71-home redevelopment at Ickleford Mill, Ickleford, Hitchin

What was proposed

The applicant sought to vary twelve conditions on outline permission for up to 71 homes, access, parking, landscaping, open space and demolition.

“Variation of conditions 4, 10,11,14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 31 32, 35 and 37 of outline planning permission 17/01955/1 granted 11.03.2024 for up to 71 dwellings and associated access, car parking, garages, landscaping and open space including demolition and removal of all existing structures, buildings and hardstanding (all matters reserved except means of access)”

Officer report

The site

The vacant 3.59-hectare mill site contains buildings, silos, warehouses, yards, trees, two bridges and the River Oughton.

“The application site is a vacant mill located within the village of Ickleford off Arlesey Road to the southern edge of the village. Measuring 3.59 hectare in area, the site comprises a number of detached and linked buildings including mills dating from the 1960s and 1980s, silos, warehouse, food processing facilities, laboratories, offices and yard and car parking areas. The River Oughton runs through the site from east to west.”

“The village of Ickleford is located north of Hitchin. It has a predominantly residential character with the main built-up area to the north and north-east of the application site.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and applications

The outline permission was approved in 2024, a non-material amendment was approved, and several condition and reserved matters applications remained pending.

“25/02832/NMA - Amendment to wording of conditions 3, 7, 8, 9 24, 25, 26, 29, 36 and 38 (as Non-Material Amendment to outline application 17/01955/1 granted 11.03.2024) - approved…”

“26/01348/DOC - Details Reserved by Condition 7 (Arboricultural Impact Assessment) of outline planning permission 17/01955/1 granted on 02.12.2025 - pending…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval, saying the changes had no identified adverse impacts, supported housing supply and accorded with the development plan.

“Section 73 (S73) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows a landowner to apply to the planning authority for planning permission for the development of land to either not comply or vary conditions imposed on an extant planning permission. When determining an application to vary or remove conditions on a S73 application, the local planning authority is limited to considering the conditions themselves and the impacts of the proposed variations.”

“There is an extant permission for the residential development of this site. This is a ‘windfall’ housing site which will deliver housing on previously developed land. The approval of this application will make a contribution to the housing land supply. As the council is currently unable to demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply, the tilted balance of paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF is engaged, the collective benefits of the development would be significant.”

Officer report

What neighbours said

Four neighbours raised concerns about sewage capacity, dust, traffic, apartment design, traffic calming, noise and privacy.

“Neighbours – four responses received raising objections and concerns -”

“Traffic impacts on local roads arising from new development especially at peak periods and priority restrictions that are currently in place • Additional design elements to apartment building should be considered • Traffic calming measures should be considered. • Noise and disturbance from additional foot traffic • Loss of privacy and increased intervisibility with existing adjacent residential property…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Project Officer presented the report, and the applicant’s representative spoke in support of the application and its practical, highway and ecological changes.

What members discussed

Members considered the amendments sensible, welcomed the brownfield redevelopment and design, noted highway support, and discussed crossings, storage, parking and bridge arrangements.

“The following members took part in the debate:”

“The amendments were sensible and understandable. • Agreement regarding the number of changes from the original permission and it was difficult to identify anything concerning. • Positive comments on the redevelopment of the brownfield site, the removal of the problematic mill buildings, and the sympathetic design of the scheme. • Improvements to bin storage, car park efficiency and the bridge crossing priority arrangement.”

Minutes

The vote

The committee voted after a proposal to grant permission was made and seconded.

“Councillor Emma Fernandes, as the Chair, proposed to grant permission and this was seconded by Councillor Dave Winstanley.”

“The following points were made as part of the debate:”

Minutes

What the committee decided

The committee granted permission subject to a deed of variation, delegated powers and amended conditions covering trees, dust, construction, highways, flooding, heritage and ecology.

“RESOLVED: That application 26/00587/S73 be GRANTED planning permission subject to:”

“A) The satisfactory completion of a Deed of Variation to the S106 agreement secured on the original planning permission 17/01955/1 to secure the original Heads of Terms as set out in the original report as amended by this addendum. B) Providing delegated powers to the Development and Conservation Manager to update conditions with minor amendments as required.”

Minutes