Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Members are required to notify any substitutions by midday on the day of the meeting.

Late substitutions will not be accepted and Members attending as a substitute without having given the due notice will not be able to take part in the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Amy Allen, Sadie Billing and Elizabeth Dennis.

Having given due notice, Councillor Mick Debenham substituted for Councillor Allen.  

Audio recording – 1 minute 53 seconds

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Amy Allen, Sadie Billing and Elizabeth Dennis.

Having given due consideration, Councillor Mick Debenham substituted for Councillor Allen.

To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 16 January 2025.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 16 January 2025 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Audio Recording – 2 minutes 13 seconds

Councillor Bryony May advised that she had given apologies prior to the Planning Control Committee meeting on 16 January 2025 but was listed as being present in the Minutes of that meeting.  

Councillor Nigel Mason, as Chair, proposed, as amended, and Councillor Emma Fernandes seconded, and following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 16 January 2025 be approved, as amended as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II 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 Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered.

There was no other business notified.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 24 seconds

There was no other business notified.

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 Chair 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, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)     The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.

(2)     The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)     The Chair clarified matters for the registered speakers.

(4)     The Chair advised that Section 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution applied to the meeting.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 39 seconds

(1)   The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.

(2)   The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)   The Chair clarified matters for the registered speakers.

(4)   The Chair advised that Section 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution applied to the meeting.

To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public.

The Chair confirmed that the registered speakers were in attendance.

Audio recording – 5 minutes 16 seconds

The Chair confirmed that the registered speakers were in attendance.

RESOLVED: That application 24/01371/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, plus the standard Biodiversity Net Gain planning condition.

Audio recording – 5 minutes 54 seconds

N.B. Councillor Martin Prescott moved to the public speaking gallery at the start of this item to act as an Objector Member Advocate.

The Senior Planning Officer notified Members that a letter from a member of the public in objection to the application had been received since the agenda pack had been circulated. A summary of the concerns of objectors was also read out. Members were finally advised that if the development was approved, it would be subject to the mandatory Biodiversity Net Gain condition as mentioned in paragraph 4.3.5 of the report.

Following this, the Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of Application 24/01371/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·                Councillor Ruth Brown

·                Councillor Louise Peace

·                Councillor Ian Mantle

·                Councillor Nigel Mason

In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

·                The Silver Birch tree which was currently at the centre of the site would be retained as per the outline landscape proposals.

·                It was unclear whether solar panels would be installed on every house in the development, however, if permission for the development was granted, it would be subject to condition 27 in the recommendation which would require a sustainability strategy to be submitted prior to the commencement of the development.

·                The applicant would have to purchase biodiversity credits from a land bank company to meet the national requirement of a 10% biodiversity net gain for the development. A certificate proving the purchase of the biodiversity credits would have to be submitted to the planning authority.

·                The first stage of the Road Safety Audit had already been carried out and the second and third stages would be undertaken. Issues such as on-street parking along The Causeway would be considered, along with measures like double-yellow lines.

·                Cars would not be allowed to park in the narrowest part of The Causeway where the proposed footpath would extend into the road.

·                The Road Safety Audit indicated that 2-3 vehicles might be displaced because of this, which could add to the on-street parking in nearby roads such as Peddlers Lane.  

·                The owners of the vehicles that were parked outside the proposed access point as shown in the photos accompanying the presentation were unknown, however, the photos were taken during school time.

The Chair invited Therfield Parish Councillor, Andy Osbourne, to speak against the application. They thanked the Chair for the opportunity to speak and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation. They advised that:

·                They were Chair of Therfield Parish Council.

·                The housing structure in Therfield was mostly low density and complemented by open green spaces, of which the land at Tussocks was one.

·                The Parish Council acknowledged that the application was within the village boundary.

·                They realised that the Hillcrest portion of the proposed site needed development.

·                No dialogue between the developer and the Parish Council had taken place since the Parish Council had requested for decreased housing density on the development.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 123.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

To update Members on appeals lodged and any decisions made.

The Development and Conservation Manager provided an update on Planning Appeals.

Audio recording – 1 hour 10 minutes 44 seconds

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report entitled Planning Appeals and informed the Committee that:

·             3 appealed decisions had been decided, of which 2 had been dismissed and 1 had been part allowed, part dismissed.

·             2 appeals had been lodged, one of which was for a 42-dwelling development on Land East of Royston Road, Baldock which had been upgraded to a public inquiry that would be held on 29 April for 4 sitting days. The other was a householder appeal at Blackmoore End.

The Following Members asked questions:

·             Councillor Ruth Brown

·             Councillor Tom Tyson

In response to questions, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that:

·             The Public Inquiry would be held at the District Council Offices and Members were welcome to attend.

·             The appeal had been upgraded to a Public Inquiry by the Inspector dealing with the case, who deemed that cross examination of the expert witnesses was needed. The appellants originally requested a Public Inquiry, whereas the Council had requested a Hearing.