Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Rob Broom.  Councillor Conor McGrath was in attendance as substitute.

There were no declarations of interest.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Rob Broom.  Councillor Conor McGrath was in attendance as substitute.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meetings held on 29 November and 7 December 2023

It was RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Planning and Development Committees held on 29 November 2023 and 7 December 2023 be approved as correct records and signed by the Chair.

At this juncture, the Assistant Director Planning and Regulation, updated the Committee on a number of issues including small land sales, the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and recent enforcement action taken at the Novotel Hotel.

It was RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Planning and Development Committees held on 29 November 2023 and 7 December 2023 be approved as correct records and signed by the Chair.

At this juncture, the Assistant Director Planning and Regulation gave the following updates to the Committee:

·         Small Land Sales – the first quarterly update on small land sales had been sent out to Members by the Council’s Estates Team in December;

·         National Planning Policy Framework – the update to the NPPF had been published just before Christmas.  One of the additional requirements of the NPPF was the Housing Delivery Test which related to the number of houses that had been delivered within a three year period.  The Council had delivered 57% of its target over the last three years and because of that there would have to be a presumption of development and meant that this would hold a greater weight than would have previously done;

·         Novotel – the Committee was advised that enforcement action was now underway at the Hotel.

It was RESOLVED that the updates be noted.

To consider the erection of 3 no. 3 bedroom dwellinghouses with associated parking, landscaping, access and ancillary works.

It was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as per the recommendations set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for the erection of 3 no. 3 bedroom dwellinghouses with associated parking, landscaping, access and ancillary works.

The application was before the Committee for determination as the applicant and landowner was Stevenage Borough Council and there had been more than 5 objections to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer gave an introduction to the Committee.  She advised that the application for the dwellings and associated parking was on Council land which had been designated as an informal area of public open space.  The existing communal parking bay would be retained in-situ and remain unchanged.

The Chair introduced Mr Justin Mills, Contour Planning, who would be speaking on behalf of residents who had objected to the application, to the Committee to address the meeting.  He advised that the application site offered a contribution to the street scene and wildlife and was an area for local people to use and children to play.  The application would have a detrimental impact on the environment and neighbouring properties and would be contrary to policy HO5 in the Council’s Local Plan.  The application also failed to comply with the separation distance standards between dwellings at ground floor levels. 

The Chair then invited Councillor Margaret Notley, Woodfield Ward Councillor to address the meeting.  Councillor Notley concurred with the comments made by Mr Mills and advised that the style of housing was out of keeping with the existing properties.  She also expressed concern regarding the loss of the green space in the area.

The Chair thanked both of the speakers for their contributions.

The Senior Planning Officer advised the Committee that the main issues for consideration in the determination of the application were the acceptability of the proposal in land use policy terms, both as a windfall housing site and loss of amenity space; design and impact on the character and visual amenity of the area, amenity of future occupiers and neighbouring properties and highways access and parking provision.

Members were advised that the issues considered were consistent with the most recent revision of the NPPF.  The Council was required to apply the tilted balance in favour of sustainable development by reason of its housing delivery position.

Officers advised that the proposed development would result in the delivery of 3no. three bedroom dwellings, making a small, but significant contribution towards meeting the Borough’s housing needs and the scheme would provide a good standard of accommodation which carried significant weight in favour of the proposal.

In the Officer’s opinion, the proposal was acceptable  in terms of the impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, the collection of waste and recycling, appearance and the proposed car parking and cycle parking.

In relation to the loss of public open space, the Committee was advised that the loss of the area of informal open space was justified having regard to the quality and accessibility of the open space and whether alternate spaces would remain available for community use.  The benefits of providing additional housing were considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

To consider outline planning permission (all matters reserved) for the erection of 2no. three to four bed dwellings.

It was RESOLVED that outline planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as per the recommendations set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for outline planning permission (all matters reserved) for the erection of 2no.three or four bed dwellings.

The application was before the Committee for determination as the applicant and landowner was Stevenage Borough Council and there had been more than 5 objections to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer gave an introduction to the Committee.  She advised that the main issues for consideration was its acceptability in land use policy terms.  Only the principle of the development was to be considered at this stage, matters pertaining to access arrangements, parking provision, layout, appearance and landscaping were to be reserved for future consideration as part of a reserved matters application.

An addendum report had been circulated to the Committee which included information relating to a new site survey plan received from Affinity Water which showed a different location of the water pipe.  It was noted that there was ongoing dialogue between the applicant and Affinity Water to discuss their concerns regarding easement width and to form an exact location of the pipe.

The Chair then invited Mr Keith Price, an objector to address the Committee.  Mr Price’s concerns related to the following objections:

·         Objection from Affinity Water that the proposed build would be within the easement (no build) area of a critically important 24 inch water main;

·         Concerns that private ownership of the land without the ability to build would lead to the land becoming derelict;

·         Loss of mature trees and the resulting impact on climate and loss of wildlife habitats;

·         Loss of amenity land and the resulting adverse changes to the appearance of the estate;

·         Increase in parking congestion and resulting potential for harm to people.

The Chair then invited local Councillor Tom Wren to address the Committee.  Cllr Wren also expressed concern regarding the impact on the environment and the loss of the 13 mature trees which demonstrated why the site was unsuitable for development and that there were many alternative sites across the Town more appropriate for this type of development.  Cllr Wren referred to the Council’s climate emergency pledge and that the replacement trees would be small and not able to compensate to what was being lost.  Cllr Wren also expressed concern regarding the water pipe and that there was no accurate mapping of the site.

The Chair thanked both speakers for their contributions to the meeting.

The Senior Planning Officer advised that the site was considered to be a small, underused urban site and the proposed development would support the Council’s aim of delivering homes.  The Committee was also reminded of the presumption in favour of delivering sustainable development. 

The loss of open space with the various trees had been assessed by the Council’s Arboricultural and Conservation Manager who had raised no concerns or objections so long as a financial contribution was secured for the replacement of any tree lost, which was not to be replanted on the site, at a ratio of 3:1 to be planted along the verge of Six  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider the change of use from dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to residential institution for the care of up to 4 children (Use Class C2).

It was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as per the recommendations set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for the change of use from dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to residential institution for the care of up to 4 children (Use Class C2).

The application was before the Committee for determination as it had been called in by local ward Councillor Phil Bibby on the grounds of impact on neighbouring properties and impact on residential amenities.

The Senior Planning Officer gave an introduction to the Committee.  She advised that the main issues for consideration in the assessment of the application were the acceptability in land use policy terms, impact on the character and the appearance of the St Nicholas/Rectory Lane Conservation Area, impact on residential amenity and car parking provision.

The Chair then invited Mr Singh, the applicant to address the Committee.  The Committee was informed by Mr Singh that there was a huge shortage of childrens homes for those children not in the foster care system.  Mr Singh outlined the regulation and management process of the proposed care home and advised that the proposed care home would be fully regulated by OFSTED and would be subject to both planned and unannounced inspections. Mr Singh advised that following a meeting held with the Police, additional measures including the office being alarmed and a new security gate would be installed as well as all fire regulations being complied with.

The Chair then invited Councillor Phil Bibby to address the meeting.

Councillor Bibby advised that although he was aware of the need for such care homes, his concerns related to:

·         a previous care home in Rectory Lane that had caused significant issues before it was shut down;

·         the loss of a large, aspirational, family home;

·         the need to keep Rectory Lane as a leafy, aspirational road in the Town;

·         the safety and security of local residents as a result of the change of use.

The Chair thanked Mr Singh and Councillor Bibby for their contributions to the meeting.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the committee that there would be no external alterations to the building and that therefore the proposed development would not impact on the level of privacy and outlook currently enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

In terms of noise and disturbance, the Council’s Environmental Health Officer had raised no concerns in this regard.  Further, 4 children under the age of 18 living in the property would be in line with that expected of a 4 bedroom family dwelling.  The previous care home referred to had not been registered with OFSTED and there were no mechanisms in place to provide enforcement to regulate or manage this previous facility.

The Committee noted that the applicant would work with Herts police to ensure the property was satisfactorily designed and secured to Police standards.

Members agreed that there was a need for care homes such as this.  In response to a question the applicant confirmed that the age range of the children was between 8 and 18.  It was not guaranteed that the children would be from Stevenage but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider the installation of external wall insulation and associated external finish, installation of solar PV array system; replacement roof tiles; replacement of external windows and doors, alteration to external ventilation (Nos. 2- 24 And 26 - 48 Buckthorn Ave

It was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as per the recommendations set out in the report.

The Committee considered an application for the installation of external wall insulation and associated external finish, installation of solar PV array system; replacement roof tiles; replacement of external windows and doors, alteration to external ventilation.

The application was before the Committee for determination as the applicant and was Stevenage Borough Council.

The Senior Planning Officer gave an introduction to the Committee.  She advised that the only issue in the assessment of the application was the impact of the character and appearance of the area.  There were no changes to the number of units within the building and no enlargements of the buildings or number and locations of fenestrations, no change to the parking provision nor any changes to existing impacts on neighbouring properties.

In response to a question, Officers advised that the residents of the properties would benefit from the installation of the solar panels through reduced utility bills.  The Assistant Director Planning and Regulation advised that he would make enquiries as to the financial impact the works would have on any leaseholders in the properties and inform Members accordingly.

It was RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1       The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

          7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4103; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4104; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4101; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4102; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4503; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4504; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4505; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4506; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4507; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4403; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4404; 7059-CTS-00-000-L-A-4405;

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

 3      The external materials used in the development to which this permission relates shall be those detailed on the approved plans and in the accompanying planning submission documents unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

INFORMATIVE

 1         Public Information on Planning Applications

            Warning: all information provided on your planning application is now publicly available. Individuals and organisations offering their services may contact you. The Council does not endorse or approve any builders, surveyors, trades persons or other supplier, and advises householders to obtain quotes/references, and check the legitimacy of any contractor who contacts them before making payment.

 2         Community Infrastructure Levy

            Stevenage Borough Council adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule at Full Council on 27 January 2020 and started implementing CIL on 01 April 2020.

            This application may be liable for CIL payments and you are advised to contact the CIL Team for clarification with regard to this. If your development is CIL liable, even if you are granted an exemption from the levy, please be advised that it is a requirement under Regulation 67 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) that CIL Form 6 (Commencement Notice) must be completed, returned and acknowledged by Stevenage Borough Council before building works start. Failure to do so will mean you risk losing the right to payment by instalments and a surcharge will be imposed. NB, please note that a Commencement Notice is not required for residential extensions if relief has been granted.

            Stevenage's adopted CIL Charging Schedule and further details of CIL can  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

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

Noted.

It was RESOLVED that the report be noted.

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

Noted.

It was RESOLVED that the report be noted.

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

None.

None.

To consider the following motions that:

1.    Under Section 100(A) 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.

None.

None.