Agenda item

REPORT OF: SERVICE DIRECTOR – REGULATORY

To consider the representations made in response to the consultation on the draft Chesfield Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (CAAMP) and the proposed designation of the Chesfield Conservation Area.

RESOLVED: That the Chesfield Conservation Area item be DEFERRED to clarify the proposed conservation area and to conduct further consultation with residents to ensure the People First priority of the Council was being met.

Audio Recording – 5:26

N.B. This item was considered ahead of Agenda Item 7.

Councillor Ruth Brown, as Executive Member for Planning and Transport, presented the report entitled ‘Chesfield Conservation Area’ and advised that:

·       The purpose of a conservation area was to manage and protect areas of special interest.

·       The 2016 heritage assessment for North Stevenage 1 (NS1) recommended there should be a conservation area in Chesfield, as an extension to the existing conservation area.

·       Following a public consultation consultants carried out further work and made minor amendments, included at Appendix B. However, they concluded that there was enough historic evidence to merit a conservation area in this area.

·       A conservation area promotes sustainable development, which was important following the declaration of the Climate Emergency at the Council.

Councillor Ruth Brown proposed the recommendations in the report.

The Chair invited Dr Hilary Napier to speak. Dr Napier thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided Cabinet with a verbal presentation, including that:

·       As a resident of the area, she was unaware of the proposed Conservation Area until November 2022, despite the report beginning in September 2021.

·       They were also only made aware of the consideration of the item at this meeting on 13 September 2023 and no other resident had been provided information.

·       It was good practice to involve residents in policies that impact them.

·       A public consultation took place in January 2023 and the residents were unanimous in objecting to the Conservation Area proposals.

·       At this meeting, Councillor Brown indicated that the proposals would not proceed without resident support.

·       The main reasons provided for objections were the managing of boundaries of farmland, the impact of the nearby woodland and housing estates, as well as dangerous trees that would need felling immediately.

·       The effects of NS1 was not considered within this report, and this is important as work is underway and the spoil from the development is to be deposited on the proposed Conservation Area boundary.

·       There were historically significant buildings in the area, but these were covered by existing listing, and the land was protected as greenbelt. The proposed Conservation Area, therefore, made little additional protection.

·       Following the resident meeting in January 2023, several responses were provided as action points, including to consult further with the ARB team at the Council regarding woodlands, expand permitted development on farmland, consider the likely effect of new developments and confirm a landscape assessment had been completed for NS1. However, no action or information had been provided on these points.

·       The section of the report which covered Chesfield Park area contained inaccuracies, which had been covered by previous submissions from residents, including photographic evidence, but only summarised versions appear on the website.

·       Woodland around the area is extremely patchy and housing developments were clearly visible.

·       The Assistant Director of Planning at Stevenage Borough Council had advised that the immediate area around Chesfield Park had already been eroded by the development of Great Ashby, as well as pylons.

·       A site visit had been arranged in May 2023, but this would be more appropriate following the completion of current ongoing developments.

In response to the presentation from Dr Napier, Councillor Brown advised she had taken part in online meetings with consultants and residents, however no officers were present at these, and could not recollect saying that this would not go ahead. She would have advised that concerns would be taken away and consulted on with Officers, as she was not an expert in these areas. Councillor Brown apologised if documents were missing from the website, and this was a genuine mistake.

The following Members asked questions:

·       Councillor Ian Albert

·       Councillor Steve Jarvis

·       Councillor Alistair Willoughby

In response to question, Dr Napier advised:

·       A letter from the Assistant Planning Officer at Stevenage Borough Council mentioned the spoil.

·       Her view was that the point of the letter was that he did not see Chesfield Park as a worth place to be designated as a Conservation Area.

·       The whole area, not just buildings, had been included in the proposed area, despite nearby developments being visible through woodland in the winter months.

In response to questions, the Principle Strategic Planning Officer advised:

·       The letter from Stevenage Borough Council did advise that there were pylons and the presence of housing, however the overall message was in favour of the designation for Chesfield.

·       The reports were all uploaded online and to the best of her knowledge all submissions had been uploaded and, other than personal details, nothing had been redacted.

·       It was not standard practice to notify all consultation respondents to the decision making, it was done in the case of Dr Napier as correspondence had been taking place over summer.

·       Discussions had taken place with the Development Management Manager at Stevenage which had led to this outcome. In these discussions it became apparent that they were overall supportive, with some reservations about some matters, but saw the benefit of extending the current area.

·       She was not part of the Development Management Team and therefore could not advise on what was considered whether this applied to non-built environment, such as farmland, fences, etc.

·       The map included in the letter from Stevenage Borough Council highlighted the area in green, which was within this proposed conservation area, but was within the civil boundary of Stevenage, known as Park Plantation.

·       This area had not been included within the Stevenage conservation area as it was designated as greenspace. However, this had been queried with the consultant who advised that this should be included in these proposals.

·       Applications within North Herts boundary would be weighted with the proposed conservation area. The North Stevenage site had been given weighting based on the existing Stevenage Borough Council conservation area in St Nicholas and Rectory Lane. There were no further proposed developments out towards North Herts boundary.

Councillor Albert noted that verbal agreements and discussions were not appropriate for this decision to be taken and a written response was needed to clarify the position of Stevenage Borough Council. This position was similarly expressed by Councillor Steve Jarvis, who further noted the need to understand what was affected by the proposed area.  

In response to points raised, the Chair allowed Dr Napier a response, who further advised that:

·       Residents wanted to know what obligations they will need to meet to secure their boundaries.

·       A lot of this land was farmland, which was not a normal conservation area, and the area had been expanded to cover dense woodland, which in reality was not dense.

·       It was understandable to try and protect significant buildings in an area, but this proposal goes beyond the protection of historic interests.

·       Residents had not been fully informed of the proposals and a lot of uncertainty around the proposals remained.

The Chair summarised that clear themes were coming from Members that they were not at grips with the proposal and concerns regarding consultation and putting people first.

Councillor Elizabeth Dennis, as Chair, proposed to defer the item awaiting further clarification on points raised at the meeting. This was seconded by Councillor Ian Albert and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED: That the Chesfield Conservation Area item be DEFERRED to clarify the proposed conservation area and to conduct further consultation with residents to ensure the People First priority of the Council was being met.