PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE
8th November 2016
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION
Item 1: 07/16/0951/F
Location: The Windmill 210A Windmill Lane Cheshunt Hertfordshire EN8 9AF
Description: Development of a four storey building with commercial unit on ground floor and 5 no. residential flats on floors above
Applicant: Ludgate Developments Ltd.
Agent: DPA (London) Ltd
Date Received: 24/08/2016 Date of Committee: 05/10/2016
Officer Contact: Colin Free Expiry Date: 19/10/2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr Carol Crump, Cllr Cody McCormick and Cllr Tony Siracusa
RECOMMENDED: that planning permission be approved subject to the planning conditions set out at the end of this report.
1.0 CONSULTATIONS
1.1 HCC Flood Management Team – No objection EA – Referred application to Flood Risk Standing Advice HCC Highways – No objection Network Rail – No objection Environmental Health – No objection
2.0 PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of a site notice and 32 individual neighbouring letters – addresses comprise:
197, 199, 201, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209 & 211 Windmill Lane 29, 31, 33 & 35 Shalcross Drive Flats 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 - 212 Windmill Lane Flats A, B, C and D – 208 Windmill Lane Flat, The Windmill, Windmill Lane Hazel Apartments Windmill Lane Station Cars Windmill Lane The Windmill 210 Windmill Lane A1
3.0 REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 Three responses have been received from neighbouring properties, all objecting. The reasons for objection raised are summarised as follows:
Concerns that the retail unit would become an off licence – with associated anti- social behaviour issues There would be a loss of character through the demolition of the existing building There is an over proliferation of flatted developments in the local area Crossrail 2 will render the development redundant Resident windows overlook the fronts of properties opposite in Windmill Lane with associated loss of privacy issues Structure will deprive light from other local residences Overlooking and loss of light at the Windmill PH, including at flank window due to be re-instated in near future Overbearing effect on pub garden Potential effects to future residents from activities already occurring at public house Boundary dispute with site of Windmill Public House
4.0 RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.1 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
SUS17 Flood Risk Assessments SUS18 Surface Water Drainage H6 Protecting the Amenity of Existing Residential Areas H8 Design Quality of Development HD13 Design Principles T3 Transport and New Development T10 Cycling Provision T11 Car Parking
4.2 The policies of the emerging Local Plan are also of particular relevance, in particular:
4.3 CH1: Cheshunt Lakeside – which concerns site allocations for the proposed redevelopment of sites in Delamare Road and Windmill Lane. The application site is in close proximity to but outside the boundary of the designated land.
4.4 The Borough-Wide Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004) (updated in 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
4.5 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered. The local planning policies listed above are generally considered to accord with the policies and principles of the NPPF.
4.6 The Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards (approved February 2011) is a relevant consideration. A2
4.7 The Technical Housing Standards – nationally described space standards (March 2015) are also relevant.
5.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 The site is located at the corner of Windmill Lane and Station Approach, immediately to the east of Cheshunt Rail Station. The current structure at the site is a single storey building which formerly housed an interior design and fittings company but more recently was a coffee shop. The unit currently appears to be standing vacant. To the south of the site is a four storey apartment block recently constructed on a former factory site and further to the south is the station car park. Members should note that the structure on the former factory site is currently subject to enforcement action, having not been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. To the east is the level crossing into the Lee Valley Park. Immediately adjacent to the site to the west is the Windmill Public House and opposite there is a row of residential dwellings (No’s 197-211 odd) and a Network Rail Maintenance Depot.
A3
Aerial Image of Site
Street View of Site
6.0 PROPOSAL
6.1 The application seeks full planning permission for the development of a four storey building with a commercial unit and car parking and service bays on the ground floor and five, two bedroomed flats on the floors above.
A4
6.2 The proposed development would comprise a four storey building having an overall footprint of 227m2 and maximum dimensions 13.4m width and 18m depth. The ground floor would be made up of the shop space, of 18m2, the residential entrance and stairwell, parking for five vehicles with turning spaces, storage space for two 1.26m x 1m Eurobins and racking for six bicycles. The first and second floors would have identical layouts comprising of accommodation for two x two bedroom flats and the top floor would have a reduced floorspace with a roof terrace area and would accommodate a fifth two bedroom flat. Access to the parking area would be from Windmill Lane, via the existing crossover for the manufacturing unit currently in situ and the garage area would have a sliding security gate set 5m back from the edge of the footway and 7m back from the road.
6.3 The application is supported by a suite of documents comprising:
Design and Access Statement Noise Risk Assessment Flood Risk Assessment
6.4 The applicant has not undertaken pre-application advice with the Local Planning Authority.
6.5 Following the comments made by representatives of the freeholders of the Windmill Public house site, the applicant was invited to re-address the site boundaries and layout. Subsequently amended designs were submitted and re-consultation undertaken. The amended designs form the basis of this report although confirmation of acceptance of the re-drawn boundary has yet to be received from the Windmill Public House.
Indicative Illustration of the Proposed Front Elevation
A5
Building below is the elevation for the adjacent 212 Windmill Lane forming part of the street scene elevation.
210A
Proposed Elevations
A6
Proposed Plans
7.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 07/14/1130/O - Outline application for development of commercial unit and five residential flats Conditional Approval (01/04/2015)
7/264/1990 – Change of Use Shop/office to car rental - refused
7/115/1988 – Change of Use Newsagent to minicab office – refused
7/756/1987 – Single storey side extension to office & shop – conditional approval
8.0 APPRAISAL
8.1 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. Principle of development ii. Design, layout, and appearance; iii. Highways/Parking; iv. Impact to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties; v. Planning Obligations; vi. Other matters
These matters will be appraised in turn, below.
A7
Principle of Development
8.2 The principle of this development has already been established in the previously approved application for outline approval for this development. The accommodation and basic design and access remains largely unaltered from the approved scheme with most alterations comprising improvements to the cosmetic finish of the building and internal layout. Publication of the Draft Local Plan has not introduced any new policies or guidance which would give reason to reverse the previous decision. This proposal is compatible with the proposed allocation of the nearby site and could complement the development of that site.
When considered against the policies of the adopted and emerging Local Plans, the proposed development is acceptable in principle.
Design, layout and appearance
8.3 The accommodation and internal amenity provision for the residential accommodation of the development all comply with Council SPG and National Space Standards and the proposed apartments would provide adequate accommodation for future residents in close proximity to a significant commuter link in the Borough. The overall appearance of the building has been improved in this revised scheme from that previously approved by showing greater care and attention to finishing details and the materials proposed which would complement the surrounding vernacular of the locality. It is considered that the proposed building would enhance both the station entrance and the wider street scene.
8.4 Despite its lack of external amenity space it is considered that, owing to its close proximity to the Lea Valley Park and all of the facilities for leisure and recreation which are available there, the proposed development would be able to provide a good range and quality of opportunity for enjoyment of casual external amenity space.
In terms of its scale, design and layout the development is considered to be compliant with all relevant existing Local Plan Policies and also those of the emerging Local Plan.
Access and Car Parking
8.5 The provision of five spaces for private vehicles is considered adequate for the five dwellings proposed as the site is located within the Borough Accessibility Corridor and is next door to Cheshunt Station. The cycle storage is adequate and would facilitate leisure use of cycling facilities in the nearby Lea Valley Park. The gated access is considered appropriate for security purposes and is set sufficiently back from the highway to ensure that no hazard to highway safety would occur as a result of vehicles waiting for the gates to open.
The parking and access provided for the proposed development is considered acceptable and it is considered that no hazard to public highway safety would be created.
A8
Amenity
8.6 The frontage of the property would stand 25.8m from the front of the nearest neighbouring residential property, No.211 Windmill Lane, separated by the main thoroughfare of the highway. At this distance and when assessed under guidelines contained in the Borough Wide SPG document it is considered that no material intrusion or infringement to privacy would occur. Equally, whilst the development would be apparent in the outlook of residential properties opposite, it would not appear intrusive or incongruous in the wider setting of the locality.
8.7 An objection has been registered on the grounds that the outlook of a window on the first floor of the east flank of the Windmill Public House would be blighted by the development as it stands less than 2m from the flank of the proposed development. At the time of the officer site visit this opening appeared to be brick in-filled and not providing daylight to the interior of the building. Although the objection letter notes that the window is to be re-instated in the near future, the current obscuring of that opening indicates that the window does not provide primary lighting, ventilation or outlook to residents of that adjacent site and is not essential to the everyday use of the property. See image below, window in top rear flank of PH to right of picture;
8.8 It is also represented that the development would overshadow the beer garden of the adjacent public house, creating a sense of enclosure for that site. However, it is not considered that this effect would be detrimental to operation and use of the beer garden.
Waste
8.9 The provision of two large capacity Eurobins (1.24m x 0.97m) in a bin store of 3.1m x 1.2m capacity, located on the ground floor is considered adequate provision for the five dwellings proposed. The bins would be located approximately 12m from the highway which would be a suitable arrangement to facilitate ease of collection.
A9
Other matters
8.10 Noise: An acoustic report prepared for the development concludes that the development would meet the requirements of BS8233 and that therefore the development would fit into the category of No Observed Adverse Effect Level and that it is therefore in accord with the NPPF. Environmental Health report that further assessment is required as the submitted report uses outdated legislation as a basis of its recommendation. A further study can be required by condition in the event of the proposal being found otherwise acceptable.
8.11 Flood Risk: A Flood Risk Assessment prepared for the Outline application (Ref: 07/14/1130/O) was considered acceptable and no special requirements or conditions were applied to the approval of that application. There have been no significant changes to the structure or to relevant policies to render that position in need of adjustment in this application. HCC Flood Authority recommends that a condition requiring an implementable SUDs strategy be incorporated into any approval granted. However, it is considered that a standard drainage condition would suffice.
Matters Arising from Third Party Representations
8.12 Crossrail 2: At the moment the detail of TfL/Network Rail’s plans for Crossrail 2 as they affect Cheshunt Station and its immediate surroundings are not known and to date there has been no indication that the application site would be affected. It would therefore be unreasonable to deny development proposals around the station pending confirmation of these plans, particularly in this case where a recent planning permission has been given approving the principle of the development now proposed.
8.13 Antisocial Behaviour: Concern has been raised regarding the potential for the retail space to be used as an off-licence. Whilst it is not considered reasonable or necessary that such a use be prohibited by condition on any planning permission granted, such use would require a licence from the Council. That licence application would be considered in relation to matters including anti-social behaviour.
8.14 Boundary Dispute: As discussed above, a representation has been made by representatives of the Windmill PH that the development would encroach into land not within the Applicant’s ownership. If granted, planning permission would not override the property rights of neighbouring land owners. Accordingly, the dispute is a civil matter which should be resolved by the two parties and does not preclude the grant of planning permission.
8.15 Proliferation of Flats: Whilst neighbour objections highlight the issue of an existing abundance of flatted apartments in the locality of the site, the Council is minded that market forces dictate that such development is the most in demand and appropriate for sites of this nature, particularly given its close proximity to the station. The development of family or alternative accommodation at such a site would be unlikely to be viable.
