Agenda item

That Full Council:

• Approves the Regulation 18 Consultation document in Appendix 1 to this report

• Grants delegated authority to the Head of Planning Policy and Conservation in consultation with the Lead Member for the Local Plan to make any minor changes that are required prior to the documents being published for consultation

Councillor Giles-Medhurst proposed the recommendation as set out in the report and seconded by Councillor Nelmes.

Members received a verbal report on the Local Plan Regulation 18 Document. It was noted that the Council was legally required to undertake a consultation, residents would be invited to give their views at a later date. Sites were deemed either potentially suitable, some concerns, considerable concerns and may be further ruled out following the consultation. The consultation exercise was not a decision making process. It was noted that Hertfordshire Highways was a statutory consultant.

Councillor Cooper proposed an amendment to the Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation Document seconded by Councillor Hearn.

“That the following sites be discounted from consultation, and to be listed within the consultation solely as discounted:

NCFS1 – Chequers House, Chequers Lane

NCFS2 – Fortune Farm, High Elms Lane

NCFS3 – The Old Dairy, Chequers Lane

NCFS4 – High Elms Manor

NCFS6 – Land to the east of Watford Road

NCFS8 – Land off St Albans Lane, Bedmond

NCFS9 – Land to the north-west of Woodstock, Bedmond

NCFS10 – Great Westwood Park

NCFS11 – Grange Wood, Carpenders Park

NCFS12 – Lane East of Oxhey Lane, Carpenders Park

NCFS13 – Catlips Farm

NCFS14 – Homefield Road

NCFS17 – North Hill Farm

NCFS18 – Land to the east of Sarratt Lane

NCFS19 – Land adjacent to 60 Harthall Lane

NCFS22 – Nine of Herts Golf Club and surrounding land

NCFS24 – The Island, Rickmansworth

NCFS27 – Green End Farm, Sarratt

NCFS28 – Ravenswood, Sarratt

NCFS29 – New Model Farm, Sarratt

NCFS30 – Sarratt Lodge, Sarratt Green

NCFS31 – Land to the south-east of Poles Hill

NCFS32 – Land to the south-west of Bragmans Lane

NCFS34 – Land south of Chalfont Lane (employment)

NCFS35 – Land north of Little Green Lane”

Some members felt that the above sites would cause more harm to the Green Belt, had the exercise been undertaken in Autumn 2023 under the previous NPPF, the sites would be classed as a low growth option and discounted. Some members felt the sites would do more than moderate harm to the Green Belt.

Members debated the removal of the sites, some members felt some sites should fall into the Green Belt review. The new NPPF and guidance would mean a low bar for properties to be considered part of the grey belt. Members had previously requested a map with the proposed sites but this had not been provided as this would be provided after the Green Belt Assessment. It was noted that the sites in the documents were not proposed for development but instead sites to be consulted on. Members felt clarity needed to be given to the consultation before being released to the public, it was noted that with the sites proposed removed from the consultation only about 69  additional possible housing units would be consulted on, and this would most likely  result in the consultation ruled as “invalid” at the public inquiry.

Councillor Cooper moved for a recorded vote on the proposed amendment, seconded by Councillor Hearn, Alley, Campbell, Ranger and Merali.

On being put to the Council the proposed amendment fell; the outcome of the recorded vote was as follows:

FOR: (12) Councillors Christopher Alley, Ian Campbell, Oliver Cooper, Vicky Edwards, Andrea Fraser, Philip Hearn, Lisa Hudson, Abbas Merali, Debbie Morris, Reena Ranger, Ciarán Reed and Mike Sims.

 AGAINST: (25) Councillors Stephen Cox, Harry Davies, Elinor Gazzard, Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Rue Grewal, Tony Humphreys, Khalid Hussain, Raj Khiroya, Stephen King, Chris Lloyd, David Major, Keith Martin, Chris Mitchell, Ian Morris, Sarah Nelmes, Louise Price, Kevin Raeburn, Paul Rainbow, Andrew Scarth, Narinder Sian, Tom Smith, Cheryl Stungo, Jon Tankard, Chris Whately-Smith and Anne Winter.

Councillor Hearn proposed an amendment to the Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation Document seconded by Councillor Edwards.

“To add the following as a new paragraph as paragraph 2 under Policy XE1:

“2. Policy XE1 does not apply to householder applications.”

And to consequently replace paragraph 4.85 if the Consultation Document with:

“It is accepted that the burden on applicants for householder and other minor applications will be too onerous, and so householder applications will be exempt

from retrofit-first and the level of detail required for all householder and minor applications where required will be lower.”

Members discussed the impact that the Regulation 18 policies would have on households with many households within Three Rivers District struggling to afford the cost of housing. Members felt that following Policy E1 within Policy XE reduing carbon emissions within existing buildings for any householder application will incur a significant amount of money to be spent on consultants and reports. It was further felt that care should be taken when passing policies and members should ensure that the affect to families should be known.

It was noted that for extensions to preexisting properties the householder is required to follow an energy strategy already. Members argued that other local authorities have not implemented net zero policies at this level. However other members felt it was important to get properties as close to net zero as possible regardless of whether the other authorities are or are not.

On being put to the Council the proposed amendment fell by the Chair of Council, the voting being; 12 For, 24 Against and 1 Abstention.

Councillor Cooper proposed the following amendment, seconded by Councillor Hearn:

“To replace paragraph 13 under Policy A4 with:

“Only where it is financially unviable to achieve an on-site net zero regulated and unregulated energy balance should any shortfall in on-site renewable energy generation that does not match energy use be offset via a S106 financial contribution, reflecting the cost of the solar PV that will need to be delivered off-site.

Add new paragraph after paragraph 13 that reads:

“Means of off-setting – or pricing of off-setting – off-site other than solar PV will be considered if it can be demonstrated by the applicant that the offsetting is verified, life-long, and off-sets at least 50% more than would be off-set by the expected solar PV delivery.”

Councillor Cooper stated that he wished to withdraw the amendment to the motion, on the understanding that the proposed amendment will be considered when the Local Plan Subcommittee considered the results of the public consultation on the polices. Councillor Giles-Medhurst agreed it would be so considered.

Members discussed concerns regarding some of the sites however it was noted that the developers would be required to have designs that mitigated the concerns of the members. Statutory consultees such as Hertfordshire Highways had yet to respond.

On being put to vote the proposed amendment fell, the voting being; 12 For, 24 Against and 1 Abstention.

NOTE:

A comfort break was called at 21:00 for ten minutes.

Councillor Hussain left the room at 21:03 during the comfort break and did not return having informed the chair that he needed to return home to care for his seriously ill mother.

RESOLVED

That:

• Approves the Regulation 18 Consultation document in Appendix 1 to this report

• Grants delegated authority to the Head of Planning Policy and Conservation in consultation with the Lead Member for the Local Plan to make any minor changes that are required prior to the documents being published for consultation