Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER.

 

Erection of 52 dwellings including open space, landscaping, local area for play, and associated highway works (as amended by plans received 09/03/23).

RESOLVED: That application 20/02412/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager with the following amended recommendation:

 

“Recommendation 6.1:

 

A.    Clarification from HCC Highways regarding local sustainable transport. The response will be shared with the applicant; Parish Council and Chair of Planning Control Committee. If this results in a change to the sustainable transport S106 Contribution for this to be agreed by the Chair of Planning Control Committee;

 

B.    The completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and the applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the agreement if required; and

 

C.    Providing delegated powers to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and informatives as set out in the report above; and

 

D.    Conditions and Informatives as set out below:”

Audio recording – 2 hour 4 minute 24 seconds

 

The Area Planning Officer provided an update on this matter which included that:

 

·       An email of supplementary documents had been sent to the Committee and published on the website which corrected some minor typographical errors.

·       There was an update to Paragraph 3.24 of the report and the requested upgrade of two bus stops which the applicant had agreed and this was added to the s106 heads of terms.

·       In response to further clarification from County, the Highways department advised that the s106 money had been allocated to the upgrading of two existing bus stops and a cycle footpath which they felt was sustainable and reasonable.

·       The Area Planning Officer proposed that the amendment to 6.1 of the report be revoked and that the original paragraph 6.1 be reinstated.

 

The Area Planning Officer presented the report in respect of Application 20/02412/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor David Levett

·       Councillor Dave Winstanley

·       Councillor Ian Moody

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Michael Muir

 

In response to the points of clarification the Area Planning Officer advised that:

 

·       The speed limit would remain at 40 miles per hour.

·       EV parking would be per house and shared for the flats.

·       The ice house would be repaired and protected as detailed in conditions 13 to 16 of the report and the footpath was adjacent to the ice house.

·       The boundary fences would be 1.8 metres high around the proposed gardens. The existing neighbours had rear gardens of approximately 40m long, which combined with the existing trees on the boundaries and the proposed rear garden means that there are no anticipated privacy issues.

·       The fences did not replace the existing hedgerows on the existing rear boundaries of the existing neighbours. The proposed fences were shown on the plans to be set inside the site.

·       All of the development would be within the proposed site which was no longer considered green belt.

·       There would be additional and enhanced biodiversity.

·       Electric charging points were highlighted in condition 23.

 

The Chair invited Parish Councillor Robert Moore and Ms Lorna Else to speak in objection of the application.

 

Parish Councillor Moore thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation including that:

 

·       In the last three years the applicant and the Parish Council steering group had undertaken a great deal of collaborative work.

·       On balance the Parish Council were in favour of this application but requested s106 money to be spent on a new footpath along Hitchin Road, Gosmore.

·       The proposed footpath was not mentioned in paragraph 3.2 on page 198 of the report.

·       The applicant was making contributions in excess of £1.2M towards s106 money. 

·       The current proposed footpath was impractical, most pedestrians walked along Waterdell Lane and through the village of Gosmore using the footbridge which was safer and more visually stimulating.

·       The payment allocated to priory school would be better spent between secondary education and St Ippolyts Parish.

 

Ms Else thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation including that:

 

·       The foreword of the Local plan talked about the importance of sustainable developments with considerations of the natural environment to deliver housing growth in the right place, now and in the future.

·       There was an opportunity to build housing to meet these goals, a housing estate of the right character and quality.

·       The development needed more than EV Charging points and bat boxes to achieve the goals of the Local Plan and would be required to meet green standards with sustainable building construction and to meet the 2025 future home standards.

·       The development relied on adjacent greenbelt fields to provide much needed green spaces.

·       The application failed to meet the Local Plan in almost every way.

·       The St Ippolyts residents deserved a better application for their village, and their objections to this application had been registered on the Planning website.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor David Levett

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

 

In response to a point of clarification Parish Councillor Moore stated that, Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) would receive £1.2M of s106 money from the applicant, at least 15% should be shared and spent in St Ippolyts.

