Agenda item

RESOLVED: That application 21/00354/FP be REFUSED planning permission for the following reason:

The proposal by reason of the design, and siting of the dwellings and ancillary development on this cramped and poorly accessed site would be harmful to the character and appearance of the locality. Moreover, the inadequate access arrangements do not appear to enable the safe access of delivery, service and emergency vehicle to the site, to the detriment of highway safety and amenity. The proposal therefore fails to accord with Policy 57 of the North Hertfordshire District Local Plan and Policy SP1, SP3, D1 and D3 of the North Hertfordshire Emerging Local Plan (2011-2031) and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Audio Recording: 34:52

The Senior Planning Officer advised of updates to the report including:

·         An investigation by the Fire Service into access of Conquest Close was performed earlier today and a submission by the Service has now been accepted.

·         A resident in Conquest Close voiced concerns that there had been no evidence that any other issues raised by the Highways Authority have been adequately addressed.

·         The Highways Officer provided comments stating that the recommendation for refusal would not be withdrawn until further clarification from the Fire Service; the Service has now commented on fire safety in 3.12 in the report, in which they have not objected to the layout plans.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 21/00354/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Ian Mantle

·         Councillor David Levett

·         Councillor Tom Tyson

·         Councillor Val Bryant

·         Councillor Michael Muir

·         Councillor Mike Hughson

In response to questions the Senior Planning Officer advised:

·         The storage space for bicycles and mobility scooters would be internal and the development also includes hard surfacing around the dwellings as well as a small out building in the rear garden.

·         The refuse collection plans are just north of the back garden of 23 Conquest Close; there is a bin storage area which would allow bins from both houses to be kept.

·         The Highways Authority have not officially withdrawn their present objection.

·         The proposal does include the intention to upgrade and resurface the access track to the North of the plan; condition number 8 asks for more details from the applicant as to the plan to resurface.

·         The resurfacing condition only relates to the upgrading of the access drive not of the development in the larger part of the site.

The Chair invited Andrew Hills to speak in objection of the application.

Andrew Hills thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         He was an owner and resident of a property in Conquest Close and a practicing architect.

·         He is representing the resident group of Conquest Close and Stevenage Road, which consists of over 30 neighbouring properties, all of whom are concerned about the proposed development and wish to object.

·         The main concern relates to the sites proposed access. Earlier this week the speaker sent an email containing pictures of the access to Committee Members.

·         The majority of the access laneway is not owned by the site or developer.

·         The laneway is a poorly managed dirt road which provides access to rear garages and gardens.

·         Even with improvements to the laneway surface, the laneway would remain inadequate as the sole vehicular access to the dwellings.

·         The speaker drew attention to the objections of the Highways Officer and the lack of space for Fire Service vehicles.

·         Previous proposals for a single dwelling on this site led to a similar response from the NHDC Highways Officer in 2013.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Mike Hughson

·         Councillor Mike Rice

In response to questions Andrew Hills advised:

·         The laneway ownership is divided into many portions of about 10-15 dwellings. Every terraced house owns a portion.

·         The laneway owners are only obliged to allow a maximum 8 feet of space for anything to pass. There is nothing to stop owners of the laneway narrowing their portion.

The following Members then took part in the debate:

·         Councillor Ian Mantle

·         Councillor David Levett

·         Councillor Michael Muir

·         Councillor Simon Bloxham

·         Councillor Val Bryant

Councillor Michael Muir proposed and Councillor Mike Hughson seconded and, following a vote it was:

RESOLVED: That application 21/00354/FP be REFUSED planning permission for the following reason:

The proposal by reason of the design, and siting of the dwellings and ancillary development on this cramped and poorly accessed site would be harmful to the character and appearance of the locality. Moreover, the inadequate access arrangements do not appear to enable the safe access of delivery, service and emergency vehicle to the site, to the detriment of highway safety and amenity. The proposal therefore fails to accord with Policy 57 of the North Hertfordshire District Local Plan and Policy SP1, SP3, D1 and D3 of the North Hertfordshire Emerging Local Plan (2011-2031) and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).