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 S. Mcnamara for Councillor J. Cragg

Councillor S. Kasumu for Councillor N. Pace

Councillor J. Quinton for Councillor J.P Skoczylas 

Councillor C. Stanbury for Councillor R. Trigg

Apologies of absence were received from Councillors J. Cragg, N. Pace, J.P. Skoczylas and R. Trigg.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2022 (previously circulated).

The minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2022 were approved as a correct record.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) on changing the use of the ground floor from a learning workshop (Class F1) to Office (Class E). The application site measures approximately 886sqm, with the ground floor of the building measuring approximately 189sqm in floor area. Planning permission was granted in August 2001 under application ref: N6/2001/0662/FP for the change of use of the ground floor of the building to a learning workshop, to provide education, training and associated services. It is understood that the first and second floor levels had remained in office use.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because the application was called-in by Councillor Fiona Thomson in December 2021.

A written statement from the agent was read out; stating that the existing building currently benefited from an unrestricted ‘E Class’ to the first and second floor, the ground floor currently benefited from an ‘Educational Use Class’. The application sought consent for the change of use of the ground floor only to an ‘E use class’ to match the upper floors. The submitted application proposed no external alterations to the building in any form. The agent was aware of the previous property owners and their historic applications for a ‘Weatherspoon’s’ drinking establishment.’ The new freeholder of the property did not have any intention to allow any forms of drinking establishment or food retailing use within the building and had agreed to a planning condition restricting these sub classes within the Class E use of the ground floor. The client did not object to the restrictions recommended by condition 1 and did not intend to use 22 Parkway for retail purposes or as a pub or restaurant.

Malcolm Day, Objector, stated he was representing the Welwyn Garden City Society. There had been a high level of interest in the application as the use of the premises had been, and remained a worrying issue for the residents of Welwyn Garden City. The planning officer had picked up the major concerns from the Society and its members and has incorporated them in the conclusion. It would appear that these concerns could be fixed by modifying Class E. Class E was introduced in 2020 to loosen up the development of town centres heavily hit by covid and e-commerce by removing the responsibility of many changes of use from the planning departments. The concern is that Class E is too new and unproven on risks on such an important building. It should be asked if sections can be removed from Class E and does the building revert back to a full Class E upon sale. The objector also queried what implications the change in class will have on properties 8 to 20 Parkway. Surely the objective is to come up with a plan to place all the houses in that stretch of Parkway in a class that ensures that in the future the residents will not have to fight to prevent the frontage of these beautiful buildings being spoilt. Ensure there is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) on the erection of eight dwelling houses, following the demolition of the existing garages. The proposal included eight detached dwellings, with one four-bedroom dwelling, five three-bedroom dwellings and two two-bedroom dwellings. Each of the dwellings would benefit from two off-street parking spaces and a rear garden. A further two on-street visitor spaces would be provided to the front of plots numbered 1 and 2. The scale of the new dwellings would be of two storeys with gabled roofs, measuring an approximate height of 7 metres. The dwellings would be constructed of a mix of red facing brick and buff facing brick for the walls and dark grey concrete roof tiles. Access to the site would be provided by a single-entry point from Hollyfield to the north of the site. This would be a raised shared surface assess with priority given to pedestrians. The existing tree belt running around the east and south of the site would remain, with additional landscaping proposed within the new housing site

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because the application was an allocated site, and the Borough Council had an interest in the land/property which is the subject of the application.

Thomas Beard, the agent, stated that the application is for eight high-quality homes in South Hatfield. These are much needed family homes which are all detached and benefit from two on-plot car parking spaces plus additional visitor spaces. The site was submitted as part of the draft local plan 2016 with fourteen dwellings and then reduced to twelve dwellings to comply with certain ecological constraints. It was found that the site-specific constraints such as trees and access to the site made delivering the scheme unrealistic. This was only discovered through reviewing constraints through a series of options in detail and determined that eight units was the optimal number whilst still delivering high quality scheme in line with planning requirements. This also allowed the developer to deliver much needed family homes rather than flats, readdressing the shortage of newly built family homes in the area.

In terms of impact on development in the amenity of existing neighbours, this has been taken into consideration as part of the design. The existing dwellings east and south of the development would not suffer significant impact to amenity due to the dense tree belt that is to be retained. Whilst the proposal does include citing of residential units to the west and border of the site, it was agreed that sufficient separation will remain and the scheme has been designed for no overlooking, namely the removal of any windows on the flank elevation on the rear of Cherry Tree Way. Concerns were raised through consultation on the demolition of the existing garages with the potential risk of asbestos: any asbestos related areas will be appropriately dealt with by a contractor that would adhere to the health and safety legislations. Biodiverse proposal and would enhance the site for future residents and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) on the change of use from a C3 private residential dwelling to a C2 residential children’s home. The property would become a long-term home, providing 24-hour care, for up to four vulnerable children (ages 9-18) that have been taken into care permanently. The children would come to the home for several reasons, including a family breakdown or court ordered residential placement or removal. The children would not be placed here due to faults in their own behaviour, but those of their environment. The staff would comprise six full time staff and 4 part time staff. Circa two staff would be present at any one time. None of the staff would preside at the property, but one staff member would stay over-night, each night.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because Hatfield Town Council had submitted an Objection and it had been called-in by Councillor Bell.

Mr & Mrs Islam, objectors stated that they were residents of 1 Mulberry Mead and objected to the application for many reasons. Firstly, the change in the current class C3 use to a Class C2 use. Class C2 includes residential care homes, hospitals, nursing homes, boarding schools, residential colleges and training centres. The description of the development includes the Children’s care home if granted but the permitted change of use can change to any other uses within Class C2. If the scheme gets approved with a condition restricting it only to a children’s care home it will make it difficult for the Council in the future not to accept a change of use to any other use within C2 given they are grouped together in the same Class as they operate similarly and have the same impact on the community. The children will come from troubled and problematic backgrounds with no fault of their own and would be better suited in a setting where they have access to immediate support and services they require and can be adequately supervised. The property is situated on a busy corner. The street parking is very limited with narrow roads. This house has a garage which has now been proposed for bicycle storage which will lose a car space as a result leaving just one space in front of the house. The objectors stated that they will have difficulty coming in and out of their driveway. They felt that the change of dwelling will certainly cause severe anxiety to many residents, and confirmed that they had felt safe and secure in their home ever since they moved to this area when it was first built. They felt this house will cause a negative impact on their’s and their family’s quality of life and others too.

It was noted that all three of the ward councillors for Hatfield Villages were sitting on the committee and could not be seen to predetermine the decision and must assess subjectively the proposal that was in front of them in the context that was presented by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) which sought full permission for the erection of a detached two storey dwelling including a vehicular cross-over. The application plot measured approximately 0.290 hectares in area and was currently laid to lawn, shrubs and a few trees. The surrounding area was residential in character including bungalows to the south and a row of terraced two storey dwellings north of the site.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because it had been called-in by Councillor Paul Zukowskyj due to the number of objections received from neighbours.

Sarah Biggs, Objector, stated that she lived at 3 Booths Close and was speaking on behalf of neighbours in Booths Close and Skimpans Close who objected to the proposal. The proposal did not fully include the area opposite Booths Close and there would be significant impact on the two adjoining properties also in Skimpans Close and the four housing opposite in Booths Close. She felt that the planning is inaccurate as the planning application stated that no trees will be removed which was untrue and felt that the proposal was a significant overdevelopment of a small garden area and plot with a number of dwellings in close proximity. It will have significant impact on the properties opposite through loss of sunlight in the winter and loss of daylight throughout the year. Previously numbers 2, 3, 4 Booths Close enjoyed a view of trees which have already been cut down and the trees did not block out light as the house will. The proposed property will look directly into the bedrooms of numbers 2, 3 and 4 Booths Close significantly reducing privacy and will be very close to the front window of number 3 Booths Close. There will be a significant impact on parking in a very small road and the plan has parking for two cars in Booths Close but this will displace cars that already use that space to park in that area and cars parked right up to the junction which will cause congestion in the area. It is a relatively quiet close and the building work will be very disruptive. The proposed noise restrictions will not be beneficial as the objector is a night worker and will be very noisy and disruptive.

Members asked about the bedrooms as one of the bedrooms is quite small and does not meet the nationally described space standards. Officers stated that was correct and stated that although bedroom 3 has a floor area less than the recommended size of a one bedspace by 1.7m2, it has a width of 2.4m which exceeds the recommended width set out in the NDSS.

Members asked what weight should be given as one of the rooms does not comply with the nationally describe space standards. Officers stated that limited weight should be given due to the fact that it exceeds the recommended width set out in the nationally described space standards. Balance has been struck between room size and width.

Members  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) which sought outline permission (with all matters reserved except for access) for up to 125 dwellings, a care facility for up to 60 bedrooms and a scout hut. Vehicular and pedestrian access to/from the development would be provided via an extension to Bradmore Way at the southern boundary of the site. Of the 125 dwellings, 36% would be affordable housing (45 units) and 8% (10 units) would be self-build.

Members were informed by the case officer that they will be aware that an updated response which was received from Natural England a day before Committee removing their objection to the application following the submission of additional information from the applicant.  It was stated that this overcomes recommended reason for refusal 5 which relates to potential effects of the development on a nearby Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

Member also informed by the case officer that additional information in response to reason for refusal 4 was provided by the applicant this week in response to issues raised by both Hertfordshire Ecology and the Herts & Middlesex Wildlife Trust and that Hertfordshire Ecology responded at around 5pm on the day of Committee.  Members notified that their response addresses part of this reason for refusal and it is recommended that the first sentence of this reason for refusal as well as the word ‘furthermore’ which follows is omitted.

Members updated by the case officer with regard to Hertfordshire County Council Contributions set out in paragraph 11.117 of the Committee Report.  In terms of primary education, another option at the County Council’s discretion is a payment of £1,117,889 toward new primary school provision up to 2 forms of entry inclusive of land costs.  Also, the childcare service contributions is no longer requested by County Council as it would not meet the planning obligation tests.  All financial obligations would be subject to indexation.

Late representations also raised and considered by the case officer.

The site is eight hectares and lies within the Green Belt and Potters Bar Landscape Character Area.  The southern boundary of the site is bordered by properties on Peplins Way and Bradmore Way and access is proposed to be taken from Bradmore Way.  A line of trees run along the eastern boundary and on the other side is Brookmans Park Golf Club.  Peplins Wood wraps around the western boundary of the site and a majority of the northern boundary and a section of the north-east boundary is open affording longer range views of the countryside.  The railway line run close to the site on its western side.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because: it had been called-in by Councillor Rebecca Lass; North Mymms Parish Council submitted a Major Objection; and the Assistant Director for Planning considered it prudent for this application to be determined at Development Management Committee.

Alan Perkins, Applicant, stated that full council met on 26 July 2022 to consider the local plan. At that meeting, it was specifically decided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) detailing recent appeal decisions for the period 6 June to 15 July 2022.

RESOLVED:

Appeal decisions during the period 6 June to 15 July 2022 were noted.

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) providing the Committee with a summary of planning applications that may be presented to DMC in future.

RESOLVED:

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

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).  

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) on the performance of the Development Management Service over the six-month period January to June 2022 (Quarter 1 and 2).

Members thanked the planning team for all their hard work on the Council’s planning applications.

RESOLVED:

That Members noted the content of the report.