Chairman clarified that each group of speakers would have a maximum of 5 minutes. The bell would sound after 4 1/2 minutes as a warning, and then again at 5 minutes to signal that the presentation must cease; and

(7)       Members were reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and were required to notify the Chairman of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item.  Members declaring a Declarable Interest which required they leave the room under Paragraph 7.4 of the Code of Conduct, could speak on the item, but must leave the room before the debate and vote.

To receive petitions and presentations from members of the public.

The Chairman confirmed that the 2 registered speakers and 2 Member Advocates were present.

The Chairman confirmed that the 2 registered speakers and 2 Member Advocates were present.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Outline planning permission for up to 70 residential dwellings (including 40% affordable housing), new village gateway, new retail outlet/village facility, planting, landscaping, informal public open space, children's play area and sustainable drainage system (SuDS). All matters reserved with the exception of access.

RESOLVED:  That application 17/01781/1 be REFUSED outline planning permission for the reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, and for the following additional reasons:

4.       The Flood Risk Assessment carried out by MLM Consulting ref. 618538-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-C-000 Rev 3, dated 27 September 2017, does not provide a suitable basis for an assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed development as it does not demonstrate a feasible discharge location.

5.       In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the nearby village of Great Offley and rural area beyond by reason of over development of the site and poor layout in relation to the character and layout of the village. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy 57 of the North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No. 2 - with Alterations and paragraph 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Outline planning permission for up to 70 residential dwellings (including 40% affordable housing), new village gateway, new retail outlet/village facility, planting, landscaping, informal public open space, children's play area and sustainable drainage system (SuDS). All matters reserved with the exception of access.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented a report, supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

The Development and Conservation Manager advised that comments had been received from the Local Lead Flood Authority maintaining their objection to the application and recommending the following additional reason for refusal (No. 4):

“The Flood Risk Assessment carried out by MLM Consulting ref. 618538-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-C-000 Rev 3, dated 27 September 2017, does not provide a suitable basis for an assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed development as it does not demonstrate a feasible discharge location.”

The Development and Conservation Manager referred Members to Paragraph 4.4.1 of the report, and explained that the applicant had already lodged an appeal against non-determination of the application within the statutory time period.  However, as the Local Planning Authority had not received confirmation from the Planning Inspectorate that the  appeal had been registered, the Committee was able to make a decision on the application.

The Development and Conservation Manager reported that there was a potential changing policy context in relation to the application site.  Under the saved policies of the current Local Plan, the site was located in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt, and therefore the application was contrary to saved Policy 6 of that Plan.  The submission Local Plan sought to change the designation of the site to Green Belt.  This proposal to expand the Green belt could only be given limited weight, as the Local Plan Examination had not been completed, and until this was supported by the Examination Inspector and the Plan was subsequently adopted by the Council, the site would not become Green Belt.

The Development and Conservation Manager explained that the Local Planning Authority may therefore need to revise its position on this application at any future appeal depending on the outcome of the Local Plan Examination.  These factors were outside of the Council’s control, and so he could only offer Members his views and conclusions based on the existing policy position.  Accordingly, his recommendation for refusal reflected that position.

Mrs Patricia Cowley (Offley Residents Action Committee) addressed the Committee in objection to application 17/01781/1.

Mrs Cowley advised that the application was seen by the residents of Offley as a purely speculative application, especially as the applicant carried out no public consultation with either Offley Parish Council or the people of Offley.  The applicant and their agents had ample opportunity to bring this site forward for potential allocation as a site for development when the Council was asking landowners to do so as part of the Local Plan process.

Mrs Cowley stated that Offley had recently experienced a large development of 63 houses and flats (Garden Fields), and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of 6 x 2 bed single storey retirement dwellings including creation of vehicular access off of Hadrian Way, Baldock.

RESOLVED: That, application 17/01982/1 be REFUSED planning permission for the reason set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, and should an objection be maintained from Environmental Health, inclusive of an additional reason for refusal on the basis of unacceptable noise levels in the proposed rear gardens.

