Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of nine detached dwellings (2 x 3-bed, 1 x 4-bed and 6 x 5-bed) including garaging, parking, landscaping and creation of vehicular access off Gray's Lane.

RESOLVED: That application 22/00516/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions as set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager as amended by the Supplementary Agenda, as well as:

 

(1)   The completion of a satisfactory legal agreement or unilateral undertaking relating to achieving Biodiversity Net Gain from the proposed development, or the applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the agreement or provide a satisfactory unilateral undertaking.

 

(2)   Confirmation that Hertfordshire County Council’s Rights of Way Officer has no objections to the proposal.

 

And the following additional condition:

 

“Condition 15:

 

No dwelling shall be occupied until a scheme setting out details of all on-site household refuse and recycling storage and collection facilities (to include details of any enclosures or screening) to serve each dwelling have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The scheme shall also include arrangements for management of any other waste generated by the development.  All such facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the corresponding dwellings and shall be maintained and retained thereafter.

 

Reason: To facilitate refuse and recycling collection.  To protect the amenities of nearby residents and occupiers in the interests of visual amenity and to comply with Policies D1 and D3 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031.”

Audio recording 1 hour and 11 minutes

 

The Development and Conservation Manager, informed the Committee that there were updates provided in the Supplementary Pack which included:

 

·       Clarification of drawing numbers and a tree survey.

·       A revised appraisal of the biodiversity submitted by Herts & Middlesex Wildlife Trust showed a net loss of 1.17 hectare, which could be offset by a contribution of £15K to build an offsite enhancement in North Herts.

·       The County Council had withdrawn their request for a financial contribution as this application fell below their 10-house threshold.

·       A new condition had been added, requiring the provision of a soft and hard landscaping scheme.

 

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of Application 22/00516/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The Development and Conservation Manager summarised that:

 

·       The site extended to 0.8 hectors and included woodland on the western edge of Hitchin.

·       When the Local Plan was adopted the site was removed from the Green Belt.

·       The site was acceptable for a residential development as set out in the Local Plan.

·       The Local Plan estimated 16 dwellings on the site, this application is for 9, and considered the location, accessibility, density and constraints of hedge land, site access and trees.

·       The application was for six, five bedroom houses, one, four bedroom houses and two three bedroom houses.

·       The site was on the edge of town in a low-density area and the proposed houses were in keeping with the scale and character of nearby large detached dwellings.

·       The layout and was acceptable under Policy D1 of the Local Plan.

·       The woods would be repurposed and are subject to a landscaping condition.

·       After the access point for this development, Lucas Lane became a bridleway, and the Local Planning Authority considered this application acceptable subject to conditions listed in the report.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Ian Moody

·       Councillor Michael Muir

·       Councillor Louise Peace

·       Councillor Daniel Allen

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Val Bryant

 

In response to the points of clarification, the Development and Conservation Manager stated that:

 

·       Access via Grays Lane to the site was an adopted road but there were no plans to adopt Lucas Lane.

·       Road access would be the same for this application and for the HT6 application.

·       Using DEFRA calculation which considers different species with different biodiversity values, it was concluded that there was a net loss on the site of 1.17 habitat units.

·       There was a well-used path across the site but it was not a public footpath as defined by the County Council.

·       The illustrations showed some planting of trees and landscaping to reflect the master plan landscaping.

·       A revised plan was submitted to Highways which had been agreed.

·       A further condition had been added regarding waste and recycling.

·       The response from the County Councils changed after further clarification and drawings of the bridleway.

·       The Right of Ways officer had yet to respond, but the bridleway had a free and safe passage in the design and was shown outside of the red development area.

·       S106 money was based on the biodiversity loss and not for the number of dwellings.

·       The County Council had reviewed the application against their policy and agreed no S106 money was required as the application was below the dwellings threshold.

·       The application was below the threshold for affordable housing.

 

The Chair invited Mr Phil Davis to speak against the application. Mr Davis thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation including that:

 

·       He was presenting the objection on behalf of Save Hitchin Green Belt on the grounds of: loss of biodiversity, wildlife habitat, site access, increased pollution, and housing numbers.

·       The removal of this land would cause a huge loss, this area acts as a carbon sink and absorbs 1 ton of carbon per hectare.

·       Three sizable horse chestnut trees were to be removed with no regards to woodlands or wildlife, these trees are 6 foot in circumference.

·       There was a Tree Protection Order (TPO) on the woodland, which was proposed to be a playground.

·       The Ecological survey was incomplete, inaccurate, and misleading. It did not mention, the TPO, and the Woodlands on the site were referred to as dense scrubs. The survey did not mention any animals, or the non-cultivated grassland which is a great biodiversity asset.

·       A night survey of animal had not occurred, and this was when most wildlife in this area appeared.

·       This site included one of only two non cultivated grassland areas in Hitchin.

·       The development would cause the destruction of feeding land.

·       The development did not have any affordable houses.

