Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Construction of the main spine road (The Avenue) from Stotfold Road connecting to High Dane, creation of drainage ponds, swales and other associated drainage infrastructure, signage and other necessary highway and service infrastructure (to serve future development parcels) (outline was EIA development with an ES submitted).

RESOLVED: That application 24/02780/RM be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the delegation of authority to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and information with minor amendments as required.

Audio recording – 2 hours 4 minutes 40 seconds

 

N.B. Councillor Nigel Mason declared an interest and left the Chamber and did not take place in the debate or vote. The Vice-Chair, Councillor Emma Fernandes, chaired the item.

 

The Senior Planning Officer provided a verbal update on matters relating to Application 24/02780/RM and advised that:

 

·       There were no further updates for Members.

·       No objections had been received from the Highway Authority or the Lead Local Flood Authority (LFFA) on any detail of the plans.

 

The Senior Planning Officer then presented the report in respect of Application 24/02780/RM accompanied by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·       Councillor Dave Winstanley

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

 

In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

 

·       The design of the road caused the carriageway narrowed from two lanes to one lane as illustrated in one of the slides in the presentation.

·       The Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) would be attractive, with two ponds in the northern corner, one with a level of water and one without.

·       The swales would be green and usable. 

 

In response to questions the Senior Transport Officer advised that:

 

·       This application was for groundworks, not for the infrastructure that would make the bus gate open.

·       There was expectation that a camera would be installed in the spine road after correct procedure was followed and Hertfordshire County Council would have the power to enforce penalty charges for vehicles that passed through that were not buses.

 

The Chair invited the Public Objector, Mr Richard Wilcox to speak against the application. Mr Wilcox thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·       At that Planning Committee held in July 2023 a decision was taken to defer this item to allow for more traffic data to be gathered.

·       In September 2023 a weeklong traffic survey was caried out, but this data was not shared.

·       In a transport note provided for the planning meeting councillors were given a report showing old data related from manual counts which indicated that traffic flows were in decline.

·       Numerous reasons were given for why data was not provided, including that it wasn’t ready and that traffic data wasn’t material to the outline decision.

·       The Department for Transport does have a count point on the Cambridge Road but the data was not from manual counts as it was estimated.

·       The Department for Transport figures were robust and reported as national statistics, but traffic estimates for individual roads were less robust as they were not always based on up-to-date counts.

·       The response received in August was specifically referenced to this Department for Transport data.

·       Therefore, a decision was made to approve this application where traffic data had been falsely represented and other pertinent data had been withheld.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Wilcox for his presentation and the Member Advocate Objectors, Councillors Elizabeth Dennis and Daniel Wright-Mason to speak against the application. Councillors Dennis and Wright-Mason thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·       This was the first development of this scale in North Hertfordshire for decades.

·       They were reflecting the concerns of the Walsworth residents which were most directly affected.

·       It should be considered that the bus gate would only work if it was used by buses.

·       Since the floods in September and November 2024 the flood risk evidence had been updated.

·       In the interests of the public, the developer should provide a drop-in session for residents to keep them informed. 

·       The infrastructure of the main spine road and the facilities around it did amount to necessary highway and service infrastructure.

·       The layout was a matter considered within reserved matters applications.

·       The way the traffic routes in development were situated did include the main spine road.

·       The bus route was essential to ensure that policies 3 – 10 of the local transport policies of Hertfordshire County Council were complied with.

·       The Council needed to be critically aware of child safety in that part of the spine road.

·       Condition 17 which in the outline permission, was discharged on 17 October based on the bus design.

·       The inclusions of electrical ducts to detect number plates had not been taken forward by the Highways Authority.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

The Chair thanked Councillors Dennis and Wright-Mason for their verbal presentations and invited the Applicant’s Representative, Mr Mark Osborn to speak in support of the application. Mr Osborn thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·       This was the first phase of the development following approval of the outline permission in November 2024 for 700 new homes.

·       The infrastructure in place was to provide a coordinated and sustainable solution.

·       No objections had been received from all relevant authorities.

·       The bus gate principles were agreed with Hertfordshire Country Council and had been cemented through the discharge of condition 17.

·       The drainage strategy would channel water to the northern corner of the plot and this had been designed to accommodate 40% climate change.

·       Foul drainage would disperse through a pumping station with timed discharge to the Anglian water network via Stotfold Road to the east.

·       A public consultation was held in Hitchin in June 2025 where residents were updated on progress with the development.

·       The developer had met with the Hitchin Forum in July 2025. 

·       A further detailed design reserved matters application would be submitted by the end of the month for phase 1 of the development, detailing the site and landscaping and open spaces.

·       Details around the main public square had been delayed until later phases to work with Hertfordshire County Council to integrate the school design into this key space.

·       This development would bring the much-needed new housing supply to the district with 40% of affordable housing.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Emma Fernandes

·       Councillor Claire Strong

 

In response to points of clarification, the Applicant’s Agent advised that public consultations would be held in each phase of the development.

 

In response to a point of clarification, the Senior Transport Policy Officer advised that:

 

·       There was a process that would have to be followed with bus route signage and if it was demonstrated that people were abusing the traffic order, then the Highways Authority could enforce a camera.

·       The bus service was designed by Hertfordshire County Council as a new service which would stop on Stotfold Road before entering the site and it could turn around in the site.

·       This would be a new bus service along the Stotfold Road which would expand to serve the whole of the site as it was built.

 

Councillor Emma Fernandes proposed to grant permission and this was seconded by Councillor Ian Mantle.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

·       Councillor Claire Strong

·       Councillor Dave Winstanley

·       Councillor Val Bryant

 

Points raised during the debate included:

 

·       This application had been accepted at the masterplan stage.

·       This was one of the strategic sites in the Local Plan and needed to be moved forward.

·       It would be beneficial to have the camera installed at the start of the project rather than at a later stage.

·       There was already a bus service in place along the Stotfold Road.

 

In response to points raised during the debate, the Senior Transport Policy Officer advised that installation of a camera was a matter for the Highways Authority and not the Council. Highways were required to follow the correct procedure and demonstrate the need for a camera before one could be installed.

 

 Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 24/02780/RM be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the delegation of authority to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and information with minor amendments as required.

 

N.B. Councillor Nigel Mason returned to the Chamber at 21:50.