Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of two 2-bed dwellings, three 3-bed dwelling and two four-bed dwellings, with associated access, landscaping and parking.

RESOLVED: That application 24/02214/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with the removal of Condition 13, the renumbering of the remaining conditions, and the addition of Conditions 20 and 21, as follows:

 

‘Condition 20

 

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as amended no development as set out in Classes  B and C of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order, (or any subsequent Statutory Instrument which revokes, amends and/or replaces those provisions) shall be carried out without first obtaining a specific planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: Given the nature of this development, the Local Planning Authority considers that development which would normally be "permitted development" should be retained within planning control in the interests of the character and amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 and/or Policy D3 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.

 

Condition 21

 

Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, the approved three pedestrian refuges and two vehicle passing bays shall be fully constructed in accordance with the approved details outlined in the Transport Statement (dated February 2025). Thereafter, the passing bays and pedestrian refuges shall be retained, maintained in a good state of repair, and kept free from obstruction at all times in perpetuity, to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the private road.

 

Reason: To ensure adequate access for vehicles and pedestrians and to maintain highway safety in accordance with Policy T1 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.’

Audio recording – 7 minutes 10 seconds

 

N.B. Cllr Tom Tyson declared an interest in this item due to being the Member Advocate Objector and moved to the Public Gallery.

 

The Senior Planning Officer provided a verbal update on matters relating to Application 24/02214/FP and advised that:

 

·       The Highway Authority had thoroughly reviewed previous applications and have deemed this current application acceptable.

·       The objections from the Parish Council were that the changes in the new application did not address the concerns set out in their previous letter of objection.

 

The Senior Planning Officer then presented the report in respect of Application 24/02214/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Louise Peace 

·       Councillor Clare Billing

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

 

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

 

·       It would be possible to add a condition to prevent development into the roof spaces without further planning permission.

·       The Waste team had been consulted and were content with the access waste vehicles would have to properties.

·       Details on the bin storage facilities to be provided were covered by Condition 16, including the arrangements for the mid-terrace dwelling.

 

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

 

·       The position of the Highways authority was neither to approve or refuse the application, but their lack of position did not mean that there was no impact on residents.

·       Green Lane was private with no public access which meant Highways were not a statutory consultee on this application.

·       Green Lane was previously at capacity for vehicles and this would become a severe issue with further development.

·       Despite this being a different site, access was still a key consideration with this application.

·       Previous applications were rejected and nothing was changed.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Rogers and invited Ms Jill Powell to speak against this application. Ms Powell thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       The applicant was aware of objection letters but had not addressed these.

·       She had lived on Green Lane since 1956, and for the last 10 years had worried about traffic between houses 3, 5 and 7.

·       This development was unsustainable.

·       Increased traffic would create an unusable road.

·       Residents walk into the village and with an increase in traffic, there were concerns about safety.

·       Online shopping had increased, and delivery vehicles travel fast creating an additional hazard.

·       The proposals would create an issue for access for emergency vehicles. Even as amended, the bottle neck created was unworkable for residents.

 

The Chair thanked Ms Powell and invited Mr Mathew lee to speak against this application. Mr Lee thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       This is the third time that a planning application has been proposed on this lane, the last two were refused.

·       As this was not an adopted Highway, the County Council were not required to formally comment on this application, but they had noted that were it adopted an objection would have been submitted.

·       Parking issues in Green Lane had caused a bottle neck for vehicles.

·       Photos of the lane during bin collection had been submitted as part of the consultation process and demonstrated the congestion at these times.

·       Access to Green Lane was unsafe and had been unchanged from previous applications, which would be especially dangerous for children.

·       He believed claims that things have changed were not true, the only change was location from east to west.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Lee and invited Councillor Tom Tyson to speak against this application. Councillor Tyson thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       He called in the item due to supporting the objections of the community.

·       The Neighbourhood Plan stated that development density should match that of the surrounding area of the proposed development, which this did not.

