Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning)

The Planning Policy and Implementation Manager introduced the report as set out in the agenda. Members commented as follows:

·        The Chair noted the area contained a lot of arable land and farmland and asked how biodiversity net gain (BNG) could be achieved when something green was to be turned into something built. Officers advised they would expect BNG to be accounted for onsite on locations such as North West Hatfield which was a very large site; it was agricultural land and the starting point for BNG was relatively low as a result.

·        The Chair asked where hard copies of the consultation would be sited. Officers said suitable locations were typically libraries etc; they would be resting heavily on the Council’s consultation portal and would also write to all residents within the garden village and the immediate location signposting them to where hard copies would be.

·        A member asked if hard copies would have Welwyn Hatfield branding; officers agreed to establish the answer to this after the meeting.

·        A member noted the final version of the SPD would come back to the Panel and would then go to Cabinet and asked why Development Management Committee (DMC) was not involved in the process. Officers advised that the Panel was the forum set out in the Council’s constitution that considered policy issues, whereas DMC made decisions about planning applications. The decision as to whether to adopt the SPD would be made by full Council.

·        Officers responded to a member question about BNG and explained the way the metric worked: the value of the land was assessed at a starting point and agricultural land generally had a low ecological value due to chemicals used on it, so the opportunities afforded were significant; it was likely the 10% minimum BNG could be exceeded across the development as a whole.

·        A member noted some sections of the SPD ended with ‘Future work’ and asked if that work would be included in the final version of the document. Officers said the SPD moved work forward from the Local Plan as it enshrined a set of principles and identified some key issues. A lot of technical work had been looked at by the landowner which had in part been updated to support this masterplan and SPD, and much more detail would be required. However the work carried out was sufficient for the current stage which was why the landowner had been asked to identify where future work would need to be, although they were unlikely to need to do further work between now and when the SPD was considered at Council.      

·        A member asked whether Gascoyne Cecil was proposing to hold an exhibition for residents around the garden village. Officers said their understanding was the estate wished to supplement the Council’s consultation with an event that would probably take place in the school.

·        A member commented that it was unclear in the ‘transport and movement’ section which paths were for pedestrians or for cyclists and officers agreed this would be clarified.

·        A member reflected on the fact that the public could think the Council was using its own land and had extensive resources whereas this was not the case; the Council did not have a blank slate and was not the landowner.

·        A member requested that links of ongoing consultations be sent to councillors with details of when they were closing. Officers agreed and said the two substantive items considered by the Panel at this meeting were working to the same timetable.                        

RESOLVED

The Panel recommended to Cabinet that the North West Hatfield Masterplan as detailed in Appendix A of the report be taken forward for public consultation for a period of six weeks.