Issue - meetings
25/01094/FP Land To The Rear 34, Arlesey Road, Ickleford, Hitchin, Hertfordshire, SG5 3UU
Meeting: 12/02/2026 - Planning Control Committee (Item 126)
126 25/01094/FP LAND TO THE REAR 34, ARLESEY ROAD, ICKLEFORD, HITCHIN, HERTFORDSHIRE, SG5 3UU 
PDF 348 KB
REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION
MANAGER
Erection of nine dwellings including access, parking and
landscaping
Additional documents:
Decision:
RESOLVED: That application 25/01094/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with the removal of Conditions 22 and 23 and a new Condition 22 as follows:
‘Condition 22
No development shall commence until a strategic foul water strategy, or any other solution, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority, in consultation with Anglian Water. This strategy will identify a sustainable point of connection to the public foul network, or any other solution. Prior to occupation, the foul water drainage works must have been carried out in complete accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason: To protect water quality, prevent pollution and secure sustainable development having regard to paragraphs 7/8 and 180 of the National Planning Policy Framework.’
Minutes:
Audio recording – 4 minutes 46 seconds
N.B. At the commencement of this Item, Councillor Louise Peace advised that she would be speaking as Member Advocate on both applications on the Agenda. She withdrew from the Committee and moved to the public gallery to speak at Member Advocate Objector.
The Planning Officer provided a verbal update on matters relating to application 25/01094/FP and advised that:
· The Conservation Officer had provided a response and confirmed it was not considered unacceptable in heritage terms.
· Herts Archaeology had provided a response and confirm that the conditions proposed could be removed.
· Updated plans, referenced as 01, 02 and 03, had been provided which detailed the location of the bin storage area and heat pumps.
· The Environment Agency had made a representation, which was available online, and had confirmed they had no objection. They confirmed that the sequential test could apply to this site, but having checked with Planning Policy team, this was applied during the allocation of the site within the adopted Local Plan.
· The applicant was in negotiations with Anglian Water to agree a solution, either on site or through any other connection possible.
· A resident had raised a concern with regards to the contents of their objection and how this would be covered by the Committee report. The matter raised were regarding issues already covered within the report and would not have changed the recommendation to grant.
The Planning Officer then presented the report in respect of application 25/01094/FP accompanied by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.
The following Members asked questions:
· Councillor Jon Clayden
· Councillor Dave Winstanley
· Councillor Nigel Mason
· Councillor Tom Tyson
· Councillor Ian Mantle
In response to questions, the Planning Officer advised that:
· The Environment Agency had not recommended any conditions for inclusion.
· There was an error at 4.3.19 of the report, and references to the impacts of plot size, loss of light and dominance should be ‘are considered to be acceptable’.
· The swale was controlled by the landowner.
· There were two conditions requiring a Construction Management Plan, one from Highways to address the deliveries and access routes to the site and one from Environmental Health to address mitigations to construction nuisance.
· The Ecologist had noted that there would be a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) shortage on site of 1.57, which was to be secured through off site credits and this was secured through the standards BNG condition.
In response to questions, the Principal Planning Officer advised that:
· Conditions which required works to be completed would not be brought back to the Committee to consider, as details reserved by condition were delegated to Officers to determine.
· The Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) had provided conditions for inclusion, therefore they do not believe further information was required at this stage to determine the application.
· When details on these conditions were submitted, the LLFA would be consulted again and, subject to their approval of the details, these would be approved.
· If the LLFA objected to the details provided, ... view the full minutes text for item 126