·       The benefits of the development do not outweigh the cost of urbanising effects of 7 houses on the edge of a village which backed onto farmland.

·       The Ashwell Neighbourhood Plan sought to ensure traffic generation did not adversely affect safety and the response to previous refusals show that this development does increase harm.

·       The manoeuvring needed to navigate parked cars and delivery vans was extensive, this created a risk to pedestrians and cyclists.

·       The passing bay increased the road width to 4.7 metres which would make it tight for a waste vehicle and a large car to pass each other.

·       He agreed with the members of the Parish Council and urged the committee to refuse the application.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Tyson and invited Ms Mandy Owen, as agent to the applicant, to speak in support of this application. Ms Owen thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

 

·       The applicant worked with officers at NHDC and HCC for 18 months on the proposal.

·       Due to the lack of 5 year housing land supply, the Council would need to approve the proposal, unless the impacts significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits.

·       The proposal is recommended by the Councils officers.

·       There would be 7 2 to 4-bedroom houses, which would fit within the requirements under the Ashwell Neighbourhood Plan.

·       There would be generous space between dwellings and the proposal was compliant with the parking policy of the adopted Local Plan.

·       The houses would have electric vehicle charging points.

·       Previous applications referred to by objectors were on the opposite side of Green Lane and therefore there was no relevant planning history for this application and site.

·       Improvements and upgrades of the lane, including the widening of the lane, meant there would be safe access for emergency vehicles and there were no concerns raised by the County Council regarding risk to pedestrians.

·       In legal terms there was nothing to stop the right of access being enhanced as land controlled by applicant.

·       The application represented a policy compliant scheme, as assessed by officers and consultees.

 

The following members asked questions:

 

·       Councillor Caroline McDonnell

·       Councillor Martin Prescott

·       Councillor Louise Peace

 

In response to questions, Ms Owen advised that:

 

·       One of the three-bedroom houses had a bedroom on the ground floor and would therefore be accessible for disabled residents.

·       The point regarding history of the site was just clarification that previous applications were at a different site and therefore HCC objections were not relevant to this application.

·       Due to proposed installation of heat pumps, the solar panels were unnecessary.

 

The Chair thanked Ms Owen for her presentation.

 

Councillor Ian Mantle proposed to grant permission, with the removal of Condition 13. This was seconded by Councillor Emma Fernandes.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·       Councillor Martin Prescott

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Louise Peace

·       Councillor Val Bryant

 

The following points were raised as part of the debate:

 

·       The report was detailed but Members needed to be satisfied with the access arrangements and any road widening should happen before any work was commenced.

·       The roof space could be converted, and a condition should be added to remove permitted development of this space to make house larger than needed.

·       Waste storage was still a concern.

·       5-year housing supply argument would be affected by Baldock master plan so would these houses be needed.

 

The Chair confirmed with the proposer and seconder that two additional conditions relating to pre-commencement highways work and the removal of permitted development rights were acceptable. Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 24/02214/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with the removal of Condition 13, the renumbering of the remaining conditions, and the addition of Conditions 20 and 21, as follows:

 

‘Condition 20

 

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as amended no development as set out in Classes  B and C of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order, (or any subsequent Statutory Instrument which revokes, amends and/or replaces those provisions) shall be carried out without first obtaining a specific planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: Given the nature of this development, the Local Planning Authority considers that development which would normally be "permitted development" should be retained within planning control in the interests of the character and amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 and/or Policy D3 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.

 

Condition 21

 

Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, the approved three pedestrian refuges and two vehicle passing bays shall be fully constructed in accordance with the approved details outlined in the Transport Statement (dated February 2025). Thereafter, the passing bays and pedestrian refuges shall be retained, maintained in a good state of repair, and kept free from obstruction at all times in perpetuity, to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the private road.

 

Reason: To ensure adequate access for vehicles and pedestrians and to maintain highway safety in accordance with Policy T1 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.’

 

N.B. Cllr Tom Tyson returned to the chamber at 20:02.