Issue - meetings
24/01013/HYA Land Surrounding Burloes Cottages, Newmarket Road, Royston, Hertfordshire
Meeting: 19/03/2026 - Planning Control Committee (Item 150)
150 24/01013/HYA LAND SURROUNDING BURLOES COTTAGES, NEWMARKET ROAD, ROYSTON, HERTFORDSHIRE 
PDF 654 KB
REPORT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER
Land Surrounding Burloes Cottages, Newmarket Road, Royston,
Hertfordshire,
Hybrid application for residential development of up to 325
dwellings comprising (a) full planning application for Phase 1
comprising 106 dwellings and associated infrastructure including
access from Newmarket Road, emergency and pedestrian/cycle access
from Burloes Hall Drive, internal highways, public open space,
landscaping and drainage and b) outline application for up to 219
dwellings and associated infrastructure with all matters reserved
apart from primary means of access and emergency and
pedestrian/cycle access from Burloes Hall Drive.
Additional documents:
Decision:
RESOLVED: That application 24/01013/HYA be GRANTED planning permission, subject to:
a) The completion of a satisfactory legal agreement including a conditional viability review mechanism and for officers to negotiate appropriate viability review triggers to ensure that viability is revisited at appropriate junctures throughout the development.
b) The applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the agreement as required.
c) Providing delegated powers to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and informative with minor amendments as required.
d) A revised Recreation Mitigation Strategy, in consultation with and receipt of no objection from Natural England, and delegate power to the Development and Conservation Manager to agree this.
e) Conditions as set out in the report, subject to the amendments to Condition 29 g shown below:
Condition 29 g
“Timing of construction activities (including delivery times and removal of waste) and to avoid the hours 08.00-9.15 and 15.00-15.45;”
Minutes:
Audio recording – 5 minutes 22 seconds
N.B. Councillor Bryony May Declared an interest and moved to the public speaking area to act as Member Advocate.
The Senior Planning Officer advised that written updates on matters relating to application 24/01013/HYA had been published as a supplementary document and advised that, item 1 needs to be revised as Natural England requested the Recreation Mitigation Strategy to be agreed before the decision so the following should be added to the recommendation “A revised Recreation Mitigation Strategy, in consultation with and receipt of no objection from Natural England, and delegate power to the Development and Conservation Manager to agree this.”
The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of Application 24/01013/HYA accompanied by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.
The following Members asked questions:
· Councillor Ruth Brown
· Councillor Louise Peace
· Councillor Claire Strong
· Councillor Nigel Mason
In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:
· It was standard practice for the Section 106 not to be finalised at this point and therefore it was in draft form.
· The independent viability report looked at the site as a whole. Even though the first third has come forward with a good housing mix, the other two thirds have been estimated. The S106 agreement would cover the entire site and there would not be a lowering of the amount owed in S106 contributions as the viability review progressed.
· The 22% provision of affordable housing could not go down for the rest of the site, it could however go up.
· There were no flats in this phase of the development. Increased height buildings would be in the bowl on the site up to 3.5 storeys or 15m, for example due to topography with 2.5 storeys in the upper slope and the 3.5 storeys in the lower side.
· The emergency access was not a public right of way.
· Most of the Biodiversity Net Gain would be on site, with some off-site provisions.
· Strand 1 Highways works would be complete before occupation and the Strand 2 works would be complete after occupation.
· Sports England use a calculator which suggested that Royston did not need more changing rooms, but needed more cricket and hockey facilities.
· There was not an option to look at sports on Newmarket Road at the time.
· The viability report was done by the applicant and their consultant, this was then reviewed by Officers.
In response to questions, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that:
· The viability review mechanism works in a way that if viability improves further contributions would be needed, however if viability worsens there would not be a reduction in financial contributions.
· This was the minimum financial contribution that the applicant will have to pay.
In response to questions, the Locum Planning Lawyer advised that:
· The Section 106 was a legal agreement which ties the applicant into certain contributions, these must be provided even if viability changes.
· The Planning Committee should be only focusing on the planning application in ... view the full minutes text for item 150