Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Planning Officer recommending that the proposed infilling of a natural depression in a field with soil excavated from the construction of an attenuation pond; construction of a temporary access to allow access to and from the site of the pond; and an amendment to the design proposals for the construction of the attenuation pond, be approved.

 

The Chair invited the Planning Officer, Mr Adam Ralton, to introduce the report.

 

Announcement: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Update

 

Before introducing the report, Mr Ralton informed the Committee that, on 5 September 2023, the Government had published an update to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and that all the Planning reports before the Committee this evening should be read as referring to the September 2023 version of the NPPF.

 

Planning Officer’s Presentation

 

Mr Ralton updated the Committee regarding the planning application that was before the Committee, noting that one additional letter objecting to the application had been received since the report had been published. The letter reiterated previously expressed concerns that that were addressed in the report.

 

For purposes of clarification, Mr Ralton noted that planning permission for the residential development to the south of the site had been granted, including the construction of a drainage pond. The present application was a request by the developer to be allowed to spread the arisings from creating the pond in a depression in a field, rather than having to remove the arisings from the site, thereby avoiding the necessity for approximately 400 lorry journeys to remove the arisings from the site by road. The application also included widening the access from the main site and adjacent fields to allow access and egress for construction vehicles, thereby avoiding vehicles from having to use Little Green Lane.

 

Regarding the pond, it was no longer proposed that this be lined as a lining was not deemed to be necessary.  However, it was proposed that additional boreholes would be required to allow the pond to drain a suitable rate.

 

Concerning the ecology of the site, it was noted that the grasslands beyond the application site was farmland and, therefore, of limited ecological value.

 

Regarding the material to be deposited in the depression in the field, this would include the topsoil and subsoil from the drainage pond which would be deposited in such a way as to maintain a low point in the field which would not affect the existing drainage of the field.

 

Having considered the application, officers proposed that two conditions be added to the existing conditions, viz that only material excavated from the drainage pond would be deposited in the depression in the field; and that construction vehicles use only the widened entrance for access and egress to and from the site.

 

It was also proposed, to ensure reinstatement of the hedge at the construction site and the hedgerow around the perimeter of the field after completion of the works, that Condition 5: Landscaping, be suitably amended to include this requirement.

 

Representations

 

The Committee then heard representations from a local resident and Councillor Mitchell, Ward Councillor.

 

The Chair then invited the Planning Officer to respond to the representations.

 

Welfare of Horses on Adjacent Land

 

Mr Ralton stated that, regarding the welfare issue in relation to the horses, this was not, unlike protected species such as birds, newts and badgers, which were covered by various statutory and policy provisions, a material planning consideration. Accordingly, the Council would not be able to defend any decision it might make in respect of the planning application on the grounds that the decision was taken with the welfare of the horses on adjoining land in mind.

 

Maintenance of the Drainage Scheme

 

Attached to the Planning Appeal decision which granted approval to the residential development and the pond, was a condition requiring that, upon completion of the works, a management and maintenance plan for the drainage systems should be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local authority. Having described the requirements of the condition, Mr Ralton proposed that it would be possible for the Committee to add an informative to Condition 9 requesting information on the proposed operation of the maintenance plan.

 

The Chair then opened the discussion to Members of the Committee. In the subsequent discussion, the following points were raised.

 

a)    If access to the site was to be restricted after completion of the works, what provision would be made for access to maintain the site, particularly if Little Green Lane should be closed to vehicular traffic, as was currently proposed.

b)    If it was not possible to include a provision in the planning permission intended to protect the welfare of the horses on adjacent land, consideration should be given to including an informative requesting the developer to provide local residents with information regarding the phasing and implementation of the work so that appropriate measures could be taken to protect the welfare of the animals.

c)    Consideration should be given to –

·       The size of the lorries entering and exiting the site and the effect they might have on the road surface; and

·       The hours of operation of the site.