A10
Planning Obligations
8.16 In accordance with national planning policy guidance, this development is below the threshold of 10 dwellings for seeking planning obligations.
9.0 CONCLUSION
9.1 In light of the above appraisal, it is considered that the proposed development presents a visually attractive and sustainable use of a site which benefits from good public transport connections. Redevelopment of the site to provide local residential accommodation would meet a local demand and provide suitable and sustainable use of the site.
10 RECOMMENDED that the proposal be approved subject to the following conditions:
GEN1A – Standard Time Limit (3 Years) GEN7 - Development in Accordance with Numbered Plans GEN13 - Approval of Materials GEN14 - Approval of Surfacing Materials GEN15 - Details of Screen and Boundary Treatments RES11 - Parking for Private Vehicles Only NonStd - Drainage details NonStd - Approval of ‘Traffic Management Plan’ Prior to Construction NonStd - Access and Surfacing to be Completed Prior to First Occupation NonStd - Gates to be set back no less than 6m from highway
NonStd - Further noise assessment plan to be submitted and approved prior to development NonStd - Contamination report and Remediation Strategy to be approved and implemented before development commences Construction Management Plan (to include hours of work/deliveries, storage of materials and facilities, parking of construction vehicles, measures to limit dfirt and dust, details of site hoardings).
A11
Item 2: 07/16/0976/F
Location: White House Farm, St James Road, Goffs Oak
Description: Redevelopment of the site, comprising the demolition of the existing buildings, removal of hard surfaces and manège, and for the construction of nine dwellings, private access road, parking and landscaping
Applicant: Triread
Agent: Briffa Phillips Architects
Date Received: 26/08/2016 Date of Committee: 08/11/2016
Officer Contact: Stuart Robinson Expiry Date: 04/10/2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr Mills-Bishop, Cllr Moule and Cllr Pearce
RECOMMENDED that planning permission be refused for the reasons set out at the end of this report
1.0 CONSULTATIONS
1.2 HCC Lead Local Flood Authority – Objection. The Flood Risk Assessment is not suitable for assessing the risks arising from the proposed development.
1.3 HCC Highways – No objection, subject to conditions.
1.4 HCC Infrastructure – Requests provision of fire hydrants.
2.0 PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of a site notice, a newspaper advert (in the Mercury on 14/09/2016) and 19 individual neighbouring letters were sent to the following properties:
1 – 5 Oakdene; 7 – 10 The Asters; and Brackendale, Unit A Brackendale, Brookwall Nursery, Pendine, Oakdene, White Gates Cottage, White House Farm, Workshop JPM Contractors Ltd White House Farm, Writtles and Glencoe, St James Road
3.0 REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 No responses have been received from neighbouring properties.
A12
4.0 RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.3 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
SUS17 Flood Risk Assessments SUS18 Surface Water Drainage GBC2 Development within the Metropolitan Green Belt GBC19 Protection for Sites of Wildlife and Nature Interest EMP6 Local Employment Sites H6 Protecting the Amenity of Existing Residential Areas H8 Design Quality of Development H11 Housing Densities in New Development on Unallocated Housing Sites H12 Housing Mix H13 Affordable Housing HD13 Design Principles HD14 Design Statement on Local Character HD16 Prevention of Town Cramming T3 Transport and New Development T10 Cycling Provision T11 Car Parking IMP2 Community and Infrastructure Needs Linked To New Development
4.4 The draft Local Plan 2016 – 2031 was published for consultation on 18/07/2016 and the emerging policies within it are of some relevance to this application.
4.5 The Borough-Wide Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004) (updated in 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
4.6 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered. The local planning policies listed above are generally considered to accord with the policies and principles of the NPPF.
4.7 The Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards (approved February 2011) is a relevant consideration.
4.8 The Technical Housing Standards – nationally described space standards (March 2015) are also relevant.
5.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 The application site comprises part of Whitehouse Farm, situated to the south of St James Road, to the north of Goff’s Oak. The site has vehicular access onto St James Road.
A13
5.2 The site contains several existing structures on site, including a dwelling, a barn (presently in use as a car wash facility following the grant of temporary planning permission), a unit associated with a storage use and a metal framed storage shelter. A manège is located to the west of the barn. The majority of these structures are situated to the east of the site. There is a parking area, serving the temporary car wash use, to the south and east of the site.
5.3 The site is located within the Green Belt. The site is not located within Flood Zones 2 or 3.
A14
View looking east, showing the barn and the shelter (used for the car wash)
View looking west, showing the unit associated with a storage use
5.4 To the west of the site is Pendine, a dwelling set within a substantial plot which contains the remnants of a horticultural nursery. This site was the subject of a recent planning application seeking residential development, which was refused at the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting on 6 September 2016. To the north, south and west of the site are grassland fields.
A15
View from the south of the site, looking north
View of the entrance to the existing dwelling
5.5 The livery/manège have previously received temporary planning permission (expiring February 2018) for a temporary change of use from livery stables to a hand car wash. The site contains several containers to the west of the site, which do not have planning permission.
A16
View looking south from the entrance
Entrance to the site, from St James Road
6.0 PROPOSAL
6.1 The application seeks full planning permission for 9 x 4 bedroom dwellings. The existing structures, including a dwelling, would be demolished as part of the proposed development of the site.
6.2 The site measures 0.73 hectares in area. The gross density of the development would be 12.3 dwellings per hectare.
A17
6.3 The application is supported by a suite of documents comprising:
Design and Access Statement Flood Risk Assessment Foul Drainage Statement Land Contamination Report Transport Statement Bat Survey
6.4 The agent has submitted a proposed site layout, site sections, elevations and floor plans of the proposed dwellings. These are shown below.
Proposed site layout
A18
Side elevation Front elevation Rear elevation
First floor Second floor Ground floor elevation elevation elevation
Proposed elevations and floor plans – Plots 3 and 4
Front elevation Rear elevation
A19
Side elevation
Ground floor plan First floor plan
Proposed elevations – Plots 1, 2 and 5
Front elevation Rear elevation
Side elevation GroundA20 floor plan
First floor plan Second floor plan
Proposed elevations – Plots 6, 7, 8 and 9
Proposed section, looking south towards plots 2, 3 and 4
Proposed section, looking west towards plots 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9
Proposed section, looking west from the eastern boundary
6.5 The applicant has undertaken pre-application advice with the Local Planning Authority in respect of a 14 dwelling scheme. The officer response identified concerns relating to the principle of the development within the Green Belt and the proposed layout.
A21
7.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 The relevant planning history is listed below.
07/15/1150/F - A temporary change of use from livery stables to a hand car wash Application approved.
07/14/1088/F – Removal of agricultural tie to dwelling on the property. Application approved.
07/14/0484/LDC - Certificate of lawfulness for an existing use to permit the on- going use of the agricultural workers bungalow as an unrestricted dwelling – Application approved.
07/13/0839/LDC - Certificate of lawfulness for the occupation of The Bungalow at White House Farm by persons not employed or last employed in agriculture or forestry for a continuous period of at least 10 years in breach of Condition 3 of planning permission 7/407-82 – Application refused.
7/429/1993 - Outside manège and three additional stables – Application approved.
7/334/1993 – Joinery workshop (renewal) – Application approved.
7/283/1993 - Erection of barn – Prior notification approved.
7/517/1992 – Change of use of agricultural barn to mixed agricultural use and livery for 8 horses – Application approved.
7/836/1988 - (Outline) Residential Development – Application refused.
7/910/1987 - Change of use from agricultural building to carpentry workshop – Application refused but allowed at appeal.
8.0 APPRAISAL
8.1 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. Principle of development; ii. Design, layout, and appearance; iii. Impact to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties; iv. Highways and car parking; v. Drainage/Flood Risk vi. Loss of employment land vii. Refuse/Recycling Storage viii. Other matters; ix. Affordable housing and planning obligations
These matters will be appraised in turn, below.
A22
Principle of Development
8.2 As the site is not allocated for development within the current or emerging Local Plan, and is located wholly within the Green Belt, the impact to the Green Belt must be considered. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.
8.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) identifies the construction of new buildings within the Green Belt as inappropriate development, unless they benefit from one of the exemptions set out in Paragraphs 89 and 90 of the NPPF.
8.4 The majority of the site is previously developed land. As such, the sixth criterion of Paragraph 89 must be considered. This states that:
“Limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.”
8.5 There is no definition of “openness” within the NPPF and the National Planning Policy Guidance, however it is commonly taken to mean the absence of built or otherwise urbanising development rather than being primarily about visual effects.
8.6 The application site comprises a barn structure (previously approved for use as livery stables), a manège, a unit associated with storage, and metal framed shelter and a dwelling. The structures which have lawful use for livery (presently in use as a car wash) may be considered previously developed. This includes the manege. There is no planning history relating to the use of the barn for storage purposes and it is therefore not possible to ascertain whether or not the existing storage use of the lawful use of this building. As agricultural buildings are not considered to construe previously developed land, it may not be considered that this structure benefits form such status until such time as the lawful use is established – for example through determination of an application seeking a certificate of lawful use. Accordingly only part of the site may be considered previously developed.
8.7 The proposed dwellings would have a similar volume to all of the existing structures (at approximately 5,500 cubic metres in volume). The area of the proposed structures would have a greater area than the existing structures (an increase in area of 332.8 square metres). When compared with those structures on land which may be considered as being previously developed, the increase in built form would be significantly greater.
8.8 The existing structures are predominantly situated within the centre and the east of the site, with a small unit, associated with a storage use, situated to the west. The proposed residential development would extend across the entire site and would be within 14.0 metres of the western boundary. Five properties would be within close proximity to the western boundary of the site. As such, the development would result in the construction of dwellings within an existing predominantly open area and beyond the extent of the previously developed land. Due to the location of the dwellings, and the scale of the development proposed, the proposed development
A23
would cause material harm to the Green Belt as it would result in a permanent reduction in the openness of the Green Belt.
8.9 As the proposal is not considered to comply with the exemptions set out in Paragraphs 89 and 90 of the NPPF, the proposed development is inappropriate development within the Green Belt.
8.10 Paragraph 87 of the National Planning Policy Framework identifies that
“inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances”.
Paragraph 88 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that:
“Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.”
8.11 There is no definition of the meaning of ‘very special circumstances’ but case law has held that the words "very special" are not simply the converse of "commonplace". The word "special" in the guidance implies a qualitative judgement as to the weight to be given to the particular factor for planning purposes.
8.12 The agent has submitted three very special circumstances, which have been listed and considered below.
1. No Five Year Supply of Land for Housing 2. Removal of Non-Conforming Uses 3. Economic Benefits
No Five Year Supply of Land for Housing
8.13 The Council does not have a five year supply of housing land and, as such, the provision of residential development could be considered as a very special circumstance, as the development would assist in meeting a five year supply of housing land.
8.14 However, in considering proposals for residential development regard should be had to Paragraph 49 of the NPPF which states that:
"Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites."
8.15 This paragraph contains a footnote (footnote 9) which sets out what specific policies may restrict development. These specific policies include land designated as Green Belt.
A24
8.16 The Council acknowledges that it does not currently have a five-year supply. However, as the site is within the Green Belt, the NPPF identifies that development should be restricted. This position is further supported by a Ministerial Statement (published on 06/10/2014) which states that housing need does not justify the harm done to the Green Belt by inappropriate development. Whilst members could consider the absence of a five year land supply as part of a very special circumstances case, the lack of supply does not on its own constitute that case and it is considered that limited weight should be applied to this factor as constituting a very special circumstance.
Removal of Non-Conforming Uses
8.17 The north-western area of the site contains a storage business, containing a single storey unit and several large sweeping vehicles. This use does not have the benefit of planning permission, nor has it been established through consideration of an application for a certificate of lawfulness that this use is immune for planning enforcement action. It is not, therefore established that the existing storage is lawful.
8.18 It is accepted that the removal of such a use would provide a benefits to local residents, by removing a use which is undesirable within close proximity to residential units. However, the benefits in terms of residential amenity are considered to be limited when compared to the scale of the site and the impact to the openness of the Green Belt. Furthermore, the lawfulness of this activity is not presently established. As such, only limited weight should be afforded to this reason as constituting a very special circumstance.
Economic Benefits
8.19 The agent has stated that the construction of 9 dwellings would provide up to 18 new jobs for a year, in addition to on-going contributions towards the local economy associated with additional households, such as Council Tax.
8.20 The proposed development would result in the loss of an existing hire depot, specialising in large road sweeping equipment, which employs three administrative people at the site.
8.21 The temporary car wash use also provides employment opportunities for the area. Whilst it is noted that this use is temporary in nature, the previous livery use would also present employment opportunities.
8.22 As the construction jobs would be temporary in nature, and would remove employment opportunities from the existing site, no weight should be afforded to this reason as constituting a very special circumstance.
Conclusion
8.23 The proposed development would be harmful to the Green Belt due to its inappropriateness and its impact on openness. The reduction to openness within the western part of the site would reduce the separation between these settlements. In line with national planning policy, substantial weight is to be attached to any Green Belt harm.
A25
8.24 Taken together, the very special circumstances are not considered to clearly outweigh the substantial harm to the Green Belt that would result from the development of the site for housing. As such, the development would not comply with Section 9 of the NPPF, Policy GBC2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review and Policy GB1 of the emerging Broxbourne Local Plan.
Design, layout and appearance
8.25 The scheme would redevelop the site, demolishing the existing structure, including a dwelling, for nine dwellings. The proposal would be designed with a cul-de-sac, with one access point on to St James Road.
8.26 The development would contain two main rows of dwellings, as shown on the proposed sections. The development would leave little space between the properties and would result in a cramped environment. This is visible on the proposed site layout, which shows gaps of 1.5 metres between plots 3 and 4 and plots 7 and 8. The lack of spacing and cramped appearance of the development is not considered to be in keeping with the Green Belt location or with the rural character of the surrounding area.
8.27 The proposal would have a density of 12.5 dwellings per hectare, which is considered to be relatively dense, when compared with the surrounding area. It is noted that a recent development to the west of the site (The Asters) has a density of 9.5 dwellings per hectare.
8.28 The site layout indicates that a large proportion of car parking would be around a turning area, at the end of the cul-de-sac. This area is considered to be dominated by car parking, which detracts from the rural character of the site. It also lacks clarity regarding future designation of the car parking spaces. The car parking could be more suitably accommodated within the front of plots, reducing the loss of open space.
8.29 The development would include three typologies, with two detached designs and a semi-detached design. The semi-detached design would follow a similar form to plots 1, 2 and 5, with the dwellings combined to form a wide structure. The design of plots 3 and 4 would have a tall, narrow form, which would differ from the wide design of the dwellings within the site and the surrounding area of St James Road. This design is not considered to be in keeping with the design of the surrounding area.
8.30 The dwellings would be constructed with brickwork external walls, with timber painted timber cladding and reconstituted stone details. The roofs would be constructed with plain clay tiles and would be constructed with a pitched roof design. The dwellings within the surrounding area exhibit pitched roof designs in a similar form to that proposed. The area also contains a variety of construction materials. It is considered that the specific nature of the construction materials can be controlled via a planning condition.
A26
8.31 The site is considered to present a cramped form of development, which does not respect the rural character of the area. The dwelling form for plots 3 and 4 would not be in keeping with the design of the dwellings within the surrounding area. As such, the development is not considered to comply with the NPPF, HD13, HD16 and H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review and DSC1 of the emerging Broxbourne Local Plan.
Impact to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties
8.32 The proposed dwellings would be located 10.3 metres away from the boundary of White Gates Cottage, to the north, and 19.6 metres away from the boundary of Pendine, to the east.
8.33 Due to the location, and the scale of the development, it would not present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of loss of light or in terms of being unduly overbearing. The design and nature of the dwellings would not present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of loss of privacy.
8.34 The proposal would comply with the dwellings size, bathroom size and garden size standards within the Borough-Wide SPG. Bedroom 3 (shown as a double bedroom on the plans) of plots 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 would measure 10.6 metres in area and, as such would fall below the double bedroom standard within the Borough-Wide SPG of 12.0 square metres in area. However, due to the small shortfall in area, and the size of the proposed dwellings, the size of these bedrooms is not considered sufficient to warrant an unacceptable adverse impact to the residential amenity of future occupiers.
8.35 Details of cycle storage have not been provided, however, it is considered that this matter can be controlled via a planning condition, if the application is approved.
8.36 The proposed development is not considered to cause material harm to the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring residents and is considered to provide sufficient amenity for future residents. It would consequently comply with the NPPF, Policy H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review, DSC1 of the emerging Broxbourne Local Plan and the Borough-Wide SPG.
Highways and car parking
8.37 Vehicular access would be taken from St James Road. The proposed access would be situated approximately 28 metres to the east of the existing access. A planning condition is proposed by the Highway Authority to require the closure of this existing access point In the event that planning permission is granted. The dwellings would all be accessed from the internal estate road.
8.38 The Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards states that the proposed development should provide 27 car parking spaces. The layout identifies that 27 car parking spaces can be accommodated within the site.
8.39 HCC Highways has not raised an objection, subject to eight conditions. It is considered that the proposed dwellings are unlikely to present an increase in vehicle trips, when compared to the existing and previous uses.
A27
8.40 The proposed development would comply with the Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards and the development would not cause material harm to the public highway.
Drainage/Flood Risk
8.41 The Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) has raised objection to the proposed development, as the Flood Risk Assessment does not provide them with suitable basis for assessing the flood risks arising from the proposed development. However, as the application does not propose a major development, the Lead Local Flood Authority has clarified that their comments are advisory only. Notwithstanding that their comment is advisory, the LLFA have confirmed that their objection to the scheme is maintained. In the Absence of the additional information required by the LLFA to enable their determination that the development will not increase flood risk elsewhere, the proposal is contrary to Policy SUS18 of the Local Plan which requires that run-off would not increase the risk of unacceptable flooding of watercourses, land or property.
8.42 The submitted Flood Risk Assessment contains insufficient information to determine that the proposal would not increase the risk of flooding. In the absence of this information, the proposal fails to comply with Policy SUS18 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review.
Loss of employment land
8.43 The site contains several employment uses, including a temporary car wash and a storage use associated with sweeping vehicles. The loss of local employment sites is protected by Policy EMP6 of the Local Plan.
8.44 The existing units, which are used for employment purposes, are buildings previously associated which agricultural and livery uses. As such, these structures are not ideal for employment purposes. There is no clear prospect of the site being re-used or redeveloped to modern standards.
8.45 The proposed development is considered to comply with Policy EMP6 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review. The proposal is not considered to present an unacceptable adverse impact to employment opportunities within the area.
Refuse/Recycling Storage
8.46 The proposed layout identifies that the refuse/recycling storage would be located in dedicated areas, towards the front of each plot. The size of the storage areas would not comply with the Waste Supplementary Planning Guidance size requirement of 2.5 metres wide and 1 metre deep. However, as there is considered to be sufficient space to accommodate refuse/recycling storage provision, it is considered that this matter can be controlled via a planning condition, if the application is approved.
8.47 As the proposed refuse/recycling storage is not considered to present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of residential amenity, the proposal would comply with policies H6 and H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review.
A28
Other matters
8.48 Biodiversity/ecology – The site is not designated as being part of a Local Wildlife Site or a Local Nature Reserve. The site shows the presence of bats, with the buildings used as a transitional roost by a single pipistrelle bat. Measures, including adequate landscaping and bat exclusion zones, will be detailed to ensure that bats are safeguarded through the development works and suitable alternative habitats are provided. Subject to compliance with the measures set out within the submitted report (which include a requirement for the dismantling of the roost by hand under the supervision of a licensed bat ecologist), it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of biodiversity and ecology. Compliance with these recommendations may be secured by the imposition of a planning condition. Additionally, following conformation of the presence of bats within the site, any works to the building containing the roost would be required to be completed under a license granted by Natural England. This requirement could be conveyed to the Applicant by an informative attached to the decision notice, in the event that planning permission is granted.
Affordable Housing and Planning Obligations
8.49 The National Planning Policy Guidance identifies that small-scale residential developments may not be subject to planning obligations. Specifically, the guidance states that
“Contributions should not be sought from developments of 10-units or less, and which have a maximum combined gross floorspace of no more than 1000sqm”
8.50 As the proposal would create floorspace above 1000 square metres, it is considered lawful and appropriate to require planning obligations, provided they are in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.
8.51 Policy H13 of the Local Plan identifies that sites with an area of at least 0.5ha should provide affordable housing at a rate of 40%. Given the scale of the properties proposed, it is considered appropriate to seek an off-site commuted sum.
8.52 Should the Committee support the proposals it is recommended that the grant of planning permission be subject to the completion of a planning obligation in accordance with Local Plan Policy IMP2. It is considered that the following contributions (totalling £786,118) would be necessary, reasonable and related in scale and kind to the development proposed.
Commuted sum for affordable housing of £195,338 per affordable dwelling (£586,014 in total). A contribution of £96,000 towards the New River cycle path from Lieutenant Ellis Way to M25 Primary Education £37,536. Secondary Education £45,296 Nursery Education £4,360. Childcare £1,952. Youth facilities £840. Library facilities £2,120. A29
Sustainable Transport – standard charge - £12,000.
8.53 The obligations are considered to be necessary in planning terms, reasonable to the scale, and directly related to the development. As such the obligations are considered to comply with the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.
8.54 The applicant has not confirmed their agreement to the contributions identified above. As the planning obligations and the delivery of affordable housing have not been agreed, the proposal does not comply with Policies H13 and IMP2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review.
9.0 CONCLUSION
9.1 The proposed development would be harmful to the Green Belt due to its inappropriateness and its impact on openness. Whilst part of the site is considered to be “previously developed land”, the structures associated with this are considered to be insufficient to justify the amount of development proposed. In line with the NPPF, substantial weight is to be attached to any Green Belt harm and very special circumstances are required to grant planning permission where such harm exists. This report concludes that such circumstances do not exist in relation to this application and that it should therefore be refused.
9.2 The layout of the proposed development would result in a cramped form of development, which would not be in keeping with the rural character of the area.
9.3 The planning obligations and the delivery of affordable housing have not been agreed. As such, the proposal does not comply with Policies H13 and IMP2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review.
10. RECOMMENDED that: planning permission be refused for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is inappropriate within the Green Belt and would result in harm to the openness of the Green Belt, which would not be clearly outweighed by very special circumstances. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to Policy GBC2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005), Policy GB1 of the emerging Broxbourne Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. The proposed development, by reason of the lack of spacing between properties, the layout and scale of the dwellings and the excessive provision for hard surfacing within the site, would not be in keeping with the rural character of the area. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to HD13, HD16 and H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005), Policy DSC1 of the emerging Broxbourne Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
A30
3. The applicant has failed to agree appropriate planning obligations and consequently the proposal fails to make adequate provision for affordable housing and local infrastructure, contrary to Policy IMP2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005).
4. The submitted Flood Risk Assessment contains insufficient information to determine that the proposal would not increase the risk of flooding. In the absence of this information, the proposal fails to comply with Policy SUS18 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review.
______
A31
Item 3: 07/16/0930/O
Location of Site: Land South of Hell Wood, Turnford, Herts, EN10
Description: Construction of a Gypsy and Traveller site and use of land as allotments as a replacement for the existing Halfhide Lane site (renewal of planning permission 07/11/0382/0).
Applicant: Broxbourne Borough Council
Date Received: 19/08/2016 Date of Committee: 08/11/2016
Officer Contact: Peter Quaile Expiry Date: 18/11/2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr Ball-Greenwood, Cllr Hart & Cllr Seeby
RECOMMENDED that subject to the application first being referred to the
Secretary of State, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out at the end of this report.
1. CONSULTATIONS
1.1 HCC Highways – No objection subject to five conditions. 1.2 Herts and Middx Wildlife Trust – No response to date. 1.3 Historic England – No objection subject to conditions requiring a management plan for the scheduled ancient monument to the north of the application site and a scheme of archaeological investigation 1.4 Environment Agency – Comment awaited 1.5 Environmental Health – No objection subject to condition to remediate the site. 1.6 Beams – No objection 1.8 Arboricultural officer – reply awaited 1.9 HCC Archaeology – No response but on the previous application raised no objection subject to a management plan for the scheduled ancient monument 1.10 Herts Constabulary – No objection subject to comments on the layout of the Gypsy and Traveller site, amenity buildings achieving a good level of in-built security and the design of the boundary treatment for the allotments. 1.12 The Wormley & Turnford Society – Strongly objects as this is exactly the same as the previous attempt to move the gypsy site and allotments in the previous local plan, rejected by the Government Inspector. To place children and allotments on contaminated landfill site with a high water table is totally irresponsible. This land is already earmarked for housing under the Local Plan and appears to be a back door way of granting this application prior to the government inspector hearing the Local Plan.
A32
2. PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of site notices, an advertisement in the local press and letters to those affected. The consultation period expired 23rd September 2016 and the period for the site notices expired 18th July 2011.
2.2 The application was advertised by means of a site notice, press advert and 54 individual neighbouring letters – addresses comprise:
Plots 1-15 Caravan Site, Halfhide Lane; 36, 37 & 122 Winnipeg Way, Turnford; 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 & 104 Vancouver Road, Turnford
3. REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 There have been no responses to date from individual residents but any received prior to committee will be reported verbally.
4. RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.1 The following saved policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001- 2011 (December 2005) apply:
CLT1 Community, open space and recreational facilities HD1 Effect of development on nationally important sites and monuments HD3 Preservation of heritage asset HD17 Retention/Enhancement of landscape features SUS5 Pollution SUS12 Development on Contaminated Land SUS15 Ground and Surface Water Protection SUS16 Flood Risk Assessments SUS17 Flood Prevention SUS18 Surface Water Drainage GBC2 Development within the Metropolitan Green Belt GBC16 Landscape Character Areas and Enhancement GBC19 Protection for sites of wildlife and nature interest GBC20 Protected species BFC1 Comprehensive development of Greater Brookfield BFC6 Land West of Halfhide Lane (Halfhide Lane site) BFC7 Relocation of Travellers BFC10 Protection of the Setting of the Green Belt T3 Transport and new development T9 Pedestrian Needs T10 Cycling provision T11 Car parking
A33
4.2 The following policies of the draft Broxbourne Local Plan (July 2016 6) are also material to this application:
BR1 Brookfield GT1 Gypsy and Traveller Sites
Development management policies within the draft Local Plan are consistent with the saved policies of the adopted Local Plan so far as consideration of this application is concerned.
4.3 The National Planning Policy Framework March 2012 as national policy guidance is material to determination of this proposal.
5. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 The proposal relates to the Gypsy and Traveller site and the Council allotment site, both currently on the north-western side of Halfhide Lane and to the west of the A10 flyover. The New River runs to the north and west of these sites; Brookfield Retail Park adjoins the Traveller site and the Council depot and Fairways Trading Estate is across Halfhide Lane to the south. The vehicle and pedestrian accesses are from Halfhide Lane. The proposed site for relocation is around 100m north of the New River and 200m to the west of the A10 flyover. The road access would be via a new arm off the Turnford interchange, currently the site of a former quarry access on the western side of the roundabout. The site itself is laid to grass and is at the eastern end of Cheshunt Park Farm. There is a modest fall on the site from west to east and the land has a slight overall camber following the post-quarrying restoration which involved grass on a thin layer of top soil. To the north is woodland with an open farmers field to the west – there is an earth bund to the south of the site and a disused drainage ditch with a line of trees to the east.
A34
View of site looking west
A35
View of Site looking east
Southern end of site
5.2 The proposed site for relocation is subject to a number of designations as follows: Metropolitan Green Belt Local wildlife site immediately to the north in Hell Wood Area of archaeological Interest Part of the site within Flood Zone 3a Scheduled ancient monument within Hell Wood Hell Wood is ancient woodland Landscape Character Area
A36
6. PROPOSAL
6.1 This application is a re-submission of the scheme granted outline planning permission in 2011 which established the principle of providing alternative sites for the existing Gypsy and Traveller site and for the Council allotments both of which are currently on Halfhide Lane. As with the previous scheme, the matters to be determined in this application are the access, the layout and the scale of development.
Application Site
6.2 The applicant has submitted a design and access statement along with the technical studies relating to ground conditions and flood risk, a supporting case of very special circumstances and a planning statement.
6.3 The overall new site would have an area of 4.4 hectares (ha). The proposed new Gypsy and Traveller site would provide 15 plots so that the whole of the existingcommunity could be kept together via the relocation. There is no intention to add to the number of families at the new site but the scheme acknowledges the future need for expansion set out in the Council’s Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment 2014 and the applicant notes in the design and access statement that land to the west of the application site is owned by the Council and would allow for the site to be enlarged as may be required. Each pitch would allow for a double unit mobile home and a facilities building in brick with a tile roof. There would be a 0.4ha paddock for Travellers’ horses at the eastern end of the site.
A37
6.4 The application would include 2.2 hectares to re-provide 90 allotment plots of up to 250sqm which would accommodate all the current plot holders at Halfhide Lane. Clean top soil to a depth of 450mm would be laid on the new allotment and water tanks would be installed at a ratio of one per eight plots.
6.5 There would be a planted 10m wide buffer strip at the western end of the development and bird boxes along with active site management to improve bio- diversity.
6.6 As with the approved scheme, road access would be provided for both elements of the site via a new road from the Turnford interchange – the access road for this site would run up the northern boundary between the front of the sites and Hell Wood. There would be 16 car parking spaces for allotment holders along with cycle parking facilities.
7. RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 The longer term site history relates to the adjoining farm uses and to the previous mineral extraction, land fill and subsequent reinstatement as agricultural land.
7.2 Permission was granted in outline for construction of a Gypsy and Traveller site and use of land as allotments as a replacement for the existing Halfhide Lane sites on 13th October 2011.
7.3 Permission was granted in outline for construction of a link road from Halfhide Lane to the A10 Turnford Interchange roundabout on 17th September 2013.
8. APPRAISAL
8.2 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. Principle of development;
ii. Design and Layout;
iii. Flood Risk;
iv. Ground conditions;
v. Ecology
vi. Amenity
vii. Access and car parking
viii. Travellers needs
These matters will be appraised in turn, below.
A38
Policy and Principles
8.3 The principle of developing the application site, which has previously been used for the extraction of minerals, has been established by the grant of planning permission in 2011 for an identical scheme to that now proposed. The main issue is therefore whether the circumstances have changed significantly since the previous permission was granted.
8.4 The current Local Plan contains saved policies relating to Brookfield which are relevant to this proposal. In essence, these saved policies allow for the relocation of existing uses from within the Brookfield area, notably the existing traveller and allotment sites, to facilitate a comprehensive mixed use development in accordance with the eight principles set out at paragraph 6.2.6 of the adopted Plan. When permission was granted in 2011 it was accepted that the application site was consistent with these policies and the ambitions for Brookfield. This remains the case although another option is being explored through the draft Local Plan.
8.4 It is by no means certain that the draft Local Plan will be found sound and become adopted policy. Such an outcome would be regrettable but if that were to happen, the saved policies in the adopted Local Plan would be relied upon to ensure that a comprehensive retail and leisure scheme can still be pursued. In those circumstances, relocation of the allotments and travellers would still be necessary and, given the difficulty of finding appropriate land for such uses, it is important that the option of relocating to the site the subject of the current application is retained.
8.5 The draft Local Plan 2016 proposes a more wide ranging redevelopment of the Brookfield area and although it will be some time before its eventual adoption, its policies are a material consideration. The draft Plan proposes an integrated mixed use scheme for the whole area (Brookfield Riverside and Brookfield Garden Village) and the application site is provisionally identified for residential purposes in an emerging master plan for the area. The draft Plan states that: “Brookfield is to be developed in accordance with a comprehensive master plan. Incremental development of the area will be resisted.”
8.6 Both the terms of the 2011 planning permission and the current planning application preclude (condition 6) any development being carried out otherwise than in accordance with a masterplan to be approved by the local planning authority. It is of course the Council’s preference for the proposals in the draft Local Plan and the emerging masterplan to be implemented. In these circumstances, the development proposed in the current application would not be pursued. However, should the policies in the draft Local Plan not come to fruition, then the implementation of the proposals the subject of the current application could only be undertaken in accordance with a comprehensive masterplan approved by the Council at that time.
8.7 The site proposed for the relocations is in the Green Belt and the guidance in the NPPF relating to such areas therefore needs to be taken into account in determining whether a ‘renewal’ of the permission should be granted. The NPPF identifies at paragraph 89 the types of development which may be considered as not being inappropriate. Allotments would not normally be considered inappropriate and would therefore be acceptable in this location. The relocation of the travellers’ site would however require very special circumstances to be demonstrated. Brookfield is of strategic importance to Broxbourne as a place in terms of the future
A39
economic prosperity of the Borough. Indeed the draft Local Plan recognises Brookfield as an opportunity to achieve a step change in the economy of Broxbourne and increase its attractiveness as a place to live in, invest in and visit, creating new retail and leisure opportunities which are known to be a priority for local residents, much needed housing, jobs and social facilities. As such it is considered that very special circumstances exist to warrant a further grant of permission in this instance.
8.8 In conclusion, it is considered that the proposals are consistent with the Council’s aims and policies and therefore, that the principle of granting planning permission for the same development as was approved in 2011 is acceptable.
Design and Layout
8.9 The principles of re-provision for the Halfhide Lane traveller community, retention of links with community services and adequate site/pitch/paddock areas were considered to have been met by the previous application in 2011. The number of pitches is considered in paragraph 8.18 but in terms of design and layout, the policy context for consideration is not considered to have significantly changed and this is considered to be acceptable.
8.10 The proposal has again been laid out so that the allotment site (an appropriate use in the green belt) would be adjacent to the open agricultural land of Cheshunt Park Farm and there would be significant landscape screening 10m deep on the western boundary along with an 8.5m wide planted buffer between the allotments and the Gypsy and Travellers site. To the south and north of the site there is dense woodland and in longer views from the west, the tree cover in Cheshunt Park would limit any visual intrusion. The site would be visible from the A10, but would be viewed past the tree screen and prospective development to the north of the New River. It is considered that the scheme has been considered sufficiently carefully in terms of public views so that its impact on local and wider public views would be limited and the development would be assimilated into the landscape.
Flood Risk and Ground Conditions
8.11 The site falls partly within Flood Zone 3a, these being the areas where there is a 1 in 100 year likelihood of flooding. The risk is generated where the new access road from the Turnford interchange would cross the Turnford Brook which further downstream meets Wormleybury Brook before feeding into the River Lea. As part of the proposal it is intended to reopen the blocked north-south drainage ditch which runs to the east of the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site. The application is accompanied by a revised flood risk assessment which seeks to take account of the recent changes in advice in relation to climate change surcharges provided by The Environment Agency (EA). The EA did not object to the scheme on flood risk grounds but on the previous scheme suggested a condition preventing the raising of ground levels in the flood risk area due to the potential loss of flood storage capacity. Since that time the Council has approved the construction of the access road to serve the wider development and of course, the sites that are the subject of this application. The Council has queried the current flood risk status of the application with the EA and with regard to the landfill on site, the EA did not object to the proposal in terms of potential risk to ground water subject to conditions
A40
requiring further investigation of the materials in the former quarry. An update will be provided at committee.
8.12 With regard to the principle of locating the allotments and Gypsy and Traveller pitches on former landfill, the Council’s Environmental Health service does not object to the proposal subject to detailed investigation and suitable remediation. The residential pitches would be largely hard surfaced and there would be a tarmac access road to the individual plots. The application proposes to cover open ground(such as the horse paddock) with clean top soil and the final detail of this could be dealt with by condition if the application is acceptable overall. The suitability of the site for planting and growing food for human consumption was previously considered by the Environmental Health service in the context of the intention to lay 450mm of clean soil over the proposed allotment site. It stated that human health could be protected but that more sampling would be needed to achieve high levels of confidence in the nature of the ground conditions and to ensure that measures can be put in place which would interrupt any potential pathways for pollution. The soil bund to the south of the site could form part of the ground cover but would also need to be subjected to intrusive investigation before its use could be agreed. It should be noted that the gaseous emissions from the site are low and can be resolved as part of the scheme of remediation.
8.13 With regard to the ground conditions and contamination it is considered that the site is suitable for the proposed uses subject to conditions and is therefore in compliance with adopted Policies SUS12 and SUS15. Clarification has been sought from the EA that the application is acceptable with regard to flood risk and in relation to contamination; a verbal update will be provided to committee in relation to these matters.
Ecology
8.14 The applicant had previously undertaken pre-application discussions with the Herts Biological Records Centre as Hell Wood is designated as a local wildlife site. As a result, the proposal, as before, envisages a 20m buffer zone between the new uses and Hell Wood (which includes the new access road). The proposed point of access has been specifically chosen to re-use the line of the concrete former quarry access road so as to minimise the impact on mature vegetation around the site. Although the Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust (HMWT) has not responded to date, it commented on the previous proposal to the effect that there are protected species such as grass snakes on the existing allotment site and that to meet statutory duties a full ecological survey of the proposed site will need to be undertaken so that a compensatory scheme can enhance the overall level of bio- diversity. The conditions suggested by the HMWT involved controlling external lighting, storage of building and other materials, a landscape management plan, detailed landscaping proposals, retention of the maximum tree and hedgerow cover and no tree/ground cover removal during the bird nesting season from March to August. The Trust also recommended that bird and bat boxes should be placed in appropriated trees around the site. Overall it is considered that the subject to controlling conditions the scheme can comply with Policies HD17, GBC16, GBC19 and GBC20 of the adopted Local Plan.
A41
Hell Wood
Amenity
8.15 As there are no residents near this site there would be no material impact on residential amenity from the proposal. With regard to amenity for the residents of the relocated Gypsy and Traveller site, there would be noise from roads and noise, dust and pollution from the major development proposed at Greater Brookfield. There will be inevitable noise and a degree of disruption inherent in such a major undertaking. However, this is a matter to be dealt with by Environmental Health, not planning legislation. The layout of the new Gypsy and Traveller site was prepared using DCLG good practice guidance. In addition, as this is an outline application, there would be ample opportunity for the details of the internal layout of the site to be finalised via further consultation and discussion with the intended residents. The proximity of the proposed site to the existing site means that access to local community services can be retained. The issue of noise from the new link road is a material consideration although it should be borne in mind that the existing site fronts onto Halfhide Lane which is extremely busy and that the elevated section of the A10 is only 130m away from the nearest existing pitch. As this would be a new site it would be possible to build a measure of sound insulation into the perimeter fence to the eastern boundary of the site and submission/approval of the means of noise mitigation can be secured by planning condition. It is considered that subject to the above condition the Scheme is acceptable in terms of amenity for future residents and complies with Policy BFC7 of the adopted Local Plan.
Access and Car Parking
8.16 The proposal is to locate the access at the north-eastern part of the site to connect with the link serving the housing, retail and leisure uses at Greater Brookfield. There will be extensive engineering work involved in the link road from the Turnford interchange but it is considered that the principle of accessing the site in this location is acceptable. The road along the north of the two sites would be 6.1m wide so as to allow access by vehicles servicing the allotments and vehicles supplying and being used by the Gypsy and Traveller residents. There would be 16 dedicated car parking spaces for the allotments which would be an improvement on facilities at the current site. There would be access for all modes of transport including cycling and walking via the new retail/leisure centre. The Local
A42
Highway Authority has not raised objection subject to conditions relating to provision of the new link road prior to development commencing and submission of further detailed drawings of the site access, internal roads and design of the car park for approval, closure of unused site access, approval of a construction traffic management plan including measures to prevent spillage onto the highway. The matters of access and parking are considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Local Plan policies T3, T9, T10 and T11.
Internal site access showing quarry road
Historic Environment
8.17 Hell Wood is the site of a Scheduled Ancient Monument the remains of what was a moated dwelling. The wood and the application site are designated in the Local Plan as a site of archaeological interest. As the application site is now landfill there is virtually no prospect of historic remains being in situ. Hell Wood is immediately to the north of the site and could be affected by greater use of the area resulting from the new access now proposed. The Design and Access Statement submitted by the applicant notes the importance of Hell Wood monument and it is suggested that, in line with the comments from Historic England, a management plan should be secured by condition for the on-going protection, maintenance and enhancement of the historic site. Overall, subject to condition, it is considered that the impact of the proposal on the historic environment is acceptable in terms of national policy set out in the NPPF and Policies HD1 and HD3 of the Local Plan.
A43
Traveller Needs
8.18 Since approval of the 2011 planning application, the Council has produced and published as evidence for the Local Plan a Gypsy and Traveller needs assessment. This demonstrates a need for 31 additional pitches across the Borough to 2031. This matter is addressed by Policy GT1 of the new Local Plan which provides for an expansion of the Halfhide Lane site by 5 pitches to a total of 20. Potential future expansion of the application site was considered within the consideration of the 2011 application but that was not possible because the site would be constrained on all four sides. However, that is no longer the case and, as mentioned in paragraph 6.3 above, the site can be extended as necessary should the current application proposal need to be implemented in the context of a new masterplan. In view of the changed circumstances and the consequent increased flexibility available, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable.
9. SUMMARY
9.1 The proposal before the Committee seeks to re-establish the principle of locating a replacement Gypsy and Traveller site and local authority allotments at Hell Wood. The access, layout and scale are to be determined by this application with appearance and landscaping reserved for future consideration. The access is acceptable to HCC as Local Highway Authority, the overall layout of the site, including parking/cycling provision has been assessed in paragraph 8.9 onwards and is considered to be acceptable. The matter of flood risk and contamination is to be reported verbally to Members once the EA has clarified its view and conditions may be suggested to control these matters. Ecology and heritage are assessed above and considered to be acceptable if controlled by condition.
9.2 It is considered that, whilst the proposal is not a preferred option, the applicant has demonstrated very special circumstances to justify the renewal of the 2011 planning permission, noting that this part of the development of Brookfield would not be implemented in the event that the proposals in the emerging Local Plan are found sound following an Examination in Public.
RECOMMENDED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out below:
1 The allotment development to be begun within a period of 5 years. 2 The Gypsy and Traveller site development to be carried out in accordance with detailed plans and drawings showing the appearance and landscaping. 3 Application for approval in respect of all matters reserved in Condition 2 above shall be made to the Local Planning Authority within a period of 5 years and development to commence within 2 years of the final approval. 4 That the details shown on the submitted drawing are for indicative purposes only. 5 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the numbered plans. 6 This permission shall not be implemented otherwise than in connection with the delivery of a comprehensive development of the Brookfield area in accordance with a masterplan and the new gypsy site is solely to accommodate Halfhide Lane gypsy/travellers. 7 Remediation of contaminated land to protect public drinking water.
A44
8 Verification of de-contamination measures. 9 No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 10 Details of any piling. 11 The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment. 12 Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation 13 The development shall not be occupied/used until completion of the archaeological investigation and post investigation assessment. 14 Details of all external lighting. 15 A full ecological assessment/survey. 16 No materials, debris, pollutants, vehicles or machinery to be stored or used within, leached into, or otherwise access the local wildlife site. 17 No part of the development shall be occupied until the access road and the new junction to the application site has been constructed. 18 Closure of existing disused site access. 19 Submission of construction traffic management plan to include prevention of mud and other debris on the highway. 20 Details/samples of all external facing and roofing materials. 21 Details/samples of all surfacing materials. 22 Details of all screen and boundary walls, fences and any other means of enclosure. 23 Submission of plans of the site showing the existing and proposed ground levels and levels of thresholds of all proposed buildings. 24 Car parking and turning facilities to be provided within the site. 25 Submission of a scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from noise from the A10 link road. 26 Approval of details of sewage disposal and drainage including on and off- site works.
A45
Item 4: 07/16/0318/F
Location: 53 – 57 Turners Hill, Cheshunt, EN8 8NT
Description: Full application for change of use and conversion of existing first floor offices and construction of new second floor to create 13 flats.
Applicant: A.W. Investments
Agent: Hertford Planning Service
Date Received: 10/03/2016 Date of Committee: 08/11/2016
Officer Contact: Stuart Robinson Expiry Date: 06/07/2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr Crump, Cllr McCormick and Cllr Siracusa
Supplementary Report
1 This application was presented to the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting on 28/06/2016 when it was deferred to obtain further information on the following matters:
(a) the design of the building. (b) clarification of fire escape arrangements. (c) details of the refuse/recycling storage arrangements. (d) further details of the concerns by HCC Highways.
These points have been addressed below and the original report is appended.
The design of the building
2. Since the previous presentation, the Council has held discussions with the applicant regarding an alternative design for the proposal. As part of these discussions, the Council proposed an alternative pitched roof design as shown below.
A46
3. The agent has consequently investigated whether it would be feasible to design the scheme with a pitched roof. Whilst he has been positive in considering alternative designs, the agent has raised significant concerns regarding the disposal of rain water. The existing building has a flat roof which falls to rainwater outlet points to the rear of the building in the adjacent service yard. There are currently no outlets to the front of the building (Turners Hill) or to the side (Albury Grove Road). The agent also notes that the adjacent building (Clayton Parade) discharges rainwater onto the roof of the application building as it also has no downpipes to the front.
4. The Agent has stated that the pitched roof design, as discussed with the Council’s Urban Designer, would not allow all of the rainwater to be disposed of to the rear of the building without running a pipe through the building from the front roof slope. Although this could be achieved via the use of a siphonic drainage system, the agent considers this to be bad practice for residential development and would not be acceptable to the NHBC. The agent has stated that a gravity fed drainage system would not work in this case due to the length of the horizontal pipes that would be required in order to transport the rainwater from the front to the rear of the building.
5. There is an existing surface water main to the front of the building that is partially within the road and partially within the footpath. The agent cannot confirm whether a connection can be made to this drain as they do not know what other services are along Turners Hill. There are also a number of other obstacles in the way including benches, a tree, a bin, a lamp column, a pedestrian crossing, a post and some cabinets. The agent has stated that there is also no guarantee that the required fall could be accommodated through any existing pipes and cabling.
4 The Applicant therefore wishes to retain the existing flat roof design. The agent has stated that the proposal could be designed with a ‘green roof’ which would help to slow down the rate of water entering the mains system. No details have been put forward on this point. If the Committee wish to include a ‘green roof’ design, then this could be controlled via a planning condition.
5. The agent has confirmed that the proposed development would include new brickwork across the front elevation and render on the side elevation and rear elevations. The development would remove the existing white cladding on the front elevation. New windows are also proposed on the front and rear elevations. Further to these points, the applicant has agreed to enter into a condition for external improvements to the elevations of the building.
Clarification of fire escape arrangements
6. One set of stairs is identified within the building, which would be located to the northern side of the building. The fire escape arrangements would be via this set of stairs. Planning Officers have discussed this matter in detail with Building Control Surveyors and they have identified that while the flats would be a considerable distance away from the stairs and main hall, the arrangements would comply with Building Regulations.
A47
Details of the refuse/recycling storage arrangements
7. No further details have been provided by the applicant regarding the existing or proposed refuse/recycling storage arrangements
8. The Waste SPG identifies that a Eurobin and a recycling docking station should be provided for the development. The proposed ground floor plan indicates that there is sufficient space for refuse/recycling for the proposed development, in accordance with the Waste SPG. This storage area would be situated 27.0 metres away from the front door of the building, which complies with the Waste SPG which requires the provision of facilities within 30.0 metres of an entrance. As such, the waste storage arrangements are considered to be acceptable.
Further details of the concerns by HCC Highways
9. HCC Highways objected to this application due to a lack of information regarding car parking provision.
10. HCC Highways has provided further clarification regarding their objection, stating that the main concern was the impact overspill parking would have on to Albury Grove Road, which has no parking restrictions and is heavily parked up throughout the day. As Albury Grove Road is already at capacity in terms of on-street car parking, Highways anticipate that parking would be forced into neighbouring roads. This would cause inconvenience, but more in terms of amenity rather than as a highways safety issue.
11. Whilst this clarification is noted, it is considered that the site is within an accessible, town centre location, with close proximity to shops, services and public transport. Whilst the concerns related to Albury Grove Road are noted, it is considered that the lack of any provision for off-street car parking would not justify withholding planning permission in this sustainable location.
Conclusion
12. This supplementary report has sought to clarify and address the issues and concerns which were raised by the Committee during the June meeting. The County Council has provided further detail and clarification regarding their specific concerns in relation to the proposed development. The applicant has added further clarification regarding the fire escape arrangements and the refuse/recycling arrangements. No additional designs have been put forward for the proposed roof design.
A48
13. It is disappointing that the alternative design proposed put forward by officers is unacceptable to the Applicant and that no alterative solution to take advantage of the opportunity to improve the appearance of the form of the building by the Applicant has been offered. Notwithstanding this, the proposal which is the subject of this planning application necessitates consideration on the basis of its own merit. The NPPF states that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. It remains the opinion of officers that there are not material considerations which would justify withholding planning permission for the proposed development. Accordingly, the recommendation remains for the grant of planning permission, subject to planning conditions including a requirement for elevational improvements to the building, to which the Applicant has indicated their agreement.
RECOMMENDED that planning permission be approved subject to the planning conditions and the applicant first completing a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the terms set out in this report
ORIGINAL REPORT
Item 4: 07/16/0318/F
Location: 53 – 57 Turners Hill, Cheshunt, EN8 8NT
Description: Full application for change of use and conversion of existing first floor offices and construction of new second floor to create 13 flats.
Applicant: A.W. Investments
Agent: Hertford Planning Service
Date Received: 10/03/2016 Date of Committee: 28/06/2016
Officer Contact: Stuart Robinson Expiry Date: 06/07/2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr Crump, Cllr McCormick and Cllr Siracusa
RECOMMENDED that planning permission be approved subject to the planning conditions and the applicant first completing a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the terms set out in this report.
1.0 CONSULTATIONS
1.5 HCC Highways – Objection – Recommend refusal due to lack of information regarding car parking provision.
2.0 PUBLICITY
A49
2.1 The application was advertised by means of a site notice, a newspaper advert (in the Mercury on 23/03/2016) and 36 individual neighbouring letters.
3.0 REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 Four responses have been received from neighbouring properties. Three objections have been raised, which have been summarised below:
Lack of car parking. Issues related to insufficient existing residential waste storage. Potential loss of light to neighbouring residents. Concern regarding noise/dirt resulting from the proposed development. Concern regarding overlooking. Support the change of use as it would enhance the building’s appearance.
3.2 One response has been received which supports the redevelopment of the site, provided there is no impact in terms of overlooking.
4.0 RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.9 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
H6 Protecting the Amenity of Existing Residential Areas H8 Design Quality of Development H10 Residential Conversion of Non Residential Premises H11 Housing Densities in New Development on Unallocated Housing Sites HD13 Design Principles HD14 Design Statement on Local Character HD16 Prevention of Town Cramming T3 Transport and New Development T10 Cycling Provision T11 Car Parking IMP2 Community and Infrastructure Needs Linked To New Development
4.10 The Borough-Wide Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004) (updated in 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
4.11 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered. The local planning policies listed above are generally considered to accord with the policies and principles of the NPPF.
4.12 The Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards (approved February 2011) is a relevant consideration.
4.13 The Technical Housing Standards – nationally described space standards (March 2015) are also relevant.
A50
5.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
Site location plan
5.1 The application site comprises a two storey building, with retail uses on the ground floor and office uses on the first floor together with a small yard area located to the rear of the building. The majority of the first floor is currently vacant. However the southern section of the first floor is occupied by Nationwide building society. The site is located within the District Centre of Cheshunt Old Pond.
A51
View from Turners Hill, looking west. Application site shown by red arrow,
View from Turners Hill, looking south east
A52
View from Turners Hill, looking north east
5.2 The rear of the site is accessed via Albury Grove Road. This area provides for car parking, waste storage and deliveries. However it must be noted that the majority of the car parking area is located outside of the application site. There are no existing car parking spaces which serve the first floor offices.
View from the car parking area, to the rear of Turners Hill. Application site shown by red arrow,
5.2 The area is largely characterised by ground floor retail and upper floor residential uses. The adjoining buildings comprise either wholly retail uses or ground floor retail uses, with residential uses on upper floors. It is noted that residential uses are located to the west of the application site.
5.3 The application property is of flat roof design, with buff brickwork and white cladding. The ground floor of the building, which faces Turners Hill, has glass frontages, with signage above.
A53
View within the first floor of the building
6.0 PROPOSAL
6.1 The application seeks full planning permission for change of use and conversion of existing first floor offices and construction of a new second floor to create a total of 13 flats (7x1 bedroom flats and 6x2 bedroom). The first floor would contain a communal storage area, which would provide additional space for residential storage. No further details have been provided regarding this use.
6.2 The proposed development would increase the height of the existing building by 2.6 metres, to a height of 9.6 metres. The depth and the width of the building would not be altered as a result of the proposed development.
Existing front elevation. The red line identifies the application site.
Proposed front elevation. The red line identifies the application site. A54
6.3 The application proposes that the front elevation of the building would be altered to include brickwork on the first and second floors, removing the existing white UPVC cladding. New windows are proposed on all of the elevations. The side elevations of the first and second floors would be finished with render. A new ground floor entrance, with a canopy, is proposed on the northern side elevation of the building, which adjoins Albury Grove Road.
Proposed window/upper floor detailing Existing upper floor detailing
6.4 The applicant has undertaken pre-application advice with the Local Planning Authority. The pre-application advice response identified that the development may have a detrimental impact to the amenity of future occupiers of units 2 and 10, as the residential windows would be located 4.1 metres away from 1-3 Albury Grove. Following these comments the applicant has altered the layout of the proposal, removing one flat in order to provide a greater level of amenity for residents.
Existing northern side elevation. The red line identifies the application site.
A55
Proposed northern side elevation. The red line identifies the application site.
7.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 07/13/0557/F - Installation of new shopfront and new internally illuminated fascia and projecting signs at No.53 Turners Hill – Application approved.
07/10/0666/AC - Internally illuminated fascia and projecting sign at No.57a Turners Hill – Advertisement Consent granted.
7/0538/08/F/WOL – Installation of roller shutter to front elevation of No.57a Turners Hill – Application approved.
7/0528/08/F/WOL - Installation of roller shutter door to rear elevation of No.55 Turners Hill – Application approved.
7/0181/03/AC/WOL - Internally illuminated fascia sign at No.53 Turners Hill - Application withdrawn.
7/0637/02/AC/WOL - Fascia sign and projecting sign on No.57a Turners Hill – Advertisement Consent granted.
7/0636/02/F/WOL – New shop front and fascia sign at No.57a Turners Hill – Application approved.
7/0132/02/AC/WOL - 1 no. internally illuminated ATM fascia sign at No.55 Turners Hill – Application approved.
