Agenda item

RESOLVED: That application 19/01106/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the following additional conditions:

 

“Condition 25

 

Prior to any demolition and construction works full details of a Demolition and Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: In order to ensure that adequate measures are adopted to control nuisance during works associated with the development from the spread of pollution, notably dust and fine particulate matter.

 

Condition 26

 

Prior to the occupation of the development a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan.

 

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation     

 

Condition 27

 

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as amended no development as set out in Class E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order, (or any subsequent Statutory Instrument which revokes, amends and/or replaces those provisions) shall be carried out without first obtaining a specific planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: Given the nature of this development, the Local Planning Authority considers that development which would normally be "permitted development" should be retained within planning control in the interests of the character and amenities of the area.”

 

 

Audio recording – 123 minutes 13 seconds

 

The Development and Conservation Manager advised Members that Matthew Armstrong Highways Area Manager (North & East) from Herts County Council was available via Zoom to answer questions and provided the following updates:

 

·         Comments had been received from Ickleford Parish Council.

·         Further comments had been received from the Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust.

·         Highways had clarified that on carriageway bus stops were safer than off carriageway, given the priority of buses.

·         There would be funds allocated to make a biodiversity net gain off site.

·         Some of the Section 106 funds had been changed, following the net reduction of one house in the proposals.

·         Due to the site being situated on currently allocated Green Belt land, this application would need to be referred to the Secretary of State if approved.

 

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of application 19/01106/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·         Councillor David Levett

·         Councillor Nigel Mason

 

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

 

·         The applicant was Cala Homes.

·         For affordable rental properties, this would equate to 80% of the market value rent and 40% of this development would be in that category.

 

The Chair invited Ms Jill Saunders and Mr Phillip Crowe to speak against the application.

 

Ms Saunders thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation, including:

 

·         Objections from local residents had been set out in writing and a challenge to the legality of the site selection had been made and was awaiting a response from the Planning Inspector.

·         The review which downgraded the relevance of the site to the green belt failed to offer justification or rationale for doing so.

·         A strategic master plan was required for Ickleford due to the number of proposed developments.

·         If the proposals are approved then, as a minimum, the conditions in the report need to be enforced.

·         Full protection, with additional planting, of trees should be included within the proposals.

·         It was good to see the inclusion of a light controlled crossing over the busy road in the proposals and requested the footpath be extended.

 

Mr Crowe thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation, including:

 

·         Ickleford Parish Council has continued to object to the plans, which will be built on green belt land and will be built before the return of the Local Plan from the Inspector.

·         Requested that all sewage will flow south towards Hitchin, not north into the older sewers which were already under strain.

·         Given the new national plans to protect chalk streams, it was not suitable to propose that all surface water will run into the River Oughton.

·         The siting of the pelican crossing proposed should be moved south, alongside the new bus stop, which would be of more use to residents and children using the bus stop.

 

In response to a point of clarification from Councillor Alistair Willoughby, the Highways Area Manager (North & East) advised that the pathway could be extended further south, as suggested by Mr Crowe, but that highways land eventually runs out. Extension would only benefit 1 or 2 homes south of the sire and all works must be relevant, and directly related, to the development.

 

The Chair thanked Ms Saunders and Mr Crowe for their presentation.

 

The Chair invited Councillor Sam North to speak against the application as Member Advocate.

 

Councillor North thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and advised of the following:

 

·         The Council had now received the draft Local Plan from the inspector and it is currently undergoing the fact checking process. It would be of benefit to the Committee to delay the decision until the time when the Local Plan is adopted, or not, which would allow for a decision in line with how policy is, not how it might be.

·         Ickleford is a village with a strong character and this development is not in keeping with the existing residences.

·         Residents were not against developments but would rather these use existing brown belt land.

·         The biodiversity net gain on site is only 3% of that currently achieved by the green field site.

·         The open spaces included in the plans are not for the wider village and would only be suitable to those on the new site.

·         There is already poor air quality in this area.

·         A new housing development is not necessary to install a new pelican crossing as proposed.

