Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).

a)    The Committee received a report from the Principal Planner on the North West Hatfield Masterplan SPD Adoption. Policy SP 22 of the Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan states that a masterplan for the site will form the basis of a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and that any application for development should be preceded by and consistent with the masterplan.

b)     

c)    1.2 A Development Framework SPD, containing a masterplan for North West Hatfield has been prepared by the landowner, in collaboration with officers from Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council and Hertfordshire County Council to ensure the site is planned comprehensively to create a new sustainable community. The document has been prepared in line with the Council’s Approach to Master Planning Guidance note which was endorsed by the Council in March 2024.

d)     

e)    The Draft SPD was consulted on for a period of six weeks between 08 November and 20 December 2024. Following consideration of the responses, some changes were made to the consultation draft.

f)                

g)    During the discussion the following points were raised:

h)     

i)      A member asked regarding the mineral extraction and possible controversy particularly as some of it will be going on while houses are being built.

j)      The Principal Planner responded that the mineral application is a county matter which has been consented. There has perhaps been a lack of understanding from the community between the two separate issues. The Principal Planner confirmed that the minerals extraction will take place prior to development and the landowner has been asked to be clear on their website about this so that people can better understand the process. She went on to say there have been concerns about traffic congestion regarding both the minerals and construction and the landowner has confirmed that the bulk of the mineral will be taken away by a belt system rather than heavy vehicles.

k)    A member asked a question regarding the sound barrier and whether there is any clarity over whether the sound barrier is going to be constructed.

l)      The Principal Planner responded that there are set standards that will need to be met and there is obvious noise levels from the A1M. Dependent on when that phase of development comes forward, and that there will be employment on the most sensitive part of the site rather than residential development taking place because probably the noise levels there would unlikely be suitable for residential development. There will need to be more detailed design work undertaken as part of a detailed application and this will aid understanding of what the employment building will look like and the ability of this to act as a sound barrier. As part of the planning application process there will need to be further studies into sound levels.

m)   The member then asked for clarification that the employment buildings may provide some of that barrier to the motorway.

n)    The Principal Planner responded that they would expect some level of landscaping and trees where certain species do act as sound barriers better than others. The employment building itself would likely act as a sound barrier although the detailed design of the building would be determined at a later stage.

o)    A member asked if officers knew what renewable energy there would be.

p)    The Principal Planner responded that it is not known at this stage. A commitment to a sustainable development strategy is required within the SPD. It is something that could be looked at as part of a design code or as part of a full planning application. She added that by the time the latter stage of development comes forward there could be a revised local plan that could have different standards for future development than the current policy regime.

q)    A Member asked a question regarding the 25% affordable housing within the report and whether it could show how much should be social housing.

r)     The Principal Planner responded that it’s a bit of a moving target. Studies are being commissioned at the moment for housing need within the borough and they would have to meet the target within a revised local plan.

s)    The Assistant Director for Planning added that in current local plan it is 25% of total housing that would need to be affordable, and of that quantum, just over half should be social rent so would normally expect 51% of thereabouts to be social rent and the remaining 49 to be made up of other affordable housing products. By the time this application comes, there could be a new local plan which could take a different stance depending on the identified need.

t)     A Member asked if the concerns that came back from residents regarding traffic congestion have been resolved.

u)    The Principal Planner responded that for a development of this size there is always going to be concerns around traffic congestion. Officers have been working closely with the County Council in terms of highways requirements and the Landowner has done further work with regards to traffic modelling. The details of that will be submitted as part of a detailed planning application.

v)    The Member added that it is an area that already suffers from congestion at peak times and if there is going to be another secondary school this will pull in traffic. 

w)   The Principal Planner responded that the site proposes new bus routes through the site and additional active travel links through Stanborough and the south of the site to enable walking and cycling. At this stage of the process, it is not possible to give exact details regarding levels of traffic because this will be dependent upon the types of homes delivered on site. For example, a scheme for 1,750 one-bed flats would probably generate a very different amount of trips that a scheme for 1,750 five-bed homes.

x)    The Assistant Director for Planning added that the SPD is very high level and at this point is very much about principles. The principle of a development of up to 1,750 homes and school and all the other uses could be acceptable, although much of the detail won’t be known until an actual planning application is received.

y)    A Member commented regarding affordable housing, there is a genuine fear and concern from residents that the 25% affordable homes are going to be one-bedroom flats and not family homes with gardens as is what is needed in the borough and wanted to put on record that they are quite concerned that that 25% needs to be across all types of homes and not just the lower end of what developers deem they can deliver.

z)    The Principal Officer responded that it was a very good point and will take it into consideration. A housing needs assessment is being commissioned at the moment and there will be some up-to-date information when the application comes forward.

aa)A Member commented that the connectivity with Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City is important and all forms of transport - walking, cycling and cars should fit in with the rest of the area.

bb)The Principal Planner responded that there had been discussions with landowner and the highways authority as part of the masterplanning process. The A1M was noted as a barrier so how can that be overcome and maintain existing rights of way, particularly the underpass at Stanborough whilst making it for user-friendly is an important consideration. Also, access from the south of the site to Hatfield and particularly the train station was important.

cc)   

dd) 

ee)RESOLVED:  Unanimous

ff)     

gg)That Cabinet Planning and Parking Panel (CPPP) recommend to Cabinet that the North West Hatfield Masterplan, as detailed in Appendix A, be adopted.

hh) 

ii)     Delegate authority to the Assistant Director (Planning), in consultation with Executive Member for planning, for any necessary further minor editorial changes to the SPD if necessary.