Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of custom/self-build detached 5-bed dwelling with shared vehicular access.

RESOLVED: That application 24/01962/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager subject to an additional Condition 12.

 

“Condition 12

 

Prior to the commencement of the works hereby granted a footpath diversion order shall have been applied for to the Local Planning Authority under the Town and County Planning Act 1990 Section 257 and a temporary diversion/stopping up order granted by the Hertfordshire County Council Public Rights of Way department. At no point shall the public footpath be blocked or access impeded until such time as both the above criteria are satisfied. Guidance on the application can be found at https://www.north-herts.gov.uk/public-footpath-diversions or by contacting the officer delegated on 01462 474431.

 

Reason: To ensure that the route of the public footpath remains open for use by members of the public at all times. To comply with Policy D1 of the North Herts.”

Audio recording – 4 minutes 59 seconds

 

The Senior Planning Officer provided an update regarding the Supplementary Document that had been published on 2 December 2024.

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of Application 24/01962/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·       Councillor Louise Peace

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Jon Clayden

 

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

 

·       A self-build planning application was exempt from Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) regulations. 

·       The height of the mature hedge was noted as 2.5 meters on all plans submitted.

·       This scheme reflected the changes approved by the Council following the appeal that was upheld.

·       The applicant would have to apply separately to North Hertfordshire to divert the public footpath under the Town and Country Planning Act and this would have to addressed as a separate issue to this application.

·       When this application was approved it was prior to the BNG regulation being made a mandatory requirement.

 

In response to questions, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that as the Council was not a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Authority, there were no adopted processes or procedures to control self-build/custom occupation, which was a possible exemption from the Levy. There were no separate processes to control the self-build/custom build exemption for BNG and therefore the Council relied on the information provided by the applicant for a self-build planning application. It was understood that the Government was looking into this exemption.

 

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

 

·       He had lived in Kelshall for 35 years and was representing the Parish Council this evening.

·       It was the view of the Parish Council that this application was not suitable for an infill site.

·       The previous application for this site had originally been refused by the Council.

·       This infill site was only suitable for a small single dwelling not a property of this size.

·       He requested the Committee not to permit any further building on this site.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Gartside for his presentation and invited William Looker to speak against the application. Mr Looker thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       He had been a resident of The Street in Kelshall for ten years.

·       There were ten footpaths that would be within clear visibility of the site.

·       This house was large and would have a negative impact on the landscape.

·       The original use of the land was for agricultural use.

·       There had already been 20% housing growth in this Category B village which exceeded the allocation in the Local Plan.

·       This property would be one and a half meters above the ridge line so would be very visible.

·       He asked the Committee to refuse planning permission as this property was out of the scale and character of The Street.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Looker for his presentation and invited Councillor Martin Prescott to speak against the application. Councillor Prescott thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       He supported the views of Mr Gartside and Mr Looker.

·       This house was too large for the area and it would also change the character of the village.

·       When you looked at the two houses together as one site, this would be a big development.

·       The footpath was unusable at present as it was covered with building materials.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Prescott for his presentation and invited Philip Kratz to speak in support of the application. Mr Kratz thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       Kelshall was a Category B village in the Local Plan and infill development was allowed.

·       This application was for a mirror image property of the one next door which had already been approved.

·       The property had been designed in a way not to overlook or overshadow any neighbouring properties.

·       All technical issues had been resolved and all relevant technical authorities had given their approval.

·       A good landscaping plan for the site had been designed.

·       Both the principle and design of this application was considered satisfactory, therefore there was no good reason to refuse this application.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Jon Clayden

·       Councillor Louise Peace

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

 

In response to points of clarification, Mr Kratz advised that:

 

·       At the time of the previous application only one house was being considered for construction.

·       The house would be visible, but with a hedge height of 2.5 meters and the construction of single storey eaves, there would be no visible harm to the area.

·       He was unaware of a blockage on the footpath, but would contact the applicant to advise of this and ensure it was cleared immediately.

·       Landscaping visual impacts were not required for a single dwelling as stated in the NPPF.

 

The Chair thank Mr Kratz for his presentation.

 

Councillor Tom Tyson proposed to grant permission and this was seconded by Councillor Val Bryant.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·       Councillor Val Bryant

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

 

Points raised in the debate included:

 

·       There was no material planning consideration why this application should not be granted.

·       It was a valid application for an infill site and the harmful impact to the village did not outweigh the benefits.

 

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

 

RESOLVED: That application 24/01962/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager subject to an additional Condition 12.

 

“Condition 12

 

Prior to the commencement of the works hereby granted a footpath diversion order shall have been applied for to the Local Planning Authority under the Town and County Planning Act 1990 Section 257 and a temporary diversion/stopping up order granted by the Hertfordshire County Council Public Rights of Way department. At no point shall the public footpath be blocked or access impeded until such time as both the above criteria are satisfied. Guidance on the application can be found at https://www.north-herts.gov.uk/public-footpath-diversions or by contacting the officer delegated on 01462 474431.

 

Reason: To ensure that the route of the public footpath remains open for use by members of the public at all times. To comply with Policy D1 of the North Herts.”

 

N.B. Following the conclusion of this item, there was a break in proceedings and the meeting reconvened at 20:22