Agenda item

REPORT  OF  THE  DEVELOPMENT  AND  CONSERVATION  MANAGER

 

Erection of six dwellings with associated access, landscaping and parking (as amended by plans received 06/02/24 and 15/02/24). 

RESOLVED: That application 22/01687/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

 

Audio Recording: 4 hours 44 minutes and 28 seconds

 

N.B. Councillor Louise Peace declared an interest and moved to the public gallery.

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 22/01687/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The Following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

·       Councillor Jon Clayden

 

In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer stated that:

 

·       The size of the parking spaces in the car ports are of sufficient size.

·       Heat pumps would be installed in the properties, but no solar panels.

·       The local bus service was a regular service.

·       Condition 13 recommended that the applicant would need to provide a land and ecology maintenance plan to ensure the biodiversity net gain was met. The submission will be consulted with the ecologist or Hertfordshire County Council Ecologist for net gain provided.

·       The mix of properties was considered satisfactory.

 

The Chair invited Parish Councillor Yvonne Hart to speak against the application. Parish Councillor Hart thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       The development was outside the village boundary and did not follow the aesthetics. It would also set a precedence for future development.

·       Large 3 and 4 bedroomed houses were not needed in the area.

·       There was a large reliance on cars, there is no shop or school.

·       Buses were not frequent and did not run on a Sunday.

·       There was increasing number of cars on the roads, together with parked cars with a limited visibility.

·       A growing number of children walk and bike ride to school and were currently safe around their homes.

·       The local sewage system had been having problems with being exasperated.

·       Concerns over the local Grade 1 listed church which could be damaged during construction.

·       Local wildlife was thriving and diverse, with bats and owls both breeding.

·       Holwell would not benefit from this site, as there would be no financial gain as the development is too small for S106 money and will just cause disruption.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Parish Cllr Hart for her presentation and invited Councillor Louise Peace to speak against the application. Councillor Peace thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       There was objection to the development of the location, habitat loss, road safety and parking issues.

·       The ecological survey was an abundance of wildlife.  It was noted that the biodiversity Net gain calculations had not yet been provided.

·       There were very few facilities in the village, no shop, pub or junior school. There was a drive to either Pirton or Hitchin for a secondary school.

·       There were already children standing on the bus to school, with additional pressure on the service and no S106 money.

·       There was a high impact on limited parking provisions, with areas on the roads full of parked cars.

·       90-degree bends in some places had the local residents considering the access dangerous.

 

The following members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

 

In response to points of clarification, Councillor Peace stated that:

 

 

·       The homes on the site were unaffordable.

·       Highways have not properly looked at the bend in the road, with cars parked on the wrong side of the road.

 

N.B. Councillor Louise Peace, following the conclusion of her presentation, left the Chamber for the remainder of this item.

 

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

 

·       Engagement started with the Parish Council and Conservation officer in 2022.

·       This is redevelopment of redundant open space, with a large building left barren for decades.

·       Creation of housing needed in the village, with the current land of no benefit to the village.

·       The development would be set further back, concealed from view, with a limited impact.

·       The bridleway denoted the edge of village.

·       The character assessment would ensure suitable materials with features will be incorporated. The Development and Conservation Officer supports the use of weatherboarding.

·       Hertfordshire County Council had raised no concerns to this being a safe development.

·       Parking provision had been provided and overflow dealt with.

·       Ecology on the site had been deemed acceptable with hedgerows being retained.

·       Tilted balance was in favour of this development.

·       Housing objectives had been met with disruptions minimised and communications maintained with residents.

·       This development would transform a redundant parcel of land into an area to contribute to the housing needed.

 

The following members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Micheal Muir

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

 

In response to points of clarification, Mr Shone stated that:

 

·       Archaeological digs were usually covered by conditions and carried out when going through the development itself. This was noted by condition 10.

·       The area was deemed to be a sustainable location due to Holwell being a category B village. The developer had made enquiries to seek to get a virtual bus stop into the village.

·       Holwell was the close by to Hitchin and Pirton, which both have more amenity features.

 

In response to points of clarification, the Senior Planning Officer stated that:

 

·       The site was deemed as sustainable and complies with policy SP2.

·       It was not a major application in terms of the number of dwellings and would not qualify for any s106 contributions.

·       There had been no Highways objections to the widening of the existing access.

·       The site was large enough for visitor parking outside of the proposed 2 spaces.

·       The officers were satisfied with the view from Hertfordshire Ecology on the ecological impact of the application. Net gain would be provided via Condition 13.

 

Councillor Michael Muir proposed to approve planning permission and this was seconded by Councillor Mick Debenham.

 

 

The following members took part in debate:

 

·       Councillor Jon Clayden

·       Councillor Mick Debenham

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Sadie Billing

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

 

Points raised during the debate included:

 

·       It was noted that the bend in the road and additional parked cars were a problem.

·       Whether there could be any provision for mirrors to be added to the side of the road for visibility purposes. There was no condition for the installation of mirrors, and these would also need to be placed by the Grade 1 listed Church.

·       The bend was already challenging, and drivers would not potentially see vehicles exiting the development whilst negotiating the bend.

·       Yellow lines to eliminate parked cars would require a condition from Highways and traffic regulations.

·       There were no grounds for refusal.

·       A different entry had not been considered, as an existing entry remains. This allows no loss of trees that currently provide screening for the development.

·       It was noted that in proportion, this was a small development of 6 houses.

 

Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was: 

 

RESOLVED: That application 22/01687/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.