·         There are significant concerns regarding drainage and sewers in Ickleford and these would need to be addressed and answers prior to commencement. 

 

There were no points of clarification for Councillor North from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

 

The Chair invited Mr Neil Farmsworth, as the applicant’s representative, to speak in support of the application.

 

Mr Farmsworth thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and advised of the following:

 

·         The site offers a mix of dwellings, including 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroom dwellings, with 40% of these being affordable, as agreed with Council’s Housing Department.

·         The site is proposed to be removed from the green belt and incorporated into the existing Ickleford boundary and it had only a moderate contribution to the green belt.

·         Whilst the Local Plan has not yet been adopted, its adoption is imminent and therefore, its plans should be taken seriously and applied. This has already happened at other sites in North Hertfordshire.

·         Housing on the site will be centred around a village green, with each dwelling having a private garden, with a mixture of detached and semi-detached houses. Brick will be the primary exterior material and architecture has been developed in line with existing buildings.

·         This development will benefit from the introduction of Cala Home’s Sustainability Strategy, as such all properties will have air source heat pumps which will reduce the dwellings emission by 35% of the baseline.

·         This is the first Cala Homes site in England to use solely timber frames.

·         There were no objections from Highways and the site offers parking above requirements.

·         The Highways plans included within the development will bring several improvements to the roads in the surrounding area.

·         Confirmed that sewage will be moved south towards Hitchin and road surface water will not flow into the River Oughton. 

 

There were no points of clarification for Mr Farmsworth from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

 

The Chair invited the Development and Conservation Manager to respond to points raised during the public and Member Advocate presentations, including:

 

·         In terms of the Planning Inspectors report on the Local Plan, the legal proceedings will have to be completed on this application which can take weeks. Furthermore, the Secretary of State has 21 days to call in any decision.

·         There is a huge delay at the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) and in this case it is better to allow the LLFA and the applicant to develop a negotiated position after planning has been approved.

·         If nothing could be agreed between the LLFA and the applicant then the application would be brought back to the Planning Control Committee.

·         Similarly, if this site was not included in the Local Plan then it would have to be brought back to the Planning Control Committee.

·         It was possible to remove Class E structures, relating to outbuildings, to protect the boundary of the site.

·         There would be little time to make changes prior to the statutory determination deadline of 30 July. The natural sequence of events mean that there is ability to react to any unknown changes, if included within the Local Plan.

·         This site is well below the threshold for SP9 considerations, which applies to developments of over 100 dwellings.

·         Cala Homes would be willing to put in writing the confirmation regarding drains.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·         Councillor Morgan Derbyshire

·         Councillor David Levett

·         Councillor Tony Hunter

·         Councillor Amy Allen

·         Councillor Tom Tyson

 

Points raised in the debate included:

 

·         There had been a 20% increase in dwellings, from 40 to 48, but this still represented only 20 dwellings per hectare. This application has been ongoing since 2019 and the developer and applicant had made concessions along the way.

·         Deferral would lead to a non-determination appeal and, should this happen, the developer would no longer be committed to the conditions outlined in the report, which offer benefits to the wider community.

·         Additional conditions could be applied to improve the landscaping on the buffer zones surrounding the site. It was also requested to remove permitted development rights for Class E buildings.

·         The developer had sufficiently answer concerns regarding draining and had confirmed sewage would run south and surface water would be sufficiently clean when going into the river.

 

Councillor David Levett proposed and Councillor Tom Tyson seconded and, following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 19/01106/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the following additional conditions:

 

“Condition 25

 

Prior to any demolition and construction works full details of a Demolition and Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: In order to ensure that adequate measures are adopted to control nuisance during works associated with the development from the spread of pollution, notably dust and fine particulate matter.

 

Condition 26

 

Prior to the occupation of the development a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan.

 

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation     

 

Condition 27

 

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as amended no development as set out in Class E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order, (or any subsequent Statutory Instrument which revokes, amends and/or replaces those provisions) shall be carried out without first obtaining a specific planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: Given the nature of this development, the Local Planning Authority considers that development which would normally be "permitted development" should be retained within planning control in the interests of the character and amenities of the area.”