Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Robert Boyle and Kamal Choudhury.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting held on 9 September 2025.

It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning and Development Committee held on 9 September 2025 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To consider the Section 73 amendment application to planning permission ref. 20/00643/RMM relating to changes to building heights and internal configuration of phase 2 of the approved development.

The Team Leader presented the amended application to the Committee. The changes to the application related to the building heights and the internal layout of Phase 2. Phase 1 had already been completed, providing 143 affordable rental units, while Phase 2 would deliver the remaining 383 flats, with no change to the overall total number of properties.

The amendments were proposed to improve the schemes’ visibility through a build to rent scheme along with the Building Safety Act 2022. As part of this, Blocks B and E had been unified in height to six storeys, which brought them below the Higher Risk Building threshold. This would also create a uniform courtyard layout. Block F had also been increased to ten stories. Block A would remain 20 stories as previously approved. All other elements of the scheme remained unchanged.

It was reported that the amended scheme included a reduction in car parking spaces compared to the previously approved plans. However, this remained compliant with the updated town centre parking policy, reflecting the site’s sustainable location close to public transport and cycle links.

Ample cycle parking would be provided, and residents would be encouraged to use sustainable travel options such as cycling, buses, and trains. This was in line with the approved Travel Plan, consistent with the Council’s approach to promoting reduced car dependency in town centre developments.

The cycle route would be rerouted around Blocks A and F along Lytton Way as previously approved, forming a shared pedestrian and cycle path. The design and materials of the proposed buildings were consistent with the original scheme and Phase 1, featuring similar brickwork and balconies.

A question was raised regarding the loss of car parking spaces, noting that the existing car park was already heavily used, and questioned whether there were plans to replace or expand parking provision elsewhere. Comments were raised that the development appeared unsuitable for families and was likely to attract commuters rather than residents.

In response, Officers advised that the loss of the original car park had been established through the original planning permission granted in 2017 and confirmed again through the Reserved Matters approval. The overall parking strategy for the Town Centre had already taken this into account, and the demand for spaces continued to be monitored. Officers were satisfied that the loss of parking could be accommodated with existing Town Centre car parks. It was noted that the current application related only to amendments to building heights, and did not revisit the principle of parking provision.

Members stated that the application did not sufficiently consider future transport developments, such as the growth of electric vehicles. Officers clarified that the current application sought only minor amendments to an already approved scheme, largely related to building height changes and internal reconfiguration to accommodate a build to rent model. These changes had resulted in a reduction in car parking spaces from 37 to 15, with no change to disabled parking and an increase in cycle parking.

It was confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

To consider the demolition of existing buildings and construction of accommodation for older people, comprising 79no. apartments and associated works.

The Senior Planning Officer presented to the Committee a report to consider the demolition of the existing building and the construction of accommodation for older people, which would consist of 79 apartments and associated works.

The Officer presented site plans and photos of the existing area to the Committee and outlined the proposal to redevelop the site. The scheme included car and cycling parking, bin storage and landscaped areas with community gardens and orchards. Existing trees would be retained, and the building design featured a mix of materials, solar panels and accessible layouts to promote independent living and sustainability. 

The Chair invited Jill Borcherds from Cycling UK to address the Committee.

It was noted that the proposed cycling scheme did not comply with the Council’s Parking Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) or the Housing for Older People Strategy. It was noted that the proposed plans lacked adequate provision for short stay visitor parking, adapted cycles and secure sheltered storage.

It was further noted that no charging facilities were included for electric bikes, despite increasing ownership among older residents. It was urged that the development be designed with higher quality and future proof bike storage to support sustainable and active travel.

The Chair invited Chloe Smith from Pegasus Group, the planning agent who was supporting Anchor on this application, to address the Committee. 

It was noted that Anchor was a not-for-profit housing provider for older people and had worked closely with the Council on this proposal. Chloe explained to the Committee that the scheme would make efficient use of a brownfield site to deliver 100% affordable homes for residents aged over 55, designed to meet accessibility and space standards.

The development included landscaped gardens and communal facilities, with existing residents offered the option to return after construction. The proposals received no objections from statutory consultees.

The Chair thanked all speakers for their contributions and invited the Planning Officer to respond.

The Officer advised that the site was not designated in the Local Plan and therefore was considered a windfall development opportunity. It was noted that the site was in a highly suitable location within walking distance of the town centre, public transport, and local services.

It was noted that requests for NHS and Ambulance Service contributions were not supported, as future occupiers of the planned development were already existing Stevenage residents and would not create additional demand.

Hertfordshire County Council had also withdrawn requests for transport contributions, as previous funding for improvements had already been secured.

The design was described as ‘modern’ and of ‘high quality’, comprising an L-shaped building of three to six storeys with mixed materials and improved landscaping, including 29 new trees. The proposal was considered to enhance the visual appearance of the area without harming nearby properties and included conditions to protect privacy and mitigate noise impacts.

Amenity space exceeded policy requirements, and all dwellings met national standards. Although the parking provision of 25 spaces fell below policy expectations, this was considered acceptable given the site’s sustainable location  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To note a report on decisions taken by the Assistant Director Planning and Regulatory in accordance with his delegated authority.

It was RESOLVED that the Information Report – Delegated Decisions be noted.

To note a report on decisions taken by the Assistant Director Planning and Regulatory in accordance with his delegated authority.

It was RESOLVED that the Information Report – Appeals / Called In Decisions be noted.

To consider any Part I Business accepted by the Chair as urgent.

There was no Urgent Part I Business.

To consider the following motions that:

1.    Under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraphs 1-7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended by Local Government (Access to information) (Variation) Order 2006.

2.    That Members consider the reasons for the following reports (if any)being in Part II and determine whether or not maintaining the exemption from disclosure of the information contained therein outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

It was RESOLVED: 

1. That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraphs1 – 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended by Local Government (Access toInformation) (Variation) Order 2006. 

2.That Members consider the reasons for the following reports being in Part II and determine whether or notmaintaining the exemption from disclosure of the information containedtherein outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

To consider the HMO enforcement investigations 2025/26 Q1 and Q2 update report.  

It was noted that the Committee discussed the Quarter 1 and 2 reports on Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) across Stevenage.

The Committee asked several questions which were answered by Officers.

To consider any Part II Business accepted by the Chair as urgent.

There was no Urgent Part II Business.