Erection of 6 x 2 bed single storey retirement dwellings including creation of vehicular access off of Hadrian Way, Baldock.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) presented the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) updated the Committee on a possible objection from Environmental Health and on responses received from six local residents.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) reported that Environmental Health had submitted a late response on 1 November 2017, recommending refusal of the application based on unacceptable noise levels in the proposed rear gardens.  However, the applicant submitted an updated Noise Assessment Report, also on 1 November 2017.  Whilst this was forwarded to Environmental Health, it was not taken into account when they made their response.  Environmental Health had been re-consulted, and asked to clarify based on the revised Noise Assessment Report, if they still wished to maintain their objection based on noise, or if they were now in a position to recommend approval subject to conditions. A response is still awaited.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) advised that she had received the views of six neighbouring residents.  Four had raised strong objection to the application on the basis that the land was Green Belt, and any development in this location would merge the towns of Letchworth and Baldock.  Further objections were also raised on the basis of Hadrian Way not being able to cope with any more traffic, and that the noise from the motorway would put off anyone from wanting to move into the bungalows.  Two views were in support, stating that they considered providing new bungalows for people wishing to downsize would be good.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) stated that the application was seeking full planning permission for six, two-bedroom bungalows, on land formed from the side garden area of Kingsfield.  This site was within the Green Belt.  Green Belt policy was set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and this sets out the five purposes of Green Belt, as well as what type of new development was considered to be acceptable within Green Belt, or what development should be considered to be inappropriate development and therefore not permitted within Green Belt.

In respect of application 17/01982/1, the Senior Planning Officer (AM) concluded that, the proposal was considered to be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.  This section of Green Belt formed an important green wedge between the towns of Letchworth and Baldock to stop them from merging together.  The proposal would erode a large section of open land within this important  wedge of Green Belt, and could be considered to be contrary to one of the main purposes of designating Green Belts, which was to stop towns from merging together.

The Senior Planning Officer (AM) noted that the applicant was arguing that this proposal was infill development on previously developed land, and therefore not inappropriate development.  However, as set out in Paragraph 4.3.7  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Increase parking provisions and alterations to existing parking layout.

RESOLVED: That application 17/02337/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Increase parking provisions and alterations to existing parking layout.

The Senior Planning Officer (JC) presented the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

In response to a Member’s question regarding the lighting of the increased car park, the Senior Planning Officer (JC) advised that a lighting plan had been submitted by the applicant which showed that the lighting would be situated and directed in a manner which would not be detrimental to local residents in terms of light spillage.

RESOLVED: That application 17/02337/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Change of Use of agricultural land to additional soft play areas for school use (Class D1 Use).

RESOLVED: That, subject to no new material planning considerations being raised by St. Ippolyts Parish Council by 29 November 2017, application 17/01998/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Change of Use of agricultural land to additional soft play areas for school use (Class D1 Use).

The Senior Planning Officer (JC) presented the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

The Senior Planning Officer (JC) advised that Paragraph 3.1 of the report stated that St.Ippolyts Parish Council had not made any comments on the application.  The Parish Council had informed her that that had not been consulted on the application.  On checking, this was correct due to an administrative error, and the Parish Council had now been formally consulted with a response date by 29 November 2017.  She therefore advised that the recommendation to grant should be subject to no material planning considerations being raised by the Parish Council by the above deadline date.

In response to a Member’s query, the Senior Planning Officer (JC) confirmed that the application site would not contain any structures, and that the application solely related to a change of use from agricultural land to additional soft play areas for use of the school.

RESOLVED: That, subject to no new material planning considerations being raised by St. Ippolyts Parish Council by 29 November 2017, application 17/01998/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Proposed and replacement security perimeter fencing and minor landscape works.

RESOLVED: That application 17/02190/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Proposed and replacement security perimeter fencing and minor landscape works.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented a report, supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

The Development and Conservation Manager commented that the reason for the application was to provide improved security for the site.

RESOLVED: That application 17/02190/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to conditions and reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.