Agenda item - 21/02796/FP 59 - 61 Walsworth Road, Hitchin, Hertfordshire, SG4 9SX

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of mixed use building comprising of 330sq.m commercial floor space at ground floor with 10 no. residential apartments at first and second floor levels (4 x 2-bed and 6 x 1-bed) including vehicular access, drainage, car parking, cycle and bin storage, hard and soft landscaping, boundary treatments and associated works following demolition of existing commercial buildings.

RESOLVED: That application 22/00170/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Legal Agreement and the reasons set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, with the following amendments:

· Removal of Condition 21 as detailed in the report.

· Condition 22 and Condition 23 to become Condition 21 and Condition 22 respectively.

· Additional Conditions 23 and 24 to read:

“Condition 23

The development permitted by this planning permission shall be carried out in accordance with the following documents:

· E-mail response dated 23 August 2022 from Nolan Associates

· E-mail response dated 28 October 2022 from Nolan Associates

· Drainage Strategy carried out by Nolan Associates dated March 2022 reference 2021- 087

· CCTV and Connectivity Survey dated 9 May 2022 carried out by Wrc

· Manhole Survey Report dated 27 May 2022 carried out by Wrc

and the following mitigation measures:

1. Provide minimum surface water attenuation volume of 27m3 to ensure no increase in surface water run-off volumes for all rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100 year + climate change (40%) event.

2. Implement drainage strategy based on a tank and permeable paving for attenuation and treatment at a discharge rate of 2l/s into an existing surface water sewer (final details to be confirmed as part of a post demolition condition).

3. Provide water quality treatment using permeable paving on 10 parking bays where all the impermeable areas including the access road will be directed to the permeable paving for treatment prior to discharge.

Reason To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the site.

Condition 24

No development shall take place, apart from the demolition of the current building, until the final design of the drainage scheme is completed and is approved by the LPA. The surface water drainage system will be based on the following approved documentation:

· E-mail response dated 23 August 2022 from Nolan Associates

· E-mail response dated 28 October 2022 from Nolan Associates

· Drainage Strategy carried out by Nolan Associates dated March 2022 reference 2021- 087

· CCTV and Connectivity Survey dated 9 May 2022 carried out by Wrc

· Manhole Survey Report dated 27 May 2022 carried out by Wrc

The scheme shall also include:

1. Post demolition survey of the existing drainage system to confirm the existing connection into a sewer. Should the survey determine the connection is into an existing combined sewer, the applicant will need to demonstrate that they have considered other options where possible to connect into another surface water sewer.

2. Permission from Anglian Water to connect into their sewer including any required sewer upgrades due to capacity issues at the agreed rate of 2l/s.

3. Detailed engineered drawings of the proposed SuDS features including their location, size, volume, depth and any inlet and outlet features including any connecting pipe runs and all corresponding calculations/modelling to ensure the scheme caters for all rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100 year + 40% allowance for climate change event.

4. Detailed engineered drawings of the tank and permeable paving parking areas. The drawing should also show proposed levels of how the access road and other hardstanding areas will drain into the permeable paved parking bays.

5. Demonstrate appropriate SuDS management and treatment and inclusion of above ground features such as permeable paving, reducing the requirement for any underground storage.

6. Provision of half drain down times for surface water drainage within 24 hours.

7. Silt traps for protection for any residual tanked elements.

Reason: To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of and disposal of surface water from the site.”

Audio recording – 117 minutes 52 seconds

The Senior Planning Officer advised of the following updates:

· Two additional responses had been received, one from HCC Growth and Infrastructure Unit and one from the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), and these had been added as addenda to the report.

· The applicant has agreed in principle to the S106 conditions proposed by Herts County Council subject to legal agreement.

· The LFFA had proposed two further conditions to replace Condition 21 in the report.

· No response had been received from HCC Ecology Unit, but a satisfactory response would be required before issuing a Decision Notice.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 22/02796/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

In response to a question from Councillor Daniel Allen, the Senior Planning Officer advised access to the retail units would be via the three service doors at the rear of the site, and this is where deliveries would be made. There have been no concerns raised by Highways in terms of deliveries to this area.

The Chair invited Dr Georgina Porter and Mr Toby Shelley to speak against the item.

Mr Shelley thanked the Chair for the opportunity to speak and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including:

· They did not object to the proposals in principle and support a number of the proposals but believe there are two planning issues which need addressing.

· The first was drainage and this area was already prone to flooding, with Walsworth Road flooded every time it rains and the railway bridge is almost continually flooded during heavy rain.

· There was a recent example where drain covers were popping out due to volume of water in one street nearby.

· Due to climate change, rain is becoming more sporadic and more intense.

· The sewage system in the area is ancient and it is clear that neither the issue of ground water or sewage had been resolved by the relevant agencies. Given the talks had been ongoing for over a year, it demonstrated the complexities of the issues involved.

· The issue of drainage should be addressed and should show that it is durable, with clear responsibility allocated for when issues occur.

· They request deferral of the application until the drainage issue can be resolved.

Dr Porter thanked the Chair for the opportunity to speak and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including:

· There was a mains leak in Walsworth Road recently, with traffic control measures put in place to conduct repair works, and this had a huge impact on traffic. This is a key road in the town and wider district, and is the main access to the train station.

· They had objected to the original plans due to their overbearing on neighbours. There have been some changes to the plan and there is no longer a fourth storey, but the roof height has not been reduced and the steep pitch is to remain.

· The social housing behind the site will be impacted by this issue more than those at the front, as the sunlight into their properties would be restricted.

· No objection to the development in principle, but the height of the building should be reduced, and this would be in keeping with other properties on Walsworth Road which had mixed roof heights.

There were no points of clarification from Members and the Chair thanked Dr Porter and Mr Shelley for their presentation.

The Chair invited Councillor Ian Albert to speak against the item, as Member Advocate.

Councillor Albert thanked the Chair for the opportunity to speak and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including:

· Both the long running nature of the application and the multiple conditions attached demonstrate the complexity of this proposal.

· The applicant refused to meet with residents, which may have helped to smooth the planning process.

· The proposed frontage had been improved, but there remained concerns about the viability of these premises. Whilst it had been acknowledged that deliveries would be made to the rear, this would block any other access to the car park.

· Walsworth Road was a main thoroughfare and there was no customer parking.

· There needed to be strong conditioning placed on energy, with more specificity with regard to heat pumps and solar panels, as these should not be dealt with at a later stage.

· There was no need for the roof to be brough level with the building next door, as this was part of its character. The loss of light created by the roof height is significant.

· The addendum provided made clear the building would need to be demolished before a drainage plan could be confirmed. This could lead to further delay and presents a lack of transparency in the process.

· Urged Members to think about refusal or deferral until the drainage plans could be determined by the Committee.

There were no points of clarification from Members and the Chair thanked Councillor Albert for his contribution.

In response to points raised during the public presentations, the Senior Planning Officer advised:

· They had been in consultation with LLFA and Anglian Water for some months, primarily due to staffing issues at the LLFA. However, most issued had now been resolved.

· The main issues which remain cannot be dealt with until the building is demolished and the existing drainage information provided.

· The building would meet the height of the adjoining building and in line with existing buildings in the street.

· In terms of light, the existing building covered around 95% of the site, but this would be reduced under these proposals, which would improve light to properties to the rear.

· The commercial units were not proposed to be destination shops, but to serve the local community and therefore it was expected most people would cycle or walk to these.

· It was not typical to know the details of energy on site at this stage, but officers would be seeking good quality energy matters, which would be dealt with by condition.

Councillor Daniel Allen commented that it was for members of the Committee to respect the knowledge and experience in these matters. The proposals did appear to be similar to existing neighbouring properties. He retained concerns on parking and energy but was happy to accept Officer proposals

Councillor David Levett noted that he understood the concerns around drainage and the requirement to knock the existing building down. These proposals would reduce the roof space of the building and was in keeping with newer developments along the road. The issue of parking was not ideal, however it was close to the railway and 10 parking spaces was more than other similar developments.

Councillor Daniel Allen proposed, with the amendments to conditions outlined by the Senior Planning Officer and subject to the Section 106 agreement, and Councillor David Levett seconded and, following a vote, it was: