Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

 

Erection of self-build detached dwelling and associated external works to include pedestrian/vehicular access to the highway.

RESOLVED: That 25/00872/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with the amendment to Condition 7, as follows:

 

‘Condition 7

 

All ecological measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the March 2025 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal as already submitted with the planning application, including integrated bird, bat and bee bricks and hedgehog boxes, and agreed with the local planning authority prior to commencement of the approved development, demonstrating that a biodiversity net gain can be achieved from those measures/works.

 

Reason: To ensure development is ecologically sensitive and secures biodiversity enhancements in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.  To comply with Policy NE4 of the Local Plan.’

 

 

 

Audio recording – 5 minutes 21 seconds

 

The Senior Planning Officer advised that there were no updated matters to report on since the publication of the agenda.

 

The Senior Planning Officer then presented the report in respect of application 25/00872/FP accompanied by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·                Councillor Clare Billing

·                Councillor Val Bryant

·                Councillor Louise Peace

·                Councillor Dave Winstanley

 

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

 

·                Trees within the site boundary were not covered by the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) in the nearby area, however, the remaining trees in the south part of the site were proposed to be retained under a tree protection condition if permission was granted.

·                The Highways Authority had raised no objection to the proposed access.

·                Condition 7 within the report recommendations could be amended to include integrated bat, bird and bee bricks and hedgehog boxes as referenced by the Ecologist in their response to the application.

·                Trees located in the north-east corner of the site would also be covered by the proposed tree condition if permission was granted.

 

The Chair invited the Public Objector, Kimpton Parish Councillor Simon Davies to speak against the application. Councillor Davies thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following: 

 

·                The self-build dwelling would be located on a busy and dangerous road.

·                An appeal lodged against a decision to grant permission to a self-build dwelling on the adjoining site at number 51 Beech Way had been allowed and consequently, refused planning permission by the Secretary of State. 

·                Residents had contacted Kimpton Parish Council to express their concerns over the removal of trees on the site prior to development. 

·                The density of this application exceeded the density of the prevailing area in Kimpton Road, The Drive and Lime Avenue. 

·                This proposal appeared to be cramped given the size of the site, with limited amenity space compared to neighbouring properties.

·                Creeping urbanisation resulting from infill development elsewhere in Blackmore End threatened to change the character of the rural community.

·                Access was proposed to lead onto Kimpton Road where there were two adjacent bus stops and two busy road intersections.

·                A mirror at the end of The Drive helped with access onto Kimpton Road but this provided limited visibility.

·                Traffic analysis carried out by former Hertfordshire County Councillor Richard Thake in 2022 concluded that Kimpton Road suffered from excessive speeding. 

·                Kimpton Road suffered from frequent standing water problems due to ground water flooding.

·                The proposed access situated between two junctions onto a busy and poorly maintained stretch of road had the potential to interfere with local infrastructure and presented a danger to bus and vehicle users, as well as pedestrians due to the absence of a footpath.

·                They felt that this application and the application at 51 Beech Way had been treated unequally as the site sizes were similar before the removal of mature trees had taken place.

·                There was intention from the occupiers of 51 Beech Way to resubmit an application for a smaller self-build dwelling on the adjoining site.  

·                If both applications were approved, there would be considerable cramping which would be out of character with the local environment.

·                The Applicant for this site protested the application at 51 Beech Way. 

·                Since the mature trees had been removed from the site, owl activity in the area had reduced.

·                Trees had a positive influence on the character of the area and their removal had undeniably impacted this. 

·                The trees that were felled were associated with the former Blackmore Manor.

·                Their removal prior to submission may have been an attempt to prevent any tree protection requirements from being imposed on them.

·                This proposed development failed to provide enhancements or be in keeping with an area that contained high quality buildings with amenable and sustainable spaces and did not reflect local policies.

 

In response to a point of clarification made by Councillor Daniel Allen, Parish Councillor Davies advised that they were unsure of the criteria used by former Councillor Richard Thake in their traffic analysis in 2022 which determined that traffic was busy during rush hour with an excessive number of vehicles speeding. 

