Agenda and minutes

To note any substitution of Committee Members made in accordance with Council Procedure Rules.

The following substitution of Committee Members had been made in accordance with Council Procedure Rules:

Councillor L.Musk for Councillor P.Shah

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor P.Shah.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2020 (previously circulated).

The Minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2020 were approved as a correct record and noted by the Chair.

To note declarations of Members’ disclosable pecuniary interests, non-disclosable pecuniary interests and non-pecuniary interests in respect of items on the Agenda.

Councillor J.Ranshaw declared an interest in item 155 by virtue of being a close neighbour to the proposed development.   It was noted that Councillor J.Ranshaw would recuse themselves from the meeting for this Item.

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the planning permission sought for a hybrid application for the demolition of the existing hostel and development of a four storey 100 bed YMCA and up to 43 residential dwellings. The site was located in Welwyn Garden City on Peartree Lane, approximately 0.7 miles east of Welwyn Garden City Town Centre and was surrounded by a range of buildings varying in uses (residential, commercial and light industrial).

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because the application was a major application and the Council has an interest in the land which is the subject of the application.

Officers confirmed that the application sought a hybrid application with detailed matters for consideration for the YMCA building and outline planning permission with all matters, other than access, reserved for future determination for the residential development. The application was advertised by means of a press notice, neighbour notification letters and site notices. A Peartree Residents Statement of objection was received signed by 17 members of the public during the initial public consultation and 2 neighbour objections were received. In total 19 representations had been received.

Following discussion the recommendations of the report were proposed by Councillors L.Musk and seconded by P.Hebden.

RESOLVED

(Unanimous of the Members present – 12 in total)

That planning permission be APPROVED subject to the conditions as set out in the report

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the planning permission sought to vary condition 13 (approved drawings) of planning permission 6/2020/0456/FULL.

The application site was located at the corner of Westland Drive and Oaklands

Avenue adjacent to the village centre which would be located to the north of the site and is comprised of a range of services, facilities and public transport. The number of flats would remain unchanged and no additional bedrooms are proposed. The amendment comprises a 1.2m extension to the front of the approved building, which would result in larger living rooms for 5 out of the 9 flats previously approved.

This application was presented to the Committee because a major objection had been received from North Mymms Parish Council, as detailed in the report.

The Committee received a written statement from the applicant (Mr Fletcher) and their agent (Ms Tinero) in favour of the planning application.  In it the applicant and their agent emphasised their position that this was a minor variation to a pre-existing granted planning permission, and the variation was in response to feedback from local agents on the needs of the area.  The statement confirmed that all other conditions placed on the developed would continue to apply, including to the variation.

The Committee also received representation from North Mymms Parish Council (Cllr Jacqui Boulton) and a written statement from a local resident (Ms Forrester) both in opposition to the planning application. The opposition statements proposed that the development would appear out of character of the area, especially alongside single story bungalows; that the variation was not minor given the overall mass and bulk of the proposal would be excessive for the site (and as such should be treated as a major variation); that the extended protrusion of the development would have an impact on both the street scene and on the visibility for road users at the junction Oaklands Avenue and Westland Drive; and the variation would further reduce outdoor amenity at this site.

Members noted that there would be no increase in the height of the building under the variation and that the parking provisions were in line with the Council’s parking policy. Whilst Members would consider the impact of the whole development, the fact that the permission granted to the original application was extant, would be a material planning consideration that Members would take into account when considering the additional proposal in this application.  

Following discussion the recommendations of the report were proposed by Councillor P.Hebden and seconded by Councillor J.Broach.

RESOLVED:

(10 FOR, 3 AGAINST, 0 ABSTENTIONS)

That planning permission be APPROVED subject to the conditions as set out in the report

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) detailing recent appeal decisions for the period 10 November 2020 to 23 February 2021. Members noted that 26 appeals had been considered by the Planning Inspector. Officers confirmed that the number of appeals reflected a sharp increase in applications.  Eight of the appeals had been allowed, whilst 18 appeals had been dismissed. The eight appeals allowed involved small scale, household planning decisions which were often subjective. There was therefore no imperative to review how the Council interprets planning policy.  It was noted that the Government set targets for councils to have no more than 10% of all planning application decisions should be overturned at appeal stage in any given two-year rolling period. Members welcomed the fact that Welwyn Hatfield statistics for non-major applications for the period March 2019 – March 2020 showed only 1.8% of decisions being overturned at the appeal stage.

RESOLVED:

That appeal decisions during the period 10 November 2020 to 23 February 2021 be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) providing the Committee with a summary of planning applications that might be presented over the next one or two months. Members noted that if the call-in or application was withdrawn, the item would not be presented to the Committee.

RESOLVED:

That future planning applications which might be considered by the Committee be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) relating to the performance of the Development Management Service over the three month period October to December 2020.

The following points were raised and noted:

-        Member noted that the Council had received 902 applications in quarter 4 (October to December 2020), and 921 applications in quarter 3. There was a significant increase in planning applications when compared to first half of 2020 and with previous years

-        Despite this increase, the performance of the team had improved and remained above required local and national levels

-        Enforcement continues to be busy with 45 new cases received and 5 notices issued

-        Whilst there has been an increase in applications, these have generally been at the householder level and not requiring review by this Committee. In fact there has been a reduction in major applications during the same period

RESOLVED:

That the Development Management Performance Report, October to December 2020, be noted.

Members noted that the Head of Planning was due to depart their post and took the opportunity to thank them for their contribution to the work of the Council and the support they have provided to this Committee and to Members over a number of years.

The Committee is asked to resolve:

That under Section 100(A)(2) and (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be now excluded from the meeting for Items 12 and 13 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of confidential or exempt information as defined in Section 100(A)(3) and Paragraphs 2 (Information likely to reveal the identity of an individual), and 6 (Statutory notice or order)  of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended).

In resolving to exclude the public in respect of the exempt information, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

RESOLVED:

That under Section 100(A)(2) and (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be now excluded from the meeting for item 13  (Minute 162 refers) on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of confidential or exempt information as defined in Section 100(A)(3) and Paragraphs 2 (Information likely to reveal the identity of an individual), and 6 (Statutory notice or order) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). In resolving to exclude the public in respect of the exempt information, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Exempt report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

The exempt report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and

Governance) provided an update on ongoing planning enforcement cases.

RESOLVED:

That the update on planning enforcement be noted