Skip to main content

Agenda item

24/02656/S73 LAND EAST OF GARDEN WALK AND NORTH OF NEWMARKET ROAD, GARDEN WALK, ROYSTON, HERTFORDSHIRE

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

 

Variation of condition 1 (revised plans) of planning permission 17/02627/1 granted 30.05.2018 for Application for approval of reserved matters comprising of access, landscaping, layout, scale and appearance of Phase 1 the development (pursuant to Outline application 14/02485/1 granted 07/12/2016) as amended by plans received on 22 December 2017; 30 January 2018; 27 March 2018; 18 April 2018; and 2 May 2018.

Decision:

RESOLVED: That application 24/02656/S73 be GRANTED planning permission subject to:

 

A)        The completion of a satisfactory deed of variation to the original s106 agreement or similar legal mechanism to ensure delivery of the agreed Heads of Terms; and

 

B)        The applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the Deed if required; and

 

C)        Granting delegation of authority to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and informatives with minor amendments as required; and

 

D)        Conditions from planning permission reference 21/02194/S73, as set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Minutes:

Audio recording – 30 minutes 48 seconds

 

The Senior Planning Officer provided a verbal update on matters relating to Application 24/02656/S73 and advised that:

 

·             It had been confirmed that VAT should not be added to the developer contributions, which meant that the contribution in the Deed of Variation should be £6,006, as detailed at paragraph 3.6.5 of the report.

·             The date for the agreement of the Open Space Scheme and Open Space Programme and Management Plan in paragraph 1.4 should read 7 December 2018.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·             Councillor Louise Peace

·             Councillor Ruth Brown

·             Councillor Nigel Mason

·             Councillor Ruth Brown

·             Councillor Val Bryant

·             Councillor Tom Tyson

 

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

 

·             The developer had already paid £73K towards the restoration of the chalk grassland. However, the Green Space Team had obtained another quote to account for the steepness which came to £80K minus VAT, therefore, the £6,006 included in the report would cover this difference.

·             The Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) and Highways Authority had no objections to the slope, and the developer had provided a ground stability report.

·             The increase in material would be near the top of the hill and distributed evenly.

·             The Estates Team would conduct due diligence when adopting the land.

·             The slope may have been less steep before, but the steep section at the base of the slope was not part of this application.

·             The quality of the material deposited would be secured through the Landscape and Ecological Management Plan, which formed part of the recommendations. 

·             The site would be used as a community open space, which would complement Therfield Heath in terms of natural environment.

·             A footpath would go round the Meridian Gate site perimeter, and stairs and a level footpath would lead up to the chalk grassland. However, the open space had not been designed as a recreational space due to the gradients, and to preserve the ecological benefits of the chalk grasslands.

·             There was an obligation for a footpath to go through Newmarket Road Recreation Ground in the original application for outline planning permission, which they had received developer contributions towards.

·             There would be gated access to the community open space from Newmarket Road and the Green Space Team would use this to maintain the land.

·             After assessment by Green Space, their contractor would be able to maintain the area for 15 years if cut twice a year, and 20+ years if cut annually, based on the funding available.

·             The retaining wall had been agreed in a non-material amendment application.

 

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

 

·             6,500 HGV movements would be saved by keeping the material on-site.

·             If the application was refused, the material would have to be moved elsewhere.

 

The Chair invited the Agent to the Applicant, Claire Newbury to speak in support of the application. Ms Newbury thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, and highlighted the following:

 

·             The application was a combination of work over the last 7 years to deliver 314 homes, including 103 affordable houses and a care home.

·             The site would be complete by mid-2026.

·             Phase 3, which was the final phase of the development, included complex proposals for ground remodelling for the deposit of chalk material within the site. 

·             The open space would exceed the 80m contour line to mitigate the impact on the wider landscape and would form part of the circular walk around the site perimeter, providing leisure and dog walking opportunities, and local habitat for biodiversity.

·             The slope gradient at the interface with nearby homes remained unchanged from a previous application, and the ground level at the highest point of the slope also remained unchanged from pre-development levels.

·             Detailed sections of the slope profile were shown in the plans submitted with the application.

·             A level walkway would be introduced at the base of the slope to improve accessibility with the wider walking route and the recreation ground.

·             The application demonstrated that no harm would come to the ecology on-site, a stable slope structure would be provided, and that there would be no long-term visual landscape changes. 

·             Delivery of the site had been delayed due to more detailed design proposals, and public access had not been feasible during the live construction of the site.

·             The application had complied with all the conditions and obligations, and all developer contributions had been paid.

·             They had continually engaged with local ward councillors to address queries from residents, and it was noted that no objections had been received. 

·             A strategy for the landscape management and maintenance of the space had been agreed with Green Space, and it would be handed over to the Council soon.

·             The overall site would make a valuable contribution towards the Council housing stock.

·             Satisfactory responses from new homeowners had been received.

 

There were no points of clarification from Members.

 

Councillor Nigel Mason proposed to grant permission subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager, and this was seconded by Councillor Ruth Brown.

 

As part of the debate, Councillor Clare Billing highlighted that she would be happy to support the retainment of greenspace as part of the application.

 

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

 

RESOLVED: That application 24/02656/S73 be GRANTED planning permission subject to:

 

A)          The completion of a satisfactory deed of variation to the original s106 agreement or similar legal mechanism to ensure delivery of the agreed Heads of Terms; and

 

B)          The applicant agreeing to extend the statutory period in order to complete the Deed if required; and

 

C)          Granting delegation of authority to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions and informatives with minor amendments as required; and

 

D)          Conditions from planning permission reference 21/02194/S73, as set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Supporting documents: