Proposals for Sustainable Development Land at Rear of the Stag PH, Little Easton for and on Behalf of Montare LLP Design and Access Statement - April 2021

Proposals for Sustainable Development Land at rear of the Stag PH, Little Easton For and on behalf of Montare LLP Design and Access Statement - April 2021

TORNER ARCHITECTS Ltd. Areal photomap of proposed site plan in context Proposals for Sustainable Development Land at rear of the Stag PH, Little Easton Design and Access Statement

Contents

1. Introduction 5 4. Site Analysis 50 9. Design Proposal 74 1.1 Statement of Intent & Client team 5 4.1 Analysis Diagrams 50 9.1 Use & Amount 74 1.2 Subject Site 7 4.2 Climatic Analysis 51 9.2 Essex Design Guide 75 1.3 Previous Planning Application 8 5. Consultation Process 53 9.3 Open Space & Public Infrastructure 76 1.4 Planning Context 9 9.4 Affordable Housing 77 5.1 1st Preapplication - Review with Councillors 55 9.5 Layout 78 2. Wider Context Analysis 10 5.2 Review with EQRP 57 9.6 Height & Massing 79 2.1 Landscape Character Areas 10 5.3 Other pre-applications 59 9.7 Appearance & Material Pallete 81 2.2 Surrounding landscape and long views from Site 11 5.4 Public Consultation 61 9.8 Character Zones - 83 2.3 Strategic Views 12 6. Site Constraints & Opportunities 62 9.8a Character Zones - The Green 85 2.4 General Topography 17 6.1 Constraints 62 9.8b Character Zones - The Avenue 87 2.5 Flood Map 18 6.2 Opportunities 63 9.8c Character Zones - The Park 89 2.6 Transport 19 9.8d Character Zones - The Country Link 91 2.7 Ecological Analysis 20 7. Design Principles 64 10. Access 93 2.8 LPA Referenced Developments 23 7.1 Relation to environmental Factors - SUDS Approach 64 3. Little Easton Analysis 24 10.1 Public Realm 93 7.2 Public Realm - Strategy 65 10.2 Emergency Access 94 3.1 Overall Layout 24 7.3 Layout - Strategies 66 10.3 Refuse Strategy 95 3.2 Human Connectivity - Footpaths 26 7.4 Layout - Details 67 10.4 Car parking Strategy 96 3.3 Existing Play Facilities 28 7.5 Public Realm - Look & Feel 68 10.5 Cycle Parking Provision 97 3.4 Historic Character of Little Easton 30 7.6 Approach to Sustainable Design 69 10.6 Compliance with Part M 4 (2) 98 3.5 Land Use 37 10.7 Compliance with Part M 4 (3) 99 3.6 Heights 39 8. Design Evolution 70 10.8 Compliance with Technical Housing Standards 100 3.7 Materiality 41 8.1 Main versions of scheme through design process 70 10.9 Schedule of Accommodation 101 3.8 Roof Profiling 43 3.9 Building Lines 45 Conclusion 102 3.10 Distance Between Buildings 47 3.11 Front Gardens / Driveways 48 Little Easton settlement with subject site outlined in red 1. Introduction 1.1 Statement of Intent & Client team

• This proposal has been prepared by Montare’s design team as a collaborative multi- disciplinary project (Torner Architects; Refolo Landscape Architects; ; Waterman; Stantec; Hybrid Ecology; Sharon Hosegood Associates & Magenta Planning).Within this document, predominantly prepared by Torner Architects in close collaboration with Refolo Landscape Architects, there is information from each Design Team member where appropiate.

• Montare’s intention is to advance an ‘exemplar project’ which delivers against all Planning Consultant three dimensions of sustainable development; those being ‘economic’, ‘social’, and ‘environmental’, and one which will achieve a logical rounding off extension to the existing Ecologist settlement boundary. Suds / Flooding

• The proposals are advanced in the context of a Planning Performance Agreement (PPA) with the Uttlesford District Council (UDC), and their invitation to present a residentially- led mixed use masterplan incorporating best practice in landscape/ecology, sustainability, flood risk/drainage and transport. Landscape Sustainability / Land- scape stewardship • They are also put forward in the absence of a Local Plan and are cognisant of the Inspectors’ concerns about the lack of consideration given towards site allocations within the District’s villages. Applicant

• Previous proposals at this site failed and were heavily criticised by UDC, in particular, there was a lack of any joined-up thinking across landscape, ecological and drainage Heritage Archaeology matters.

• Montare’s intention is not only to remedy these previous defects through the provision of a high quality and sensitively designed landscape-led scheme, but is also to make a Transport TORNER ARCHITECTS Ltd. Arboriculturalist tangible impact on changing the lives of local people in a very positive way. Architecture • In these times of partial ‘lockdown’, Montare’s ethos and drive towards creating sustainable communities is more pertinent than ever. The injection of new life blood into villages and rural locations is critical to ensure mixed and balanced communities, to ensure they remain viable and have a long-term sustainable future.

Source: Planning Statement, produced by Magenta Planning please refer to Statement separately submitted as part of this application. Land behind the stag PH, Little Easton | April 2021 5 • Image of subject site from west looking north-east • Image of subject site from west looking south-east

• Image of subject site access on Duck Street looking west • Image of subject site from south-east looking north-west 1. Introduction 1.2 Subject Site

• The subject site comprises 3.72 hectares of rough grassland hayfield, located on the eastern side of the village of Little Easton, immediately adjoining its existing settlement boundary on land to the rear of The Stag Public House.

• It is bounded by residential properties situated along Butchers Pasture to the north, and by fields and an area of woodland (known as Bush Wood) 300m to the north east. Duck Street, a rural road subject of a 30mph speed limit, abuts the site to the south, with properties and land fronting that same street bounding the site to the west.

• The site slopes from west to east towards the Chelmer River Valley and lies outside of the Flood Risk Zone. An unmade public footpath also runs along the eastern side of the site, extending from Duck Street to Butchers Pasture.

• The site has extensive vegetation along its boundaries and is well shielded in long views towards it by the local woodland and the large residential properties situated to the east of the river.

• The settlement of Little Easton itself is situated along a ridge to the south west side of the Chelmer Valley, approximately 7 miles (11km) east of Bishop’s Stortford, and 12 miles (19km) north west of the county town of Chelmsford. Stansted Airport, a major employer in the local area, is located only 5.5 miles (9km) to the west.

• Whilst facilities within the village are limited (including the Stag public house and a village hall), the nearby settlement of Great Dunmow (located only 1.9 miles/3km to the south) has extensive local facilities available (including retail, health, education and leisure uses).

• Historic maps show that there has been very little change to the village since the 1950s and virtually no change in its form since the 1980s/90s. In terms of heritage assets, the nearest listed building is a 16th Century timber framed thatched cottage (grade II) located just to the south east of The Stag Little Easton settlement with subject site outlined in red PH.

Source: Planning Statement, produced by Magenta Planning please refer to Statement separately submitted as part of this application. Land behind the stag PH, Little Easton | April 2021 7 1. Introduction 1.3 Previous Planning Application

REVISIONS ------19 Schedule of Units - - - House Type No. Size m² (ft²) