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 90 residential units for over 55’s with associated communal areas, amenity space, car parking and alterations to existing access following demolition of existing buildings.

The application site was located in South Hatfield on the east side of Bishops Rise, in close proximity to High View Neighbour Centre which lay approximately 200m to the south of the site.  Hatfield Town Centre was approximately 1.5km to the north. 

The site had an area of approximately 0.7 hectares and was currently occupied by 30 self-contained flats and 11 bungalows set around a central courtyard.  Vehicle access was gained from the north via Minster Close, which ran along the rear boundary of the site, leading to a communal car park and limited allocated parking which served the existing bungalows.  The existing flats were provided within a two storey ‘L’ shaped building fronting Bishops Rise.  The site was currently owned and run by the council, and provided retirement housing for the over 65’s, as well as one warden’s flat.  The level of care provided was comprised of district nurses and resident carers.

Immediately adjoining the site to the north was a triangle of woodland which was within the Council’s ownership.  To the east of the site were the rear gardens of residential properties along Heron Way; to the south were the rear gardens of residential properties along Lark Rise and Bishops Rise.  Opposite the site to the west along Bishops Rise was the University of Hatfield College Lane Campus.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because the application was a major development and the Borough Council was the applicant and had an interest in the land which was the subject of the application. 

Hatfield Town Council had raised an objection to the proposed development for the reasons set out below:

“The Committee objected to this this planning application due to parking issues and questioned sustainability? Will there be solar panels and electric vehicle charging points? Also they wished to request the building work did not run along the South Hatfield development”.

There was a late representation circulated from a neighbour at 52 Herons Way. The resident had queried the provision of a footpath serving the rear access of Herons Way, potential overlooking and planting measures.

Officers said that to address the issues, a footpath had been included in the scheme and would run along the back of the rear gardens of Herons Way. Trees were to be retained along the east boundary and planting was proposed and would be secured by a landscaping condition. In terms of privacy, the proposed development would be located 25 metres from the rear garden boundary of these properties and approximately 43 metre from these properties rear wall. While there was the potential for overlooking, it was considered an acceptable distance and the planting would assist with the screening of the development.

There was also a late representation concerning the financial contribution requested by the NHS towards the relocation of Northdown Branch Surgery in to High View regeneration area. Paragraph 13.1 of the Officers report which referred to the list of planning obligations to be secured by Section 106 (S106) agreement had been amended with the sum of £50,970 and this sum had been agreed by the Housing Team.

In addition it had been agreed by the Landscaping Team and Hertfordshire Ecology that the Landscape and Ecology Plan is to be removed from the S106 agreement and will be secured by planning condition in line with condition 9 on page 70 of the Officers report.

Mr S.Stokes spoke for the application saying as part of the Older Persons Housing Strategy, the Council embarked on an engagement process with residents over 50 and the outcome indicated that sheltered housing provision was poor and did not meet the needs of the older generation.

Minster Close was highlighted as a suitable site for demolition after an asset management review.

The Council had been working with its design team so that the design reflected essential elements specifically ensuring space, flexibility, daylight, balconies and outdoor space, adaptability, energy efficiency and sustainable design.

The apartments were being funded by the Councils Affordable Housing Programme.

Proposals sought to minimise energy consumption and maximise opportunities for renewable energy and low carbon sources of energy supply.

Councillor M.Eames-Petersen, Hatfield Town Council, spoke against the application saying that there were only 40 car parking spaces for 90 flats. Disabled parking and charging points for only two electric vehicles were of particular concern. Hatfield Town Council would have liked to have seen a more sustainable building with solar panels. They did however, welcome affordable housing for older people.

Following discussion, it was proposed and seconded by Councillors S.Elam and B.Fitzsimon and

RESOLVED:

(12 in favour, I abstention)

That planning permission be APPROVED subject to the conditions as set out in report including a S106, however Officers recommended amendments to the S106 to include;

•           NHS contributions  - £50,970.062

•           Removal of the landscape ecology and management plan