Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting (these are circulated separately)

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2017 were confirmed by the Members present and were then signed by the Chairman.

An addendum to the agenda was circulated before the meeting.  A copy of the addendum can be found on the DBC website on the following link:

https://democracy.dacorum.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=159&MId=510 

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies were received from Councillors Imarni, Maddern and Ritchie. 

Councillor P Hearn substituted on behalf of Councillor Maddern.

Councillor Mills substituted on behalf of Councillor Ritchie.

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 complete the pink interest sheet which will be made available at the meeting and then hand this to the Committee Clerk at the meeting

Councillor D Collins 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 228221 or by email: Member.support@dacorum.gov.uk

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 Control 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.

Councillor D Collins reminded the members and the public about the rules regarding public participation

I Keen introduced the report. It has been referred to committee as it is a large scale major and involves a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Tim Price spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Guest asked why the shop units had increased from 6 to 9.

Tim Price said this was driven by demand. It was the same floor space, just more units.

In his role as the ward councillor, Councillor W Wyatt-Lowe spoke in support.

It was proposed by Councillor Matthews and seconded by Councillor Clark to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved

That in accordance with paragraph 5.(1) of the Town and Country planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 the application be REFERRED to the Secretary of State (DCLG).

In the event that the Secretary of State does not call in the application that the application is DELEGATED to the Group Manager of Development and Planning 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 the list of conditions below:

This item has been withdrawn from the agenda.

The application was withdrawn from the agenda prior to the meeting.

N Gibbs introduced the report and said it had been referred to committee due to the contrary views of Tring Town Council. N Gibbs updated members in relation to archaeology on the site.

Members were concerned over the access to the site. It was on a dangerous road where a fatality had happened previous.

N Gough from Herts Highways said they were aware of concerns on road safety and in the last five years there have been no reported collisions  on this section of road so as far as Herts Highways are concerned, there is no evidence of significant problems.

Nigel Rose spoke in support of the application.

Councillor C Wyatt-Lowe said this was a 60mph road and would cars have time to see cars exiting that junction.

Councillor D Collins asked N Gough if the speed limit could be changed.

N Gough said it wasn’t as simple as that and a technical assessment would need to be undertaken as well as changes to the physical features on the road to change the environment.

It was proposed by Councillor Whitman but the officer’s recommendation failed due to the lack of a seconder.

Councillor C Wyatt-Lowe said it was clear that members were not happy and proposed that the application be deferred for further discussion with planning officers, developer and Herts Highways regarding the access road. It was seconded by Councillor Guest.

Vote

For: 10             Against: 0                    Abstained: 2

Resolved

That the application be DEFERRED for further discussions regarding the access road.

J Seed introduced the item and said it had been referred to the committee as it had been called in by ward Councillor Douris. J Seed said an extra condition would be added if members were minded to grant for the full demolition of existing building.

Abel Bunu spoke in support of the application.

Julia Riddle spoke in objection to the application on behalf of the residents.

It was proposed by Councillor Guest and seconded by Councillor Whitman to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 10             Against: 0                    Abstained: 2

Resolved

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

J Seed introduced the report and said it had been brought to committee to the contrary views of Berkhamsted Town Council. There is a slight mistake in condition 7. The year should say 2015 not 1995.

Edward Hunt spoke in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Birnie and seconded by Councillor Clark to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 10             Against: 1                    Abstained: 1

Resolved

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

T Rennie introduced the report and said it had been referred to committee due to the contrary views of Northchurch Parish Council.

Brian Shepherd spoke in objection to the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Guest and seconded by Councillor Fisher to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 3               Against: 6                    Abstained: 3

Having there been no majority to grant this application in line with the officer’s recommendation, it was proposed by Councillor C Wyatt-Lowe and seconded by Councillor Whitman that the officer’s recommendation be overturned and the application be refused.

Vote

For: 8               Against: 0                    Abstained: 4

Resolved:

That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

The proposed development provides insufficient parking arrangements which would place undue parking stress on the area and be contrary to adopted Core Strategy Policy CS8 and CS12.

M Heron introduced the item and said it had been referred to committee as Dacorum Borough Council has an interest in the land at the application site. M Heron advised the committee that the applicant had submitted amended plans so therefore it is not recommended that condition 3 and 7 are imposed. Information submitted in terms of materials (identified e-mail dated 2^nd February 2017) and contamination (identified in Site Investigation Report) will be incorporated into condition 2.

Mark Longworth spoke in support of the application.

Judith Emerson spoke in objection to the application.

Members queried the contaminated land and officers said that a community engagement plan could be conditioned.

