Agenda item

25/03084/RM LAND TO THE EAST OF TALBOT WAY AND KRISTIANSAND WAY AND FLINT ROAD ALLOTMENTS , FLINT ROAD, LETCHWORTH GARDEN CITY, HERTFORDSHIRE, SG6 1TY

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Reserved matters application for approval of layout, scale and appearance of buildings and landscaping pursuant of outline permission 21/00504/OP granted 03.04.2025 for residential development comprising of up to 120 dwellings with vehicular access via Flint Road.

Decision:

RESOLVED: That application 25/03084/RM be APPROVED subject to:

A) The delegation of power to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions with minor amendments as required.

B) The inclusion of any conditions recommended by Hertfordshire County Council Highways.

C) The conditions as set out within the report, with the addition of Condition 4 as follows:

‘Condition 4:

Approved elevation dwellings which do not include a fourth (side) elevation detailing shall be mirrored to match the side elevation provided.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development.’

Minutes:

Audio recording – 5 minutes 51 seconds

The Project Officer provided a verbal update on matters relating to Application 25/03084/RM and advised that:

· This was a Reserve Matters application following the granting of Outline Permission in April 2025 and was for up to 120 dwellings.

· A supplement had been published which confirmed the final documents to be considered with this application.

· A proposed additional condition was included within the supplementary document.

The Project Officer then presented the report in respect of Application 25/03084/RM accompanied by a visual presentation consisting of plans and photographs.

The following Members asked questions:

· Councillor Ian Mantle

· Councillor Ruth Brown

· Councillor Tom Tyson

· Councillor Dave Winstanley

· Councillor Emma Fernandes

· Councillor Louise Peace

· Councillor Claire Strong

· Councillor Val Bryant

In response to questions, the Project Officer advised that:

· The Outline Planning application established that pedestrian connection would be through the school, though it was unclear how this would work in reality. Otherwise, pedestrian and cycle access to the site would be via Right of Way 26 to the east.

· There was a Masterplan document approved as part of the Outline Planning application.

· Whilst this application pre-dated the Design Code adoption, this was discussed with the applicant throughout the process and has led to the inclusion of certain aspects to meet the Code, such as balconies installed on the apartment blocks and the provision of open spaces on site.

· The design had not been presented to the Design Review Panel.

· The highest building would be a maximum of three stories and would be located in the lower part of the site in the south.

· The SUDs features were multi-use by design and would be an open play area when not used as SUDs.

· There were a number of revised documents for this application as a high level of work had been put into ensuring the layout was appropriate. Therefore, whenever a site plan was updated in the process, a new, updated layout plan was produced.

· Through the documents on the website, it was possible to see the development from the original plan to the plan presented at this meeting.

· The site met tenant neutrality requirements and it would not be possible to distinguish between the housing types.

· There were lots of high quality open spaces provided, with landscaping and tress to be planted, with input from Officers to ensure the scheme was of a high quality.

· Sustainability had been dealt with in the Outline Planning application, and a statement from the Applicant had been provided as part of this. It was proposed that 4 solar panels would be installed on each house and that air source heat pumps would be installed.

· The biodiversity requirements had been dealt with through condition and had been agreed with the North Herts Ecologist.

· A Management Plan had not yet been submitted but was required as part of the S106 agreement.

· There were bird and bat boxes installed on site and there would be further wildlife measures included around the site boundary.

· The S106 agreement was made as part of the Outline Planning application. There were still aspects of this to be discharged, but that sat outside of the application at this meeting.

In response to questions, the Locum Planning Lawyer advised that the S106 agreement had been signed off as part of the Outline Planning Application, which included conditions which the developer would have to comply with to ensure trigger points for payments were met and the agreement could be signed off.

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

· Decarbonise Letchworth wanted all new developments to be no brick, no gas, no bills and no garages.

· Well insulated houses, supported by solar panels and air source heat pumps, would mean houses would not need to pay for energy.

· Whilst the installation of air source heat pumps was welcomed, and updated information confirmed that solar panels would be installed on the houses, the provision of solar proposed was not sufficient or suitably located to be of maximum benefit.

· Alternative materials to brick should be used on site, as these were not good insulators. Although home buyers and developers want to use brick as it was long lasting, other countries used alternative materials.

· Wooden frames should be considered, as these would be quicker to install and can meet higher eco standards.

· It was unclear from proposals whether the entire site would be no gas.

· Cars in the 21^st century did not need garage storage and instead suitable outbuildings should be provided for storage.

· Some proposed garages on this site amounted to 50% of the back garden space and, as the garages were proposed to be in the rear garden, they would require a driveway for access, taking up more of the garden space.

· Delivering sustainability and self-sufficiency on this site should be the priority.

There were no points of clarification from Members.

The Chair thanked Mr Lovegrove for their presentation and invited the agent to the Applicant, Mr Mark Obsorn, 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 a Reserve Matters application for up to 120 dwellings on site LG3, which was an allocated site within the adopted Local Plan.

· Already agreed at the Outline Permission stage were the number of dwellings, the provision of 40% affordable housing, the retention of the allotments, access via Flint Road, a comprehensive landscaping plan and a Masterplan document for the site.

· The Masterplan defined the principles of the development and the final design responded to the landscape and existing built area.

· The proposals encompassed future homes principles and would link into existing travel networks.

· The developer had worked closely with Officers throughout the process.

· There had been key engagement with the Lead Local Flood Authority, the Highways Authority and the public through a consultation hosted on the Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation website.

· There were no outstanding technical objections.

· The rural lane on the edge of the site had been increased to 3m, following discussions with Officers and was supported by the County Council.

· There was no condition or local or national policy to require solar PV installation on site, but the developer had agreed to meet these standards, as well as installing air source heat pumps.

· The final design of dwellings would be confirmed in the next few weeks, but the approximate location of dwellings was included in the plans.

· Refuse collection would mainly be from the kerbside, but otherwise it was within 30m of the dwelling.

· No trees would be lost to accommodate play areas.

· A water point would be provided for the allotments.

· The aim was to preserve and enhance the landscape and setting, whilst delivering a meaningful and timely contribution to the housing need in the district.

The following Members asked points of clarification:

· Councillor Dave Winstanley

· Councillor Tom Tyson

In response to points of clarification, Mr Osborn advised that:

· Pedestrian access would be possible through the north of the site, via a footpath through the woods which would link to the existing network.

· The S106 agreement included various improvements to existing Rights of Way in the area, with details submitted to Officers on these proposed improvements.

· It was not a conscious decision to omit flared eaves, as seen elsewhere in Letchworth, but simply followed the design document included at the Outline Planning stage. There were other aspects of the Garden City principles which had been included in these proposals.

· The site would not be self-sufficient as it stands, but what has been provided on this site was above and beyond what was required of developers, with some PV installed on dwellings and charging points for cars across the site.

· They were doing as much as any developer in the UK to promote self-sufficiency of sites, but this was not completely possible.

· The water point at the allotments would be provided by the developer as part of the Allotment Improvement plan, which would include installation of toilets and storage as well.

In response to points raised during the public participation, the Project Officer confirmed that:

· The original improvements proposed for access along Flint Road was proposed at 2m width. However, through negotiations, this was now proposed to be 3m width, to provide access for cyclists and pedestrians.

· The application had been inspired by Garden City arts and crafts principles but had not followed them completely. However, there was good detailing around the proposed dwellings, which would mean the site would be considered as part of Letchworth Garden City and would not stand out through design.

Councillor Nigel Mason, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Emma Fernandes seconded and, following a vote, it was: