Agenda item

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

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the erection of a new crematorium and machinery store to include new car parking provision and landscaping following demolition of existing chapel, machinery store, lodge house and central colonnade.

Planning permission was granted on 3 May 2017 (ref: 6/2016/2623/MAJ) for the erection of a new chapel, machinery store and crematory, to include new car parking provision and enhanced landscaping following demolition of existing chapel, machinery store, lodge house and central colonnade.  The lawfulness of this permission was challenged by judicial review and subsequently quashed by The High Court, ruling that the local authority did not properly consider capacity at a nearby facility.  Sir Wyn Williams, who sat as a High Court judge, said the spare capacity at Crematoria Management’s site near Broxbourne should have been considered and that failing to do so was a material error, and one where he was unable to say the decision would have been the same had it not occurred.  In giving judgment, Sir Wyn Williams dismissed a challenge on whether an Environmental Impact Assessment had been needed but upheld one about Welwyn Hatfield’s ability to demonstrate that there was a need for the development given the cemetery’s Green Belt location.

The site was located to the south of Hatfield and comprised an area of land measuring approximately 4.24 hectares in area (10.4 acres).  The site lay within the Green Belt and on the edge of open countryside.  To the south and east of the site there were fields.  A park and ride facility was located to the west and there was residential development to the north.  Lawn Cemetery was opened in 1984 and provided services for burials and memorialisation.  Both burial and cremation plots were available at the cemetery.  The site also had a mausoleum for above ground internment.  Over half of the cemetery site had been utilised for burials to date, with capacity for more burials in the future. 

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because it had been advertised as a departure from the development plan and because Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council was the applicant.

Hatfield Town Council – submitted with the following comment:

“Members welcome this application. They wish to see checks on air quality.”

North Mymms Parish Council – submitted the following comment:

“North Mymms Parish Council support the improvement of the proposed facilities to meet local needs and comment that it must comply with Green Belt policies.”

The Legal Advisor, Trowers & Hamlins LLP, addressed the Committee saying that the previous application on the site was granted planning permission in 2017 and a legal challenge was issued against it and had been successful. The Court had found the Council’s decision legally unsound. The challenge was based on two grounds. The first consideration was whether an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening was required. On that ground, the High Court found that Planning Officers had not acted unlawfully as the site was not in an urban area so did not trigger an EIA Screening under those regulations.

The current application was considered under separate, more updated regulations. The way Officers had had considered it was distinguishable from the previous application as dealt with from paragraph 11, point 107 onward in the Officers report. Officers had taken a wider consideration of the environment and determined that it did fall within the regulations and an EIA Screening had been conducted. The EIA Screening had found that the development was not likely to have a significant environmental impact.

The second ground considered by the High Court in 2017 related to the Green Belt and very special circumstances. Given the Green Belt location, the Council had demonstrated that there was a need for a crematorium which justified the very special circumstances. The capacity of the crematorium was therefore a factor to be taken into account, however, the capacity of the nearby Broxbourne crematorium had not been factored in. This meant that the Planning Committee was wrongly advised on existing crematoria facilities in the wider area and that those were inadequate. The Committee was therefore misled on a material consideration and the planning permission was quashed.

In the current application an updated Needs Assessment had been submitted based on qualitative and quantitative grounds whilst the issue of capacity in surrounding areas was an important consideration which was now addressed in the Needs Assessment. Members should give careful consideration to all the issues that go into consideration of need. This had been discussed in detail in the Officers report.

Members should also note that objections had been received which had questioned the accuracy of information in the Needs Assessment and methodologies used. Officers had considered those objections and given their views but Members would need to consider those objections in terms of what weight should be given to the Needs Assessment. Those factors were important when considering whether very special circumstances had been demonstrated when they considered the application.

Mr J.Smith, Agent, spoke for the application saying that the Council had applied for permission for a Crematorium as it felt that there is was pressing qualitative and quantitative need and too many residents had to travel too far to access a crematorium. Alternative facilities were under too much pressure. The proposal had been carefully designed to minimise the impact on the Green Belt. Even so, very special circumstances had to be demonstrated to justify development in the Green Belt. The Council relied on qualitative and quantitative need to justify the development. There were two main elements to need, firstly geographical and secondly quality of experience. It was generally accepted that residents should have access to a crematorium within a thirty minute drive time. There was an area in Central Hertfordshire where there was more than a thirty minute drive time. More than 70,000 both in Welwyn Hatfield and surrounding areas were more than a thirty minute drive time to a Crematorium. Therefore it was felt that this demonstrated very special circumstances for development in the Green Belt. Those crematoria in the Western area were showing capacity constraints, long wait times and congestion. Ensuring that these needs were met with a new crematorium contributed to the very special circumstances. There were no alternative sites and none in the Green Belt where it would be less harmful.

Councillor M.Eames-Petersen, Hatfield Town Council, spoke against the application saying that they do welcome the crematorium but were speaking on behalf of the Clergy. Atheist and humanist funerals were dependent on the Chapel of Rest. There were many Churches in the local area that also depended on the Chapel of Rest. The Clergy had asked if the wording could be changed. At the moment it said that the Crematorium would be built following the demolition of the Chapel of Rest. For continuity during the building period, could the Chapel of Rest continue to be used until the crematorium was built?

Officers responded saying that it was not necessary to have the existing building demolished prior to the commencement of development. The suggested condition 15 requires demolition prior to the first use of the crematorium but it was an operational decision as to whether it would be safe to build without the demolition of the Chapel of Rest.

(Note: Councillor M.Larkins declared an interest and did not take part in the discussion or vote for this item – minute 98 refers)

Following discussion, it was proposed and seconded by Councillors P.Shah and A.Chesterman and

RESOLVED:

(unanimous)

That planning permission be APPROVED subject to the conditions as set out in report. This includes referral to the Secretary of State before issuing the decision.