In response to these points, Mr Ralton stated that there would be no change to the standard hours of working on the site; that officers could propose a form of wording for informatives in respect of the maintenance plan and the welfare of the horses (including a request that the developer consult with adjacent landowners on the phases and stages of development such that the welfare of the horses could be taken into consideration); and that it would be necessary for the landowner and the developer to come to an arrangement regarding access to the pond for maintenance purposes, given that the pond already had planning permission.

 

d)    If the horses were not kept in the adjoining field throughout the year, it may be possible, through dialogue between the developer and the landowner(s), to schedule any works that might impact on the horse’s welfare for a time when the horses were not next to the construction site.

e)    Regarding the proposed amendment to Condition 5: Landscaping, whether it would be possible to incorporate the specific wording suggested by Hertfordshire County Council.

Mr Ralton stated that it would be difficult to justify a Planning Condition intended to provide a net gain in terms of biodiversity on highway land when net gain was not, in planning terms, a mandatory requirement. It was the view of officers that the proposed wording amending Condition 5 gave officers sufficient authority to ensure the reinstatement and maintenance of the relevant landscaping.

f)      The original ecological survey did not include that part of the field where the proposed infilling was to take place. Consequently, it was possible that there may be harm to things of ecological value as a result of infilling this part of the field.

Mr Ralton stated that there was a technical note covering the proposed infilling of what is farmland which, by its nature, was of lesser ecological value. He stated that officers were satisfied that the technical note covered the ecological issues and that there would be no significant harm associated with infilling at this location.

Mr Ralton went on to say that detailed consideration would have been  given to these issues at the time the original planning application was considered and that site visits and inspections would continue to take place to ensure the ecological protection of the site.

g)    That consideration be given to enhancing Condition 6: Ecology.

Mr Ralton stated that the matters referred to in the technical note were sufficiently covered by Condition 6, and that it would not be reasonable, given the low probability of protected species inhabiting the land, to request that a record be kept of site inspections.

 

Motion

 

Councillor Whateley-Smith moved that the Committee approve the recommendations as set out in Paragraph 8 of the report, subject to the inclusion of the various amendments and Informatives proposed by Members of the Committee.

 

h)    If the Committee were to approve the application, access to the construction site would no longer be past existing houses; it would obviate the requirement for several hundred lorries going along the Green in Croxley; that the Flood Authority was “comfortable” with the proposal; and that officers were satisfied with the proposals for reinstating the hedging.

As there was a proposal that Little Green Lane should be closed, it would be appropriate to include an informative that put the developers on notice of the possible closure of Little Green Lane as a means of accessing the site for maintenance purposes.

In response to a question, Mr Ralton stated that the conditions attached to the original planning application would determine who was responsible for maintenance of the site.

i)      As this was an enclosed site, it was unlikely that the County Council would adopt the access roads to the site. If so, it was probable that there would be a management company set up to manage the roads providing access to the site.

j)      The developers had been notified of the consultation on the proposed closure of Little Green Lane.

 

As there was a motion by Councillor Whateley-Smith before the Committee, the Chair asked if there was a seconder for the motion. Councillor Clark stated that she would second the motion.

 

The Chair then put the motion that the recommendations set out in Paragraph 8 of the report be approved, subject to the inclusion of the various Informatives and amendments considered by the Committee.

 

For the Motion:11

Against:              0

Abstentions:       0

 

RESOLVED: That Planning Permission be GRANTED, subject to –

 

1.    The conditions and informatives set out in the officer report,

2.    The addition of a further two conditions that –

·       Only soil from the excavation of the attenuation pond be used to infill the identified depression in the land; and

·       That construction vehicles use only the widened entrance for access to and from the construction site.

3.    The amendment to Condition 5: Landscaping, requiring a suitable replacement for the hedge on Little Green Lane; and

4.    Additional informatives requesting that the developer –

·       Consult with local landowners regarding the scheduling of the works and the effect this might have on horses in the adjacent field;

·       Provide information on the management and maintenance plans prescribed by Condition 9; and

·       An informative notifying the developer of the existence of a proposal that Little Green Lane be closed to vehicular traffic except for access for maintenance purposes.