Agenda, decisions and minutes

Members are required to notify any substitutions by midday on the day of the meeting.

Late substitutions will not be accepted and Members attending as a substitute without having given the due notice will not be able to take part in the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors John Bishop, Ian Moody and Terry Tyler.

Audio recording – 22 seconds

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ian Moody, John Bishop and Terry Tyler.

Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency.

The Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered.

There was no other business notified.

Audio recording – 33 seconds

There was no other business notified.

Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chair of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda.  Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item. Members declaring a Declarable Interest, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)       The Chair welcomed those present at the meeting, especially those who had attended to give a presentation;

(2)       The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be audio recorded;

(3)       The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(4)       The Chair gave advice to the registered speakers on the speaking procedure and time limits.

(5)       The Chair advised that Item 6 ‘19/03032/FP LAND SURROUNDING BURLOES COTTAGES’ would be taken ahead of Item 5 ’20/01138/RM LAND SURROUNDING BURLOES COTTAGES’.  

Audio recording – 37 seconds

(1)       The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded. The video recording would be available on NHDC YouTube channel and the audio recording via Mod Gov.

(2)       The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)       The Chair gave advice to the registered speakers on the speaking procedure and time limits. 

(4)       The Chair announced a comfort break would be taken around 9pm, at a suitable time in the proceedings.

(5)       The Chair advised that there was a change to the order of business and Item 6 would be taken before Item 5.

To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public.

The Chair confirmed that the three registered speakers and the Member Advocate were in attendance.

Audio recording – 1 minute 58 seconds

The Chair confirmed the three registered speakers and the Member Advocate were in attendance.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Reserved matters application including appearance, layout, scale and landscaping for the erection of 83 dwellings with associated sub- station, infrastructure, including attenuation basin and Local Area of Play (pursuant to outline planning permission granted under ref 17/00110/1 including the approval of drainage details for this phase required by condition 10 of that permission).

RESOLVED: That application 20/01138/RM be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the following amendments to conditions:

·         Condition 5 to be amended to the following:

“Prior to the occupation of the 83rd unit, the development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the ecological mitigation measures described in section 4 of the Ecology Addendum October 2020 where they relate to the first phase of development.

Reason - In the interests of Biodiversity”

·         Condition 9 to be added with the following:

“Prior to the commencement of the development the applicant shall submit a programme for the delivery and adoption (or private management of)  footpaths around the site, with public access secured in perpetuity including non-car access for cycles and mobility scooters to the established residential development off of Valley Rise. This programme will be agreed by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with Herts County Council Rights of Way. The agreed programme will be implemented in accordance with any agreed phasing programme and thereafter maintained in perpetuity. Any proposed footpaths shall be located and laid out to ensure that any loss of trees is minimised as much as is reasonably possible’.

Reason: To deliver a sustainable scheme of public rights of way for the incumbent population and the wider community.”

Audio recording – 22 minutes 45 seconds

The Principle Planning Officer advised of updates to the report including:

·         There had been 5 neighbour objections, not three as listed in the report. These concerned Brampton Road being used as vehicular access and access to Icknield Walk First School.

·         Royston Town Council questioned whether the powerline would be underground – this had previously been confirmed by the applicant’s agent.

·         Royston Town Council had questioned lack of information on bus route on site, but this had been covered by Condition 7 of Outline Plan.

·         Condition 5 to be updated to only include ecological requirements of this phase.

·         Paragraph 4.47 should be £30,000 not £30,000k as written on report.

·         Herts County Councillor had made contact to raise concerns regarding the loss of trees on site.

The Principle Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 20/01138/RM supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Ian Mantle

·         Councillor Val Bryant

·         Councillor Ruth Brown

·         Councillor Tom Tyson

In response to questions, the Principle Planning Officer and Senior Planning Officer advised:

·         Access paths were only indicative at this stage and were not included for consideration on this application. Condition 11 of the Outline Proposals outlined that the applicant would need to submit details of these.

·         The mix of affordable housing is known and there will be 18 units (22%) of this phase which would be affordable.

·         The affordable housing would be included across the site and would be replicated across all phases.

·         Herts Ecology had a few sites in mind to spend Unilateral Undertaking ecology funds, but nothing had been agreed yet. It is required to be in the local area and officers were confident that it would be in North Herts, but not necessarily in Royston. NHDC would receive the funds and a relevant location would be identified.

The Chair invited Leigh Carpenter to speak against the application.

Leigh Carpenter thanked the Chair for the chance to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         Good pedestrian access to the west could be achieved with good planning and was promised in the original Outline Proposals. 

·         Matters of tree maintenance, road safety and onward travel should be considered and assessed in the context of this application.

·         There is little justification for the clusters of 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings.

·         The proposed cycle route is unsustainable, as the route has a gradient of 13%.

·         Access corridors as presented will require removal of trees and undergrowth with no attempt to deviate the corridors to avoid surveyed trees.

·         Requested that Members defer the decision until further details can be provided.

The Chair invited Councillor Adam Compton to speak against the application as a Member advocate. Councillor Adam Compton thanked the Chair for the chance to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         Main concerns included the tree retention on site, the non-vehicular access points, the parking allocated on plans and the proposed height of flat blocks. 

·         The paths  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Construction of infrastructure road network, attenuation basins, substation and emergency/construction access.

RESOLVED: That application 19/03032/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Audio recording – 2 minutes 25 seconds

Councillor Tony Hunter advised that he would be making a declaration of interest in both Item 5 and Item 6 following the presentation of the Principle Planning Officer.

The Principle Planning Officer had no updates on the report to advise.

The Principle Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 19/03032/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Ruth Brown

In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer advised:

·         The new pedestrian crossing was included within the boundaries of this application, but had been previously approved.

·         There would be further discussions and agreement at a later stage regarding the prevention of traffic through the emergency access point.

Councillor Tony Hunter advised that he had a declaration of interest in the application, as he had previously spoken in depth against the outline planning application. He noted that his objections relating to single vehicle access had now been addressed, but stated that there were issues relating to trees, wildlife and building height which concerned him.

Councillor Tony Hunter left the meeting. 

The Chair invited Leigh Carpenter to speak against the application.

Leigh Carpenter thanked the Chair for the chance to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         He was a representative of several local residents who had objected to the applications.

·         There has been no communication or noted amendments to application following the consistent objections made.

·         There were concerns regarding the powerline and whether this would be underground.

·         An updated agriculture report and tree condition survey documents were included initially, but disappeared from the website in February 2021 without explanation.

The Chair invited Councillor Adam Compton to speak against the application as a Member advocate. Councillor Adam Compton thanked the Chair for the chance to address the Committee and indicated that he would respond to the Item 5 when taken.

The Chair invited David Fletcher to speak in support of the application, as agent of the applicant. David Fletcher thanks the Chair for the change to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         The application had been devised with input from NHDC Officers, as well as Highways Authority and the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA).

·         Western access for construction vehicles was vital to ensure that residents moving into dwellings in Phase 1 were provided a peaceful environment while the rest of the site was developed.

·         Suggested that the 40MPH speed limit imposed on entry to Royston be extended west.

·         Tree protection measures were employed at locations across the site.  

·         Collapsible bollards would prevent traffic travelling through the emergency access, outlined in Condition 5.

·         Confirmed that discussions were in an advanced phase with UK Power Networks regarding putting the powerline underground.

The following Member asked questions:

·         Councillor David Levett

In response to questions, David Fletcher advised that it was correct that the power line formed the site boundary of Phase 1. 

Following the presentations, Councillor David Levett proposed and Councillor Morgan Derbyshire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Outline Planning Permission for up to 23 dwellings (all matters reserved except access).

RESOLVED: That application 20/02046/OP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions outlined in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, subject to the removal of objections from the Lead Local Flood Authority, and the following amendments to conditions:

·         Condition 11 to be amended to the following:

“No development shall commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter construction of the development shall only be carried out in accordance with approved plan. The Plan shall include the following details:

a)    construction vehicle numbers, type and routing;

b)    Access arrangements to the site;

c)    Construction traffic management requirements;

d)    Construction and storage compounds (including areas designated for parking, loading / unloading and turning areas)

e)    Siting and details of wheel washing facilities;

f)     timing and delivery arrangements for construction vehicles (to avoid school pick up and drop off times);

g)    Cleaning of site entrances, site tracks and adjacent public highway;

h)    Provision of sufficient on-site contractor and construction vehicle parking;

i)      Post construction restoration/reinstatement of the working areas and temporary access to the public highway;

j)      Where works cannot be contained wholly within the site a plan shall be submitted showing the site layout on the highway including extent of hoarding, pedestrian routes and remaining road width for vehicle movements;

k)    dust and waste minimisation plans and hours of operation and deliveries to and from site.

Reason: In order to protect highway safety and the amenity of other users of the public highway and rights of way in accordance with Policies 5, 12, 17 and 22 of Hertfordshire’s Local Transport Plan.”

Audio recording – 73 minutes 10 seconds

The Development and Conservation Manager advised of updates to the report including:

·         Lead Local Flood Authority had given a further response since publication of report and had maintained their objection to the plans until design of the sustainable urban drainage be finalised.

·         It had been requested that this be included as a condition rather than objection.

·         Condition 17 has been included to allow space for any additional conditions the LLFA may impose.

·         The recommendation would be updated to include ‘subject to the removal of the objection of the LLFA’.

·         If these objections were not removed, the application would return to Committee.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of application 20/02046/OP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Tom Tyson

·         Councillor Mike Rice

·         Councillor David Levett

In response to questions, the Development and Conservation Manager advised:

·         The whole site had been allocated as open space, but had been allocated for development in previous local plans.

·         There were no explicit issues with the site from the LLFA, they were requiring detailed plans of the Sustainable Urban Drainage System before removing objection.

·         The site is not included under current land supply as there has been no permission granted. 

The Chair invited Oliver Sanhaji to speak against the application.

Oliver Sanhaji thanked the Chair for the chance to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation including:

·         He was representing a number of local residents who were opposed to the development.

·         Concerns and worry centred around the safety of access to and proximity to the school. It would be putting children and parents at risk.

·         There were already major issues with parking on Downlands and Yeomanry Drive.

·         The site is not proposed to connect through to the school access to prevent parking issues, but this is already an issue for nearby roads

·         These plans put children and infants at risk.

·         There would be a total loss of existing grass land and would be a total net loss on biodiversity.

·         The space has been a vital to local residents. 

·         Whilst there was a need to address the shortage of homes, this should bot be done by cramming housing into unsuitably sized and located sites.

The following Member asked a question:

·         Councillor David Levett

In response to questions, Oliver Sanhaji advised the entrance referred to next to the site was a rear entrance to the school, but this was heavily used by residents of Clothall Common. 

The following Members took part in the debate:

·         Councillor Tony Hunter

·         Councillor Ruth Brown

·         Councillor Morgan Derbyshire

·         Councillor Mike Rice

In response to questions, the Development and Conservation Manager advised:

·         Youth Provision is managed by Herts County Council and they will identify possible projects on which to spend S106 funds. They had identified the project in Hitchin as most suitable project.

·         There would need to be a relevant project in Baldock in order for it to be spent there and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.