Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the meetings held on 28 May and 4 July were confirmed by the Members present and were then signed by the Chairman.

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Maddern.

Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor Oguchi.

Councillor Oguchi arrived at 7:29pm.

To receive any declarations of interest

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a personal interest in a matter who attends

a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered -

(i)            must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest

becomes apparent and, if the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest, or a personal
interest which is also prejudicial

(ii)           may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter (and must withdraw

to the public seating area) unless they have been granted a dispensation.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Members’ Register of Interests, or is not the subject of a pending notification, must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal and prejudicial interests are defined in Part 2 of the Code of Conduct For Members

[If a member is in any doubt as to whether they have an interest which should be declared they

should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer before the start of the meeting]

It is requested that Members declare their interest at the beginning of the relevant agenda item and it will be noted by the Committee Clerk for inclusion in the minutes.

Councillor Guest asked Members to remember to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary or other Interests at the beginning of the relevant planning application.

An opportunity for members of the public to make statements or ask questions in accordance with the rules as to public participation.

You need to inform the council in advance if you wish to speak by contacting Member Support on Tel: 01442 228209 or by email: Member.support@dacorum.gov.uk

The Development Management Committee will finish at 10.30pm and any unheard applications will be deferred to the next meeting.

There are limits on how much of each meeting can be taken up with people having their say and how long each person can speak for.  The permitted times are specified in the table above and are allocated for each of the following on a 'first come, first served basis':

·         Town/Parish Council and Neighbourhood Associations;

·         Objectors to an application;

·         Supporters of the application.

Every person must, when invited to do so, address their statement or question to the Chairman of the Committee.

Every person must after making a statement or asking a question take their seat to listen to the reply or if they wish join the public for the rest of the meeting or leave the meeting.

The questioner may not ask the same or a similar question within a six month period except for the following circumstances:

(a)       deferred planning applications which have foregone a significant or material change since originally being considered

(b)       resubmitted planning applications which have foregone a significant or material change

(c)       any issues which are resubmitted to Committee in view of further facts or information to be considered.

At a meeting of the Development Management Committee, a person, or their representative, may speak on a particular planning application, provided that it is on the agenda to be considered at the meeting.

Please note: If an application is recommended for approval, only objectors can invoke public speaking and then supporters will have the right to reply. Applicants can only invoke speaking rights where the application recommended for refusal.

Councillor Guest reminded Members and the public about the rules regarding public participation as follows:

For each application the officer presents the report to the Committee, then the participants from the public are called to speak. Following this, questions are taken from the Committee along with statements and comments for debate.

Councillor Guest said that the application had been deferred.

Philip Stanley said that this was because they were awaiting points of technical clarification which they did not currently have.

Councillor Oguchi arrived at 7:29pm and, therefore, did not participate or vote on Item 5b.

The Case Officer, Robert Freeman, introduced the report to Members and said that the application had been referred to committee in view of the objections of Berkhamsted Town Council.

Berkhamsted Town Councillor Anthony Armytage spoke in objection of the application.

Alun Evans spoke in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Uttley and seconded by Councillor Beauchamp to GRANT the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 2                           Against: 4                    Abstained: 3

Councillor Guest noted that the motion fell and asked for a motion to REFUSE.

It was proposed by Councillor Riddick and seconded by Councillor Symington to REFUSE the application on the grounds that the application site forms part of the wider housing allocation of LA4 within the Core Strategy which, together with other matters, requires the delivery of 40% affordable housing. The proposed development does not make any provision for the delivery of affordable housing either upon the site or as part of the comprehensive development of the Site Allocation. As such the proposed development would be contrary to Policies CS19 and LA4 of the Dacorum Borough Core Strategy (September 2013), the Site Allocations Development Plan Document and the Local Allocation LA4 Masterplan SPD (July 2017).

The proposed access and parking arrangements/provision for the site would be inadequate to provide for safe and inclusive access to the site, taking into account the distance of the site to public transport connections and the town centre. Furthermore, the location of the access onto Shootersway is not considered to be practical or safe, especially when taken together with the cumulative arrangement of site accesses and recent development in the locality, and as such would result in significant harm to matters of highways safety. As such the proposals would be contrary to Policies CS8 (f) and (h), CS9 and CS12 (a) and (b) of the Dacorum Borough Core Strategy (September 2013), Saved Policy 51 and Appendix 5 of the Dacorum Borough Local Plan (1991-2011) and the Local Allocation LA4 Masterplan SPD (July 2017).

The proposed development, in view of its scale, bulk, density and design, in particular its three-storey height and coverage across the site, is considered to result in the over development of the site. The resulting building would be harmful to the character and appearance of the site and would dominate and be out of character with the area in which it would be situated. As such the proposals would be contrary to Policies CS10, CS11 and CS12 (f) and (g) of the Dacorum Borough Core Strategy (September 2013), and the Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Area Based Policies’ (May 2004) for Residential Character Area BCA 12: Shootersway.

Vote:

For: 4                           Against: 1                    Abstained: 4

Resolved: That planning permission be REFUSED.

Item 5e and Item 5f were heard next as they had members of the public speaking on the applications.

The meeting adjourned at 9:00pm.

The meeting reconvened  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242.

The Case Officer, Simon Dunn Lwin, introduced the report to Members and said that the application had been referred to committee as it is a Large Scale Major Development which is linked to proposed planning obligation under S.106.

It was proposed by Councillor Wyatt-Lowe and seconded by Councillor Oguchi to GRANT the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 9                           Against: 0                    Abstained: 1 

Resolved: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

Sally Robbins introduced the report to Members on behalf of the Case Officer and said that the application had been referred to committee as it had been called in by Councillor Sutton on the grounds of visual amenity, insufficient parking and danger to highway safety.

It was proposed by Councillor Durrant and seconded by Councillor Beauchamp to DELEGATE the application WITH A VIEW TO APPROVAL in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 8                           Against: 1                    Abstained: 1 

Resolved: That planning permission be DELEGATED WITH A VIEW TO APPROVAL subject to the completion of a Unilateral Undertaking and subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

The Case Officer, Will Collier, introduced the report to Members and said that the application had been referred to committee as the recommendation is contrary to parish objection.

Marta Thomas spoke in objection of the application.

Nash Mills Parish Councillor Alan Briggs spoke in objection of the application.

David Conway spoke in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Wyatt-Lowe and seconded by Councillor Woolner to GRANT the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 9                           Against: 0                    Abstained: 1 

Resolved: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

The Case Officer, Sally Robbins, introduced the report to Members and said that the application had been referred to committee as it was a Dacorum Borough Council scheme and was contrary to the view of the Parish Council.

Panagiotis Velentzas spoke in objection of the application.

Mr. Mark Longworth spoke in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Durrant and seconded by Councillor Wyatt-Lowe to DELEGATE the application WITH A VIEW TO APPROVAL in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 5                           Against: 3                    Abstained: 2 

Resolved: That planning permission beDELEGATED with a VIEW to APPROVAL subject to the completion of a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

Philip Stanley introduced the report to Members on behalf of the Case Officer and said that the application had been referred to committee due to the contrary views of Berkhamsted Town Council.

It was proposed by Councillor Riddick and seconded by Councillor Woolner to GRANT the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote:

For: 9                           Against: 0                    Abstained: 1 

Resolved: That planning permission be GRANTED.

That the following appeals were noted:

A.   LODGED

B.   WITHDRAWN

C.   FORTHCOMING INQUIRIES

D.   FORTHCOMING INQUIRIES

E.    DISMISSED

F.    ALLOWED

Olivia Stapleford went through the Quarterly Enforcement Report and noted a number of items.

Councillor Riddick queried a number of items which Olivia Stapleford and Philip Stanley answered.