 

The Chair thanked Parish Councillor Davies for their presentation and invited the Member Advocate Objector, Councillor Steven Patmore to speak against the application. Councillor Patmore thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·                The development would be more cramped than neighbouring properties, lacked adequate amenable space and was unsympathetic to the prevailing character and setting of properties along Kimpton Road and The Drive.

·                Despite the above, the development was well designed. 

·                Residents were concerned about vehicle access from the property as it was near two bus stops and an intersection with limited visibility, which would be hazardous to residents and bus users.

·                Given the reasons described, the Committee should be advised to refuse the application.

 

In response to a point of clarification from Councillor Daniel Allen, Councillor Patmore advised that his definition of cramped would differ to the definition given by others and that he had already given his reasons for speaking against the application.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Patmore for his presentation and invited the Agent to the Applicant, Mr Luke Kenton-Woods to speak in support of the application. Mr Kenton-Woods thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·                They were both the Applicant Agent and the Architect for this application.

·                Pre-application discussions with the Council confirmed that the application was likely to be approved subject to adjustments. 

·                Following advice received from the Council, enlargement of the site boundary took place as requested and all other comments on design, character, ecology, highways, living conditions, landscaping and more had been addressed.

·                The proposed dwelling had been thoughtfully designed to complement its surroundings.

·                The ridge height was lower than that of the existing dwelling on the site and the overall massing was modest. 

·                Inspired by the existing dwelling at 1 The Drive, the design featured brick detailing and projecting box bays and the rear elevation would adopt a contemporary style with large sliding doors which would give it the appearance of a historical property sympathetically extended over time.

·                Sustainability had been central to the design with the inclusion of solar panels, air source heat pumps, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, enhanced insulation and solar controlled glazing which would enable the application to exceed standards for low carbon living.

·                Support for the application had been given by several third-party professionals, including ecologists, arboriculturists, highways consultants and energy assessors who had ensured a policy compliant scheme.

·                No objections had been raised by many of the statutory consultees, including Ecology, Highways, Environmental Health and Waste and Recycling.

·                Both national and local planning policy requirements were satisfied by the application, and a full set of planning conditions had already been agreed with the Senior Planning Officer.

·                They were aware that Kimpton Parish Council had raised concerns regarding Highways. In response to those concerns, a Transport Statement had been submitted to demonstrate full compliance with local and national guidance.

·                Visibility splays from the new entrance were policy compliant and would improve the visibility from the existing junction due to the proposed fence line adjustment.

·                No concerns of over-development were raised during the pre-application discussions and the principle of development had been confirmed as acceptable.

·                The proposed dwelling sat comfortably within the site and would have a rear garden of over 750 square metres which was well above the national required minimum.

·                The proposed dwelling would respect the character of the area and would include high quality architecture from the vernacular buildings, although many were medium to large detached with no uniformity of design regardless.

·                The trees removed on-site were legally felled by a qualified professional and not subject to a TPO or conservation area.

·                An ecologist verified that no nesting birds or protected species were present in the trees when they were felled.

·                New trees had already been planted by the Applicant despite no planning obligation to do this.

·                The plans were deemed by the Area Development Highways Manager to be compliant with Highways policies. 

·                No issues had been raised on light, privacy or the overlooking of neighbouring properties.

·                All relevant planning requirements had been met, and the application had been recommended for approval by the Senior Planning Officer.

·                All statutory consultees either supported or raised no objection to the application.

·                There were no material planning reasons to refuse the application and they urged the Committee to follow the officer recommendation and grant permission.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·                Councillor Jon Clayden

·                Councillor Val Bryant

·                Councillor Daniel Allen

·                Councillor Ian Mantle

 

In response to points of clarification, the Agent to the Applicant advised that:

 

·                They could not confirm the discrepancies between reports on bird species found in the area, however, the arboriculturist was a qualified ecologist, and they confirmed that no birds were nesting in the trees that were felled.

·                Tree felling took place in February or March.