8.0 APPRAISAL
8.5 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
vii. Principle of development
viii. Design, layout, and appearance;
ix. Impact to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties;
x. Highways/Parking;
xi. Planning Obligations;
xii. Other matters
These matters will be appraised in turn, below. A56
Principle of Development
8.6 The proposed development would convert the first floor of the existing building, which is currently used as offices (Use Class B1) to residential flats, and would add a third floor containing flats. The second floor would also contain a residential storage area.
8.7 The National Planning Policy Framework identifies that Local Planning Authorities should provide a five year supply of housing land to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. The proposed development would support this position by providing 13 flats.
8.8 Policy H10 of the Local Plan states that the proposed conversion of the employment use would be acceptable if the loss of the existing use would not present a material loss to overall employment opportunities in the immediate area and if the site is not within a designated employment area. The proposed development would result in the loss of office space, including approximately 171.8 square metres which is currently in active office use (Nationwide building society).Currently between 6 to 8 people are employed within this space. The applicant plans to retain the offices in place until they are eventually vacated, at which time the conversion could be carried out. The site is not within a designated employment area and, due to the small-scale nature of the existing use, the loss of the office use is not considered to lead to a material loss to the overall employment opportunities in the immediate area. As such, the proposed development is considered to comply with Policy H10. It must also be noted that the conversion of office to residential would benefit from permitted development.
8.9 Policy EMP6 of the Local Plan identifies that the development of local employment sites for alternative uses will only be permitted subject to a range of criteria. This criteria identifies that the development would be acceptable if there is no effective demand for the premises and that there is no reasonable prospect in the medium term of re-use or redevelopment. The applicant has identified that the majority of the first floor has been vacant since December 2014. The site has been actively marketed since this time, however no offers have been received other than to convert the site to other uses. As such, the proposed development would comply with Policy EMP6.
8.10 Overall, the principle of the proposed development is considered to comply with both the National Planning Policy Framework and the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011.
Design, layout and appearance
8.7 The proposed development would add a third storey to the existing building. The additional floor would have a flat roof design, which would retain the pattern of glazing on the front elevation.
8.8 The proposed flat roof design would be broadly similar in design to the flat roof design of the existing building. It is also noted that flat roof designs are not uncommon within the surrounding area, with one example visible at 64 – 68 Turners Hill, opposite.
A57
8.9 The Turners Hill area of Cheshunt contains a variety of two and three storey buildings. The adjoining group of buildings to the south, known as Clayton Parade, extend to three storeys in height. The proposed development would not extend beyond the eaves of this group of buildings and would be set 3.4 metres below the ridge height. The proposed development would extend beyond the height of No.59 Turners Hill, located to the north, by 1.9 metres. However, it must be noted that the proposed development would be located 10.1 metres away from No.59. This distance would create ample separation between the buildings so that the scale of the development does not have an overbearing impact.
8.10 The proposed development would include new brickwork across the front elevation and render on the side elevation and rear elevations. The design of the front elevation would be improved through the removal of the existing white cladding on the front elevation and its replacement with brickwork. The new windows are also proposed on the front and rear elevations, which currently appear in a poor condition. It should be noted that the rear of the building is predominantly outside the applicant’s ownership and, as such, there is no room for landscape for improvements.
8.11 The applicant has identified that the proposal would be constructed with brickwork and render. Whilst no specific material types have been identified, it is considered that these details can be controlled via a planning condition, if the application is approved. A condition can also be included for overall improvements to the appearance of the façade.
8.12 The proposed development would increase the height of the existing two storey building, creating an additional floor and altering the external appearance. The proposed extension would be in keeping with the scale and design of the existing building and the surrounding area. The proposed external alterations are also considered to be a positive addition to the design of the existing building. As such, the proposed development is considered to comply with the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review Policies H8, H11, HD13, HD14 and HD16.
Impact to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties
8.13 The proposed roof extension would be located approximately 10.1 metres away from No.59 Turners Hill, to the north of the site, and 20.6 metres away from the residential properties to the west. Due to the distance between the proposal and the surrounding residential properties, the development is not considered to present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of being unduly overbearing or in terms of loss of light.
8.14 The proposed development would include new windows on the second floor front, rear and side elevations. Additional windows are also proposed on the first floor northern side elevation. The proposed glazing would have a similar field of view to the existing glazing. As the application proposes residential use across the first and second floors, one must consider the outlook of the proposed flats. The rear elevation of the building is located 4.1 metres away from No.3 Albury Grove Road, however it is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable outlook for future residents as the residential windows would not
A58
directly face No.3. As such, the proposed development is considered to provide an acceptable outlook for future residents.
8.15 The proposed dwelling sizes, bedroom sizes and bathrooms sizes would comply with the standard identified within the Borough-Wide SPG.
8.16 The Borough-Wide SPG identifies that the proposed development should provide 280.0 square metres of private amenity space. The proposed development would not include any private amenity space, however, due to the Town Centre location it is considered impractical to seek provision of amenity space. The public amenity space at Grundy Park is located within short walking distance of the site and is considered to meet this need.
8.17 The development would include a refuse storage area, which could comply with the Borough-Wide Waste SPG. The proposed refuse storage area would include provision for recycling. No further details have been provided and, therefore, if the application is approved, a condition is identified to request details of the refuse storage area.
8.18 A communal storage area is proposed on the first floor, which would provide additional storage space for future residents. The details of how this storage area would function or be managed have not been identified. These details can be required via a planning condition, if the application is approved.
8.19 The proposed development is not considered to present an adverse impact in terms of being unduly overbearing, in terms of loss of light or in terms of loss of privacy. Whilst the proposed development would not comply with the external amenity space standards within the SPG, there is considered to be sufficient justification to allow no amenity space to be provided. As such, the proposed development is considered to comply with Policy H8.
Highways and Car Parking
8.20 The Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards identifies that the proposed development should provide 24 car parking spaces.
8.21 The site is located within Cheshunt Town Centre, within close proximity to several shops and services. The site is located within close proximity to Cheshunt Train Station, located approximately 800.0 metres away, and several bus stops along Turners Hill. The location of the site within a town centre enables the application of a discretionary discount to reduce the number of spaces under the Council’s guidelines to 14.
8.22 The existing offices do not have any dedicated on site car parking. The proposed development would not provide any car parking spaces and, as such would not comply with the Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards. This issue has been raised by several residents, who have stated that car parking may increase in adjoining residential areas as a result of the development. However, it is considered that the site is situated within a highly sustainable location, within a town centre. The site is within close proximity to shops, services and public transport.
A59
8.23 The highway authority has raised objection to the development on the basis that the lack of any facilities for car parking would cause harm to highway safety as the additional on-street car parking would have a significant impact on the free flow of traffic. However, this area of Turners Hill contains parking restrictions, which extend into Albury Grove Road. Parking along Turners Hill is further limited by the location of bus lanes and stops. As such, planning officers do not consider that any such harm would be severe and it is considered in this case that the lack of any provision for off-street car parking would not justify withholding planning permission.
8.24 A cycle store is proposed as part of this development to provide 13 cycle spaces, which would comply with the requirements of the Borough-Wide SPG.
8.25 The proposed development would not comply with the Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards, however it is considered that, due its sustainable location, the provision of a cycle storage area and the close proximity to public transport, the lack car parking is not considered to present an unacceptable impact to the public highway or residential amenity.
Other matters
8.26 Construction Pollution - A neighbouring resident has raised concerns regarding the potential for noise, dirt and general disturbance in relation to the proposed development. If planning permission is granted, however, planning conditions may be imposed to limit disturbance caused during construction both in terms of noise and dirt/dust.
8.27 Flood risk – The site is situated partially within Flood Zone 2. As the proposal would be located on the existing footprint of the site, it is not considered to present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of flood risk.
Planning Obligations
8.28 Should the Committee support the proposals it is recommended that the grant of planning permission be subject to the completion of a planning obligation in accordance with Local Plan Policy IMP2. It is considered that the following contribution would be necessary, reasonable and related in scale and kind to the development proposed:
- Contribution of £57,000 toward the Old Pond Gateway (south).
The applicant has agreed to this contribution, if the application is approved.
A60
9.0 CONCLUSION
9.1 The proposal would support the Council’s five year supply of housing land by providing 13 flats. The development would comply with Policies H10 and EMP6 and, as such, would be considered to be acceptable in principle.
9.2 The proposed development would increase the height of the existing two storey building, creating an additional floor and altering the external appearance. The proposed extension would be in keeping with the scale and design of the existing building and the surrounding area. The proposed external alterations are also considered to be a positive addition to the design of the existing building.
9.3 No private amenity space would be provided as part of the development however, due to the town centre location and the absence of space available within the site, the under provision of amenity space is not considered to justify refusal. The proposed development is not considered to present an unacceptable adverse impact in terms of being unduly overbearing, in terms of loss of light or in terms of loss of privacy.
9.4 The proposed development would not comply with the guidelines of the Interim Policy for Residential Car Parking Standards. However, as the site is considered to be located within a highly sustainable location, the lack of car parking is not considered to present an unacceptable impact to the public highway or residential amenity. As such, the application has been recommended for approval.
10.0 RECOMMENDED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out below and the applicant first completing a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the terms set out in this report
1. Standard time limit – 3 years 2. Development in accordance with the numbered plans 3 Approval of materials prior to commencement of development 4. Construction Management Plan (including hours, measures to restrict dirt/dust, hoarding, contractor vehicles, storage of materials etc.) 5. Details of the refuse/recycling storage to be provided 6. Details of a cycle storage area 7. Details of the of the residential storage area, including management arrangements 8. Details of improvements to the design of the elevations
A61
The following schedule sets out the applications outstanding in excess of the Statutory 8 week/13 week period as at 8th November 2016 Ref No Description & Location Reason for Expiry date Delay/Comments LARGESCALE MAJOR TOTAL MAJOR THIS MONTH: 0 TOTAL MAJOR LAST MONTH: 0 SMALLSCALE MAJOR 07/14/0569/O Outline application for Awaiting s.106 26.09.2014 residential development of 13 obligation. dwellings, access, car parking, public open space and other related development - Former Wormley Primary School St Laurence Drive Wormley 07/15/0715/F Residential development of 14 Awaiting s.106 27.10.2015 dwellings - Cheshunt Park Farm obligation Park Lane Paradise Cheshunt 07/16/0388/F Variation to condition 2 of Awaiting Deed of 30.06.2016 planning permission Variation to S106 07/14/0026/F "The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the proposals contained in the application and drawings numbered 331125.10 - 27 submitted therewith, unless the Local Planning Authority otherwise agrees in writing". - Oaklands Yard Essex Road Hoddesdon 07/16/0557/O Outline application for Awaiting s.106 11.08.2016 residential redevelopment and obligation. associated development - Fourfields Rosedale Way Cheshunt 07/16/0644/F Demolition of existing Under 02.09.2016 commercial buildings, removal consideration of storage yard and hardstanding, demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 11 new dwellings, garages, access, landscaping and associated works - Tanfield Farm Hammondstreet Road Cheshunt TOTAL SMALLSCALE MAJOR THIS MONTH: 5 TOTAL SMALLSCALE MAJOR LAST MONTH: 8
A62
MINOR 17.03.2011 07/11/0043/F Change of use of the existing first Awaiting floor of the property from B1 office withdrawal. and premises to C3 residential dwelling, subdivision of first floor to create 4 no. self-contained residential flats - 89-93 Turners Hill Cheshunt 10.11.2011 07/11/0730/O Outline application for new Awaiting s.106 footbridge over railway line at obligation. Park Lane, including bridleway route via level crossing to be discontinued with new alternative pedestrian footpath, cycle/bridleway route (Refer 07/11/0731/F) - Land opposite 116 Park Lane Waltham Cross 10.09.2013 07/13/0608/F Construction of 3 no. additional Awaiting two bed flats at third floor level - clarification on Former Hoddesdon Snooker Club S106 from site Conduit Lane Hoddesdon applicant. 17.01.2014 07/13/0980/F Erection of 2 no. two storey blocks Planning obligation to provide 32 rooms with received, awaiting communal facilities and parking issue. for occupation in association with The Vicarage (Re-submission 07/13/0071/F) - 11 Amwell Street 27.08.2014 07/14/0566/F Re-alignment and introduction of Under traffic lights at the junction of consideration Brookfield Lane West and Flamstead End Road - Road Junction Brookfield Lane West and Flamstead End Road, Cheshunt 21.11.2014 07/14/0867/F Continued use of vacant industrial Awaiting flood risk site as open storage, parking and assessment. container storage (Refer 07/13/0868/F) - Plots F and L RD Park Essex Road Hoddesdon 22.05.2015 07/15/0267/F Change of opening hours from To be amended by 7am to 11pm Monday to Sundays applicant. and Bank or Statutory Holidays to 7am to 11pm Sunday to Thursday and Bank or Statutory Holidays and 7am to 2am Friday and Saturday - 74 High Street Waltham Cross 18.08.2015 07/15/0583/F Erection of a detached two bed On hold - applicant bungalow - 39 Dudley Avenue to resolve Waltham Cross ownership issue.