·       This site should be removed from the Local Plan and returned to Green Belt.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Davis for his presentation and invited Councillor Keith Hoskins to speak against the application. Councillor Hoskins thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation including that:

 

·       Concerns regarding this application included, the traffic volume, traffic noise, Highways, safety and air quality.

·       Highways rejected the Pirton junctions due to concerns regarding congestion and overcapacity in peak hours.

·       Highways initially rejected the Lucas Lane access, given the intersection and safety.

·       Hertfordshire County Councils right of ways officer should be contacted to supply a statutory response regarding the bridle way and road access.

·       There were real concerns about what consideration had been made for the road users’ hierarchy at this junction.

·       There had been little consideration made, for off street parking and emergency vehicle access.

·       The NHDC Air Quality Action Report 2018 highlighted the concerns of Payne’s Park roundabout in Hitchin and recommended that the area lower its nitrate dioxide.

·       NHDC was committed to reducing the exposure of people to poor air quality.

·       The access route at Gray’s Lane was a known hotspot for nitrate dioxide according to the 2018 report from 5 years ago, and traffic had increased since then.

 

In response to a point of Clarification from Councillor Sean Nolan, Councillor Hoskins stated that the highways team were too narrowly focused on the Lucas Lane site access, and not to looking at the wider impact.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Hoskins for his presentation and invited Will Berry to speak in support of the application. Mr Berry thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation including that:

 

·       The development company, the Hill Group was a 5-star house builder, and this application was designed following public consultation and discussions with Planning Officers.

·       The development was considerate to the constraints, surrounding character and contents and the vegetation of the proposed area.

·       The TPO area would be enhanced and made available to the public there would be some selective thinning of the scrub land, but the replanting would allow more light into the area.

·       Further ecological benefits of the development were the provision of bird and bat boxes, hedgehog holes, and log pile bug hotels.

·       The development consisted of nine houses with gardens and parking, in keeping with the existing homes, having bay windows, bricks banding details and pitched roof.

·       All the homes would be energy efficient, with fabric first approach, air pumps and EC charging points to all homes.

·       A consultation had been conducted with County Highways regarding the access road and a pedestrian priority crossing.

·       The site had some constraints, regarding access, sewerage, TPOs and hedgerows.

·       The design was sensitive to the location and of a high quality but low carbon footprint.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Val Bryant

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

 

In response to the points of Clarification the Mr Berry stated:

 

·       The garages all have pitched roof and would be built to the North Herts District Council standards. Three of the garages would also have studios above them.

·       All roofs would be pitched in keeping with existing houses in that area.

·       The housing mix was based on access to schools and population density of the area.

·       Too many small houses had already been built.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Berry for his presentation.

 

In response to the points raised during the public presentations, the Development and Conservation Manager advised:

 

·       Section 8.19 of the local plan HS3 confirmed that there had been a greater delivery of smaller dwelling to larger ones.

·       Section 8.19 was flexible and dependant on the location, and character of the area.

·       The dwellings to the east of this application were large, detached homes.

·       Section 8.21 of the Local Plan stated that developments should have 60% of larger houses on the edge of town and 40% smaller.

·       This application had one, three bed property.

·       It was not clear from Council records what involvement of the rights of way officer had.

·       The resolution could be subject to confirmation that there are no objections from the County Council’s Rights of Way Officer.

 

The following Members took part in debate:

 

·       Councillor Simon Bloxham

·       Councillor Daniel Allen

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Michael Muir

·       Councillor Louise Peace

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Val Bryant

 

Points raised in the debate included that:

 

·       There was no valid reason to reject the application as it was in accordance with the Local Plan.

·       An application of nine houses was disappointingly predictable.

·       HT6 was a separate planning application.

·       Concerns regarding the loss of biodiversity.

 

The Development and Conservation Manager clarified the conditions of the application, subject to, the addition landscaping scheme, waste collection and recycling strategy and clarification from the rights of ways officer.

 

Councillor Simon Bloxham proposed, with the amendments included, and this was seconded by Councillor Michael Muir and, following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 22/00516/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions as set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager as amended by the Supplementary Agenda, as well as:

 

(1)   The completion of a satisfactory legal agreement or unilateral undertaking relating to achieving Biodiversity Net Gain from the proposed development, and the applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the agreement or provide a satisfactory unilateral undertaking.

 

(2)   Confirmation that Hertfordshire County Council’s Rights of Way Officer has no objections to the proposal.

 

And the following additional condition:

 

“Condition 15:

 

No dwelling shall be occupied until a scheme setting out details of all on-site household refuse and recycling storage and collection facilities (to include details of any enclosures or screening) to serve each dwelling have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The scheme shall also include arrangements for management of any other waste generated by the development.  All such facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the corresponding dwellings and shall be maintained and retained thereafter.

 

Reason: To facilitate refuse and recycling collection.  To protect the amenities of nearby residents and occupiers in the interests of visual amenity and to comply with Policies D1 and D3 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031.”