Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Rob Broom.

There were no declarations of interest.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Rob Broom.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee held on 4 April 2023.

It was RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 4 April 2023 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

At this juncture the Chair paid tribute to former Councillor John Gardener who had recently passed away.

It was RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 4 April 2023 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

At this juncture the Chair paid tribute to former Councillor John Gardener who had recently passed away.

The Assistant Director (Planning & Regulatory) to give a verbal update on the timings for North of Stevenage RM Country Park.

The Assistant Director (Planning & Regulatory) updated the Committee on the timings for North of Stevenage RM Country Park.

The Assistant Director (Planning & Regulatory) gave a verbal update on the timings for the North of Stevenage RM Country Park. He advised there was a provisional date in place on 11^th July 2023 and there was work underway on all the Reserved Matters which could be combined. The Council had been in talks with the developers and there was communication with a variety of stakeholder groups and schools.

In response to a question from a Member, the Assistant Director advised that the main interested groups had already been consulted and there was a lot of public consultation that had already been completed. They had asked the consultation to be broadened with more stakeholders and they had met with 4-5 stakeholders and conducted a different consultation. They had also gone back to the developer and asked if the reasons for the deferral could be clarified.

New procedure on dealing with late representations.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee approved the new procedure on dealing with late representations as set out in the report.

The Development Manager presented a new procedure on dealing with late representations. He explained a number of Members had approached him with concerns that there was not sufficient time to assess and review the number of late representations that they were receiving. The aim was to introduce a cut-off point 2 working days before the Committee. This helped to avoid issues such as the repetition of comments and reduced the number of late representations. Between the cut off and the Committee date, late representations would only be accepted under special circumstances, such as facts that hadn’t been considered by Officers, concerns raised against the report, or other issues that the Committee had to be notified of.

A Member agreed this was a good policy to have and suggested there should be a practice so it can be amended where necessary. Another Member added that the beginning stage was crucial, and we needed to ensure representations had been sent out and contacted the people who wanted to have a point of view. The Development Manager advised that representations were sent in the post, if they had been informed of interested parties, they would keep people as informed as possible and ensured the agenda was posted. He added that if someone had missed the opportunity to comment but wanted to, the system was flexible and would factor in certain circumstances as it was important that everyone’s voice was heard.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee approved the new procedure on dealing with late representations as set out in the report.

Demolition of the existing building and construction of a new food store, petrol filling station, commercial unit, together with associated car parking, servicing and landscaping.

It was RESOLVED: That, subject to the applicant first entering into a Section 106 agreement, the application 22/00245/FPM be GRANTED planning permission subject to no intervention from the Secretary of State the conditions and reasons set out in the report.

The Committee considered a report in respect of application 22/00245/FPM seeking the demolition of the existing building and the construction of a new food store, petrol filling station, commercial unit, together with associated car parking, servicing, and landscaping.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation which included the photos of the site plan, the surrounding area and CGI imaging of the proposed development. The application was located within the Pin Green industrial estate which was the second largest employment area in Stevenage. It was a low-density area with small/medium sized industrial buildings and some offices. The land was square and surrounded by industrial units and a residential area to the south.

The current plot contains a 2-storey office building and a warehouse which were deteriorated, outdated, and were insufficient and unsuitable to the previous business who had relocated elsewhere leaving the site vacant. The application proposes the demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of:

·         A Morrisons food store with an in-store café, Home Delivery and Click and Collect.

·         A small Garden Centre,

·         A six-pump petrol filling station and kiosk,

·         A Commercial Unit,

·         A car park with 243 spaces, including 14 disabled, 14 parent and child, and 4 electric charging spaces

·         Vehicular access to the car park via Wedgewood Way

·         A dedicated service road within the application side allowing access to the delivery yard

The food store was cladded in light grey to reduce the mass impact and dark grey cladding to show a clear entrance. This was consistent with other retail buildings. The petrol station would be in the Morrisons dark green.

The application included offsite highway improvements in line with a Section 278 agreement with Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) Highway Authority, which comprised of:

·         A 3m shared footway/cycleway leading from the vehicular access down to Martins Way to meet the existing cycle path

·         A tactile crossing point to site access junctions, which would link with the existing pedestrian link to the residential area at Wedgewood Road/Cartwright Road

·         Improvements to the existing bus stop on Cartwright road which incorporated raised accessibility kerbs and a shelter

The Chair invited Ed Kemsley of Peacock and Smith, a supporter, to address the Committee.

Mr Kemsley stated he had correspondence with Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) and Stevenage Borough Council (SBC) to ensure this application was acceptable. It was in his opinion that the application would not harm the economic prosperity of Stevenage as it had clear and significant economic benefits. This included the provision of 190 jobs and an estimated increase in local spend of £475,000 per year, as well as 240 construction jobs. He informed Members this new store supported an area of Stevenage that only had a small convenience store, creating more sustainable shopping patterns and was supported by local residents. He highlighted the concerns raised by Tesco which had been considered by retail consultants, two senior barristers and SBC Officers. He also highlighted Cycling UK who had objections prior to discussions with HCC Highways Authority and the provision of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Variation of condition number 2 (approved plans) attached to planning permission reference number 19/00474/FPM to provide additional lifts, stair cores and amend balconies to provide metal balustrading.

It was RESOLVED: That the application 23/00239/FPM be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report.

The Committee considered a report in respect of application 22/00239/FPM seeking the variation of condition number 2 (approved plans) attached to planning permission reference number 19/00474/FPM to provide additional lifts, stair cores and amend balconies to provide metal balustrading.

The Development Manager gave a verbal presentation and noted that the application, also known as the Icon Site, was located close to the roundabout junction of Lytton Way and Fairlands Way. This was a redevelopment of the site and the construction of 7 apartment blocks with a communal garden area and external parking area.

The Development Manager informed the Committee there were new fire safety regulations under the building regulations which required two cores. This meant that there needed to be two sets of stairs and lifts, and therefore the developer had to expand some of the building to accommodate for this. There were also changes to the balconies which went from glass balustrading to metal in order to meet the new regulations.

The Development Manager reminded Members that the initial application 19/00474/FPM was appealed and granted in 2022 therefore if Members did refuse the applicant can still buildout the approval as it was registered under the previous fire regulations.

The Chair invited Colin Campbell of Hill Residential Ltd, a supporter, to address the Committee.

Mr Campbell informed Members that this application arose from the desire to meet the most up to date fire safety standards. The previous application anticipated some fire safety changes and met these, however there were more changes that were unforeseen at the time. The developer wanted this to be a responsible development that was future proofed and gave authorities and residents comfort in knowing it was safe. In buildings over 30m tall there was a requirement to incorporate two lift and stair cores and they had worked hard to minimise the impact. Four of the 7 blocks needed a slight adjustment which was a 1.3% increase on site and the layout had changes slightly to ensure symmetry but included minor changes. In addition to this, the 2023 regulation identified glazing on balconies as a combustible material so it was changed to metal.

The Chair thanked Mr Campbell for his contribution to the meeting.

A few Members raised concerns regarding the increase in building size. It was advised that the cores take up a lot of space and by adding in an additional core it would compromise the size of the flats. To ensure the flats still met the national space standards they had to increase the blocks to do that. There were no additional units, no change to the housing mix, no change to the bedroom numbers, and no change to the building height. The footprint isn’t changing, only the central area was increasing to facilitate the additional core. This would not impact any amenity space and the basement car parks had to be amended to meet the cores.

Another Member asked whether there was one entry to the site. It was advised that there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Conversion of existing parking 7 no. layby bays into 15 no. end on parking bays with additional footpaths and associated works.

It was RESOLVED: That the application 22/00006/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report.

The Committee considered a report in respect of application 22/00006/FP seeking to convert 7 parking layby bays into 15 end on parking bays with additional footpaths and associated works.

The Development Manager gave a presentation and informed Members the additional parking spaces were to compensate for a loss of pay and display spaces lost on North Road. There was also the addition of improved pedestrian connection points and a new pedestrian crossing. There was no impact on trees and no objections from residents.

A Member asked how many spaces were being lost. It was advised that they were losing 8 spaces and gaining 8 spaces. HCC informed SBC they were not allowed to make any net additional parking. In response to an additional question regarding this, the Assistant Director (Planning & Regulation) advised additional spaces weren’t allowed in order to support sustainable transportation.

It was RESOLVED: That the application 22/00006/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the following conditions and reasons set out in the report:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: R/163/1; R/163/2.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

3. No construction work relating to this permission shall be carried out on any Sunday, Public or Bank Holiday nor at any other time except between the hours of 0730 and 1800 on Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of 0800 and 1330 on Saturdays. These hours relate to noise which is audible at the site boundary.

4. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the proposed parking spaces and public footway have been constructed as identified on drawing R/163/1; R/163/2 and the carriageway has been reinstated to the current specification of Hertfordshire County Council and to the Local Planning Authority’s satisfaction.

5. The new parking area shall be constructed in a hard surfacing material as identified on drawing number R/163/1; R/163/2 in accordance with Policy 5 of Hertfordshire’s Local Transport Plan 4 (adopted 2018).

Change of public amenity land to residential and single-storey rear and side extension.

It was RESOLVED: That the application 23/00147/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report.

The Committee considered a report in respect of application 23/00147/FP seeking the change of public amenity land to residential and single-store rear and side extension.

The Planning Officer introduced the item and informed Members this application had been called in by Chells Ward Councillor, Councillor Booth. The application detailed an end terraced dwelling on a long rectangular shaped plot on the corner of a T junction. There was an SBC owned area of grass next to the property which approximately half was included in the change of use of amenity land to residential land. This would be enclosed with wooden fencing, similar to that already enclosing the property, to increase the garden size and to accommodate the extension. The extension still maintained pedestrian access.

The Chair invited Councillor Stephen Booth to address the Committee.

Cllr Booth explained the amenity land in the area contained little grass area. The resident of the property had already created a driveway on the front garden. He stated there had been no consultation with Ward Members and that planning should protect and enhance the environment with the wider community in mind.

The Chair thanked Cllr Booth for his contribution to the meeting.

The Planning Officer informed Members the main consideration was the acceptability of the change of use from amenity land to residential garden. The land was protected by policy NH6 of the Local Plan which stated development of unallocated open space was permitted when the loss was justified, and alternative spaces were available for community use. Planning Officers accepted the grass space could be used as an informal play space for children however it was a small area and was close to the road and therefore not the safest area for children to play. There were larger areas that were found and there were other smaller spaces similar in the residential area so there was deemed to be a sufficient amount of grass space.

The Planning Officer described the wooden fencing that would be used which was similar to the existing fence and other areas and would not have a detrimental effect on the street scene. The extension, which replaced an existing conservatory, was proportionate to the house, respected the character and appearance of the area and would use materials which matched the dwelling. There would be no impact on the daylight into the property, no additional bedrooms or parking spaces needed, and there would be no impact on the visibility of the junction.

A Member asked a question regarding a photo of the site showing a car parked on the amenity land, another questioned the dropped kerb. The Planning Officer advised that the owner of the car was unknown to Officers and this would be removed as the owner had no legal right to park there as it was Council owned land. The dropped kerb was used previously as an access into the back garden but was no longer in use.

A few Members asked questions regarding land sales. In response the Development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Proposed 3 bedroom detached dwelling and alterations to existing parking area.

It was RESOLVED: That the application 22/00674/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report

The Committee considered a report in respect of application 22/00674/FP seeking a proposed 3 bedroom detached dwelling and alterations to existing parking area.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the item which had been called in by a Local Councillor. Site photos were displayed showing the plot and the garages which were owned by 40 and 41 Conifer Walk. There were 3 informal visitor spaces at the front of the plot, however the hardstand belonged to the site, not the garages.

The Chair invited Mr Craig Goode of 39 Conifer Walk, an objector, to address the Committee.

Mr Goode informed Members that residents struggled for parking and the roads were congested, this would only increase with the reduction of visitor parking and a new house. There had been two incidences of emergency vehicles not being able to access Conifer Close and refuse vehicles block the roads on collection days. He stated 42% of parking occupancy ignores the road type, which was two way, and therefore they cannot double park. It was in his view that the dwelling would change the overall characteristics, they would lose Conifer trees and it was against the Local Plan. Additionally, the building was in close proximity to others, it sat over key services and the construction would cause problems with the existing house foundations. Moreover, there was an application for a similar development in the area and that these applications should be heard together.

The Chair thanked Mr Goode for his contribution to the meeting.

The Senior Planning Officer advised that the Highways Authority initially objected due to pedestrian access, however, this was removed as it was historically this way. The Council’s Arboricultural and Conservation Manager originally objected to the proposal but after looking at the orientation of the proposed development, deemed the woodland would not be impacted. A tree on adjoining land had a TPO and required work to be done but this was covered under a condition.

The Senior Planning Officer stated the main issues were the acceptability as this was a windfall site due to being undesignated in the Local Plan and it was not previously developed brown land. It had been deemed a suitable location, however the housing delivery test stated there was a 5-year land supply, so the development was not fundamental to meet land supply. Additionally, there was an issue with a lack of appropriate housing mix as Stevenage had a high proportion of 3-bed houses, so this application was not compliant with policy HO9, however it could be deemed partially compliant as it was detached rather than terraced.

The land was not public open space, but privately owned public accessible land. The parking spaces aren’t resident or visitor parking but private land. The land was small and had two dwellings either side but was overgrown and was subject to fly tipping. There was an alternative area of open space close by. The proposed dwelling would use similar materials as the residential area it was located in but was in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To note a report on decisions taken by the Assistant Director Planning and Regulatory in accordance with his delegated authority.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee note the information report.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee note the information report.

To note a report on decisions taken by the Assistant Director Planning and Regulatory in accordance with his delegated authority.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee note the information report.

It was RESOLVED: That the Committee note the information report.

To consider any Part I Business accepted by the Chair as urgent.

Draft letter to the Secretary of State regarding 5G masts

The Assistant Director (Planning & Regulation) informed the Committee that past Members of the Committee instructed him to draft a letter to the Secretary of State in relation to the 5G masts and the potential restrictive nature on their decision making. This letter would be reshared with new Members and could be published through the Communications team.

Draft letter to the Secretary of State regarding 5G masts

The Assistant Director (Planning & Regulation) informed the Committee that past Members of the Committee instructed him to draft a letter to the Secretary of State in relation to the 5G masts and the potential restrictive nature on their decision making. This letter would be reshared with new Members and could be published through the Communications team.

In response to questions from Members the Assistant Director (Planning & Regulatory) advised that there had not been a response. He also advised that when the towers are no longer in use the Council had the powers to get them to remove it. The Development Manager also advised that often the mast gets removed and it was turned into a light column.

To consider the following motions:

1.     That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in Paragraphs 1 - 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended by Local Government (Access to information) (Variation) Order 2006.

2.     That Members consider the reasons for the following reports (if any)being in Part II and determine whether or not maintaining the exemption from disclosure of the information contained therein outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

Not required.

Not required.

To consider any Part II Business accepted by the Chair as urgent.

There was none.

There was none.