A63
13.11.2015 07/15/0888/F Internal alterations, insertion of Awaiting two new external doors, amendment replacement of modern window, insertion of conservation rooflight (Refer listed building consent 07/15/0889/LB) - 102 and 104 High Street Hoddesdon
07/15/0915/F Demolition of existing bungalow Awaiting s.106 and erection of 2 no four bed obligation detached dwellings (Re- submission 07/15/0729/F) - 199 Cuffley Hill Goffs Oak 23.02.2016 07/16/0002/F Conversion of offices to three Under residential flats (Refer listed consideration. building consent 07/16/0003/LB) Re-submission 07/15/0754/F - 87- 89 High Street Hoddesdon 15.06.2016 07/16/0465/F New carriage drive with electric Awaiting additional gates and first floor one bedroom details flat (Re-submission 07/16/0106/F0 - 13 Rose Vale (Griffin Court) Hoddesdon 23.08.2016 07/16/0577/F Construction of a single storey Awaiting amended commercial unit (Re-submission plans 07/15/0826/F) - St Georges Works Delamare Road Cheshunt 15.07.2016 07/16/0595/F Demolition of former scout hut and Awaiting erection of church hall - 51 amendments Churchgate Cheshunt 31.08.2016 07/16/0771/F Development of 2 no. three bed Under and 5 no. four bed detached consideration dwellings with associated private amenity space and car and cycle parking spaces (Re-submission 07/15/1105/F) - Land between 19 and 32 Doverfield Goffs Oak 21.09.2016 07/16/0786/F Demolition of existing storage Under buildings, erection of single storey consideration rear extension and internal alterations to create a one bedroom residential unit (Refer listed building consent 07/16/0879/LB) - 94-96 High Street Hoddesdon 21.10.2016 07/16/0918/F Erection of a residential building Under comprising of 8 two bedroom flats consideration (Re-submission 07/15/0780/F) - The Coach House 90 Ware Road Hoddesdon 20.10.2016 07/16/0968/F Demolition of an existing single Under storey projection from the north consideration elevation; erection of two A64
extensions to the northern and southern flanks of the former vicarage building with associated alterations to provide 14 additional hostel rooms with communal kitchen/dining facilities and car parking - 11 Amwell Street Hoddesdon TOTAL MINOR THIS MONTH: 18 TOTAL MINOR LAST MONTH: 16 OTHER 23.05.2012 07/12/0253/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for an Under existing use of part garden for the consideration. storage of building materials part open and part enclosed - 2 Longfield Lane Cheshunt 24.06.2013 07/13/0139/F Continued use of The Vicarage as a Awaiting s.106 17 bed hostel - 11 Amwell Street obligation. Hoddesdon
31.07.2014 07/14/0280/F Small animal sanctuary with visitor Under facilities including ancillary consideration. outbuildings and various non- illuminated signage (Re-submission 07/13/0491/F) - Lucky Horse Shoes
Sanctuary, Cock Lane, Hoddesdon
31.07.2014 07/14/0483/F Change of use of first floor to self- Pending contained flat and loft conversion consideration with rear dormer - 2 Clarendon Parade Turners Hill 02.12.2014 07/14/0896/F Brook Farm Cuffley Hill Cuffley - Under Retrospective change of use of consideration. agricultural buildings (Units A, B, H and I) to Class B8 (storage) use 15.12.2014 07/14/0940/F Variation to conditions 1 and 2 of Under planning permission 07/11/0037/F to consideration. permit further occupation of the plot - 19 Leeside Wharf Road Wormley 15.12.2014 07/14/0941/F Variation to conditions 1 and 2 of Under granted permission consideration. APP/W1905/C/11/2151926 to permit further occupation of the plot - 23 Leeside Wharf Road Wormley 06.01.2015 07/14/0946/LB Listed building consent to re-roof The Awaiting Beaufort Suite Hall - Beaufort Suite Secretary of Bishops College Churchgate State decision. 06.02.2015 07/14/1115/F Removal of condition 16 of planning Under permission 7/0078/05/F/WX - consideration. Newsprinters( Broxbourne) Ltd Great Eastern Road Waltham Cross
A65
11.03.2015 07/15/0036/F Variation to condition 3 of planning Under permission 07/13/0583/F that the consideration workshop is completed in accordance with the proposals contained in drawing SG-019 A - Feel Free Farm Cock Lane Hoddesdon 28.09.2015 07/15/0725/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a Insufficient proposed single storey side and rear information extension, front porch and loft conversion with rear dormer - 35 Bell Lane Broxbourne 30.10.2015 07/15/0870/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a Awaiting proposed 1m high fence around land Withdrawal to the side - 48 Columbia Road, Turnford 13.11.2015 07/15/0889/LB Listed building consent for internal alterations, insertion of two new Awaiting external doors, replacement of amended plans. modern window, insertion of conservation rooflight (Refer 07/15/0888/F) - 102 and 104 High Street Hoddesdon 08.12.2015 07/15/0998/F Removal of conditions 8, 11 and 12 Under and variation to conditions 4 and 7 of consideration planning permission 07/15/0181/F - 55 High Road Broxbourne 24.12.2015 07/15/1031/HF Hardstanding and vehicle crossover - Under 24 Eleanor Cross Road Waltham consideration Cross 22.01.2016 07/15/1141/AC Banner advertisements on lamp Awaiting posts along Eleanor Cross Road and meeting Station Road Waltham between Cross/Waltham Abbey - Eleanor Applicant & HCC Cross Road and Station Road Highways Waltham Cross 23.02.2016 07/16/0003/LB Listed building consent for Under conversion of offices to three consideration. residential flats (Refer 07/16/0002/F) Re-submission 07/15/0755/LB - 87- 89 High Street Hoddesdon 25.02.2016 07/16/0010/HF Loft conversion with rear dormer - 30 Under Lulworth Avenue Goffs Oak consideration 01.03.2016 07/16/0020/HF Retention of rear conservatory – 40 Under Guiver Court Kennedy Close consideration Hoddesdon 23.03.2016 07/16/0122/LB Listed building consent for non Awaiting illuminated wall mounted plaque Secretary of (Refer 07/16/0121/AC - Ingram State decision House Bishops College Churchgate
A66
29.03.2016 07/16/0147/HF Erection of detached garage to front Awaiting further of dwelling – Trelane Burton Lane information. Goffs Oak 05.04.2016 07/16/0181/HF Vehicle crossover - 141 High Road Awaiting further Broxbourne information regarding highway safety. 12.04.2016 07/16/0203/F Variation to S106 of planning Awaiting s.106 permission 7/0214/08/F/HOD - obligation Wormley House 82 High Road Wormley 27.09.2016 07/16/0244/F Change of use from small scale Awaiting further house in multiple occupation (C4) to information. house in multiple occupation HMO (sui generis) - 109 Blindmans Lane Cheshunt 19.05.2016 07/16/0359/HF Erection of a 1m high fence to front To be withdrawn garden - 37 Waltham Gate Cheshunt 20.06.2016 07/16/0482/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a To be withdrawn proposed single storey side extension - 15 Lower Meadow Cheshunt 29.06.2016 07/16/0523/HF Hard standing and vehicle crossover Awaiting - 73 Russells Ride Cheshunt amended plans 08.08.2016 07/16/0677/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a To be withdrawn proposed outbuilding - 25 Hillview Gardens Cheshunt 23.08.2016 07/16/0695/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for an Awaiting further existing use of barn for the storage of information scaffolding and building materials in association with commercial businesses - St Lawrence Bush Farm Darnicle Hill Cheshunt 11.10.2016 07/16/0674/HF New garden wall including railing to Awaiting further front and side boundary (part built) - information 16 Poets Gate Goffs Oak 12.09.2016 07/16/0731/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting further existing use of land behind the barn information as residential garden - Lisand Farm White Stubbs Lane Broxbourne 06.09.2016 07/16/0732/F Alterations and extensions to listed Awaiting further building, conversion of barn to information residential accommodation and construction of new linking structure between buildings (Refer listed building application 07/16/0733/LB) - Lisand Farm White Stubbs Lane Broxbourne 06.09.2016 07/16/0733/LB Listed building consent for alterations Awaiting further and extensions and construction of information new linking structure between buildings (Refer 07/16/0732/F) - A67
Lisand Farm White Stubbs Lane Broxbourne 03.10.2016 07/16/0851/F Change of use of amenity land to Awaiting residential garden - 29 Lanthorn response from Close Broxbourne National Grid 21.09.2016 07/16/0879/LB Listed building consent for demolition Awaiting of existing storage buildings, erection amended plans of single storey rear extension and internal alterations to create a one bedroom residential unit (Refer 07/16/0786/F) - 94-96 High Street Hoddesdon 03.10.2016 07/16/0888/LB Insertion of roof light windows to roof Under (Refer 07/16/0678/HF) - Bluebelle consideration. Barn Bulls Cross Ride Waltham Cross 18.10.2016 07/16/0940/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for proposed To be withdrawn loft conversion with rear dormer - 41 St Michaels Road Broxbourne TOTAL OTHERS THIS MONTH: 37 TOTAL OTHERS LAST MONTH: 38 GRAND TOTAL THIS MONTH: 60 GRAND TOTAL LAST MONTH: 62
A68