 

In response to a point of clarification the Area Planning Officer advised that 4.3.62 of the report summarised the applicants draft s106 obligation. 

 

In response to a point of clarification the Chair advised that, the s106 money would be budgeted and spent on educational areas and not on named sites.

 

The Chair thanked Parish Councillor Moore and Ms Else for their presentations and invited Councillor Claire Strong to speak against the application. Councillor Strong thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       She was here to support the request from St Ippolyts Parish Council for a footpath to be included in the application.

·       HCC had been asked to reconsider this footpath request.

·       The Local Plan highlighted sustainable travel and this path would allow the residents of Gosmore a safe pathway through their village.

·       The area already had bus stops, therefore upgrades would be a maintenance matter and not a s106 matter.

·       The s106 money was the only opportunity for money to be given to the village for improvements and this pathway was a desired improvement.

·       It was disappointing that condition 6.1 placed on the supplementary document had now been revoked.

·       On the Local Plan the site was allocated for 40 dwellings, this application was now for 52, the Parish should benefit from these additional dwellings.

·       Had the Council implemented the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), the applicant would had paid more money and St Ippolyts Parish Council would have had more say in the improvements.

·       The amended condition 6.1 should be reinstated and consideration made for the residents to have a safer and quieter footpath, instead of subjecting the residents to a footpath along London Road, an area known for poor air quality.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Strong for her presentation and invited Mr David Fletcher to speak in support of the application. Mr Fletcher thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       The application was on a Local Plan adopted site, and careful consideration over a significant period of time had been taken to get to this point.

·       No objections had been received from any technical consultees and the comments from St Ippolyts Parish Councils had been welcomed.

·       The proposal had been amended to 52 dwellings, which had a density of 16.3 dwelling per hectare, and in line with the prevailing dwellings in the area.

·       The public right of way to the ice house had been preserved and would be subject to improvements and a detailed management maintenance plan.

·       The proposal provided the benefit of affordable housing and 0.6 hectares of public open space including a play area for children.

·       An enhancement to the wildflower meadow area would lead to a biodiversity net gain.

·       The Gosmore recreation area would receive a financial contribution towards play equipment.

·       A three metre wide footpath and cycle-way would be provided, along with two safe crossing points and bus stop improvements.

 

In response to a point of clarification from Councillor Dave Winstanley, Mr Fletcher confirmed that an energy statement was a condition of the planning permission.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Fletcher for his presentation.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·       Councillor David Levett

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

 

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

 

·       Herts County Council Highways Officer stated in the report that the bus stop upgrade formed part of the s106 payment.

·       The Transport Officer Planning Policy NHDC had asked for the bus stop upgrade as a s278 matter.

·       The supplementary update clarified that the bus stop upgrade should be from s106 money.

·       A request had been made to HCC for details of how they would decide if a new footpath was needed and funded. HCC had not yet responded to the email.

·       Councillor Strong had also requested information from HCC regarding sustainable transport, a response to which was presented at the start of this item.

·       The recommendation to revoke condition 6.1 was based on the reply from HCC to Councillor Strong.

·       The amended recommendation on condition 6.1 could be put back into the application and investigated further.

·       It was outside the remit of the Committee to impose a condition on when County spent the s106 money.

 

Councillor David Levett proposed the application with the amended condition 6.1, and Councillor Nigel Mason seconded, and following a vote it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 20/02412/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager with the following amended recommendation:

 

“Recommendation 6.1:

 

A.    Clarification from HCC Highways regarding local sustainable transport. The response will be shared with the applicant; Parish Council and Chair of Planning Control Committee. If this results in a change to the sustainable transport S106 Contribution for this to be agreed by the Chair of Planning Control Committee;

 

B.    The completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and the applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the agreement if required; and

 

C.    Providing delegated powers to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and informatives as set out in the report above; and

 

D.    Conditions and Informatives as set out below:”