·                There would be sufficient parking and turning space available on the driveway.

·                Access to the property was considered in an alternative place but was deemed to be impaired as it would be serviced by a mirror and they did not want to intensify an already bad access point.

·                Their proposal improved the visibility from The Drive onto Kimpton Road by adjusting the fence line.

·                There would be no gate to restrict manoeuvrability of cars onto the site and the parking spaces would be larger than the minimum 2.5 metre width requirement.

·                If the application was amended to include integrated bat, bird and bee bricks and hedgehog boxes within the conditions, this would be accepted by the Applicant.

·                Self-binding gravel around the property would make manoeuvrability for mobility scooters easy.

·                There was no specific storage for mobility scooters within the design, but the property would have a good-sized utility room, snug and cloak room that could accommodate a scooter or pram.

·                External cycle storage was also included within the application.

·                An EV charging point was not shown on the plan, but they could provision this if a condition was secured. 

 

In response to verbal presentations, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

 

·                The Highways Authority had not objected to the proposal and that carried significant weight in their recommendation to grant permission.

·                The application only comprised one dwelling, therefore, the volume of traffic entering and leaving the site would be very small.

·                The site at 51 Beech Way was half the size of this one and constrained by the TPO covering half its site, whereas this application would have more space between the property and site boundaries, making it comfortable within the site.

·                The dwelling would compare favourably to surrounding houses on smaller plots in terms of density, especially to properties further north in Blackmore End. 

·                The dwelling footprint would be small and would fit the character of the area.

 

In response to verbal presentations, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that:

 

·                EV charging points were a requirement of Building Regulations, therefore, it was not necessary to require this through condition.

·                An EV charging point would be free-standing next to the parking spaces or the Applicant would purchase long cables to link to a charging point situated on the dwelling itself. Both options should be easy to install.

 

In response to additional questions from Councillor Martin Prescott, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that:

 

·                Including solar panels and battery storage was not yet a planning requirement or Building Regulations requirement.

·                Building Regulations required applications to meet a certain level of carbon emissions, and the Council adopted Sustainability SPD set out an accreditation for those who exceeded levels of sustainability. 

·                The main method of achieving a more sustainable dwelling was through insulation.

·                Solar panels were encouraged but not a requirement.

 

The Chair proposed to grant permission with the amendment to condition 7 on integrated bird, bat and bee bricks and hedgehog boxes and this was seconded by Councillor Martin Prescott.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·                Councillor Martin Prescott

·                Councillor Dave Winstanley

·                Councillor Louise Peace

 

The following points were made as part of the debate:

 

·                The application met all the relevant criteria to be granted permission.

·                There was a creeping increase in density in the area, but this was a normal modern-day issue and was not a reason to refuse planning permission. 

·                Cramped density compared to nearby dwellings was the biggest concern raised on the application, but dwellings further north on Kimpton Road were in close proximity to each other, therefore this argument was not valid.

·                The application should be supported with the amendment to Condition 7 to include the wording used by the Ecologist in their comments on the application.

 

In response to points raised in the Debate, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that Condition 7 could be amended to allow the provision of integrated bird, bat and bee bricks with hedgehog boxes.

 

The Agent to the Applicant advised that the amended wording proposed for Condition 7 would be acceptable.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Caroline McDonnell, the Development and Conservation Manager confirmed that a self-build application meant that the Applicant would live in the dwelling once it was built.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Val Bryant, the Agent to the Applicant confirmed that the occupiers of 1 The Drive were building this property with the intention of moving into it once constructed.

 

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

 

RESOLVED: That 25/00872/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with an amendment to Condition 7, as follows:

 

Condition 7

 

All ecological measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the March 2025 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal as already submitted with the planning application, including integrated bird, bat and bee bricks and hedgehog boxes, and agreed with the local planning authority prior to commencement of the approved development, demonstrating that a biodiversity net gain can be achieved from those measures/works.

 

Reason: To ensure development is ecologically sensitive and secures biodiversity enhancements in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.  To comply with Policy NE4 of the Local Plan.