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

Vote

For: 11             Against: 0                    Abstained: 1

Resolved:

That the application be DELEGATED to the Group Manger, Development Management and Planning with a view to approval subject to the completion of a legal agreement requiring the provision of affordable housing and subject to the following conditions:

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

Reason:  To comply with the requirements of Section 91 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 (1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.    The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the following approved plans/documents: ADC1551/001 Rev. A & 16 WDG SP3 Rev. G & 16 WDG SP01 & 16 WDG SP4 Rev. G & 16 WDG CE01 & 16 WDG SL01 & 16 WDG P2 Rev. E & materials details within document entitled ‘Architect’s Design and Access Statement’ & Section 14 'Contamination Recommendations' within submitted document entitled 'Report on a Site Investigation at Garages and Parking Area Gaddesden Row' dated 28th October 2016 & confirmation of materials within e-mail received and dated 02nd February 2017.     

Reason:For the avoidance of doubt, in the interests of proper planning, in the interests of the character of the area and to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policies CS11, CS12 and CS32 of the adopted Core Strategy 2013.

3.    All planting, seeding or turfing and soil preparation shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following first occupation of the building; and any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written approval to any variation. All landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the guidance contained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 145.

M Heron introduced the report and said it had been referred to committee as Dacorum Borough Council own the site.

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

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved:

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

M Heron introduced the report and said it had been referred to committee as it was a council owned building.

It was proposed by Councillor Mills and seconded by Councillor Whitman to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved:

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

M Heron introduced the item and said it had been referred to committee as Dacorum Borough Council has an interest in land at the application site.

It was proposed by Councillor Birnie and seconded by Councillor Whitman to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved:

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

M Heron introduced the item and said it had been referred to committee as Dacorum Borough Council has an interest in land at the application site.

It was proposed by Councillor Birnie and seconded by Councillor Matthews to grant the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved:

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

M Heron introduced the item and said it had been referred to committee as Dacorum Borough Council has an interest in land at the application site.

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

Vote

For: 12             Against: 0                    Abstained: 0

Resolved:

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

The following appeals were noted:

1. Lodged
2. Withdrawn
3. Forthcoming inquiries
4. Dismissed

S Whelan introduced the report to members.

Councillor C Wyatt-Lowe said the call-in wording was confusing. It makes members think that they are losing a power. It should be rewritten in a more positive way.

S Whelan said this point was to tackle a grey area in the Constitution and will work with the legal department to reword it. Applications are given a 28 day call-in period and if amended plans are submitted, there is a further 14 days consultation. This point is to deal with calling in the amended plans not the original application.

Councillor Matthews asked S Whelan to clarify the call-in process when the recommendation is for refusal.

S Whelan said this was to clarify that requests to call-in an application should be made in writing, not via the phone in the interests of fairness.

Councillor Guest said the ideas in this report are good. Closing the meeting at 10pm ensures a high quality of decision making and meetings every four weeks would be better as some meetings have been cancelled due to a lack of business. Councillor Guest said she was concerned that a sub-committee could decide applications that had no objection but called in by Town and Parish Councils. If the items do not come to the committee, the council could be seen to be hiding something.

Councillor D Collins said that Town and Parish Councils had a legal right to make recommendations and said he did not support the idea of a sub-committee and the applications should still be referred to the Development Control Committee.

S Whelan thanked members for their feedback. She said she had spoken to Mark Brookes today and there was concern that if the sub-committee met every four weeks just to decide Council’s own applications then it could be an over kill. Therefore she suggested a change to the constitution that only major applications or those with objections will be referred to the Development Control Committee. Also, there is no statutory obligation to take council’s own applications to committee.

Councillor Mills said he felt unhappy at putting a time limit on the meetings as it would not be fair to turn the public away if their application had not been heard before 10pm.

Councillor D Collins said he had a contrary view and said it was not fair for the public to have their application reviewed late at night when decision making was potentially of a poorer quality.

Councillor G Sutton said all the recommendations were very sensible and would not damage democracy but will increase it. More people might then become interested in the committee. He said that it should be a two way street, if meetings are being capped at 10pm then officers must be succinct in their presentations. We do not want to restrict members’ time. He said he was happy to refer this report to Council.

Outcome

S Whelan to make the changes suggested by members and Development Control Committee to refer the report to Council.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 152.

Resolved:

That, under s.100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 Schedule 12A Part 1, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, the public be excluded during the item in Part II of the Agenda for this meeting, because it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that if members of the public were present during this item there would be disclosure to them of exempt information relating to an ongoing enforcement investigation and proposed action by the Council in connection with the investigation into an alleged breach in planning control, being also a criminal offence under Section 224 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. (LGA 1972 Schedule 12A Part 1 Paragraph 7 as amended by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006

Full details in part 2 minutes.

Report to follow

Full details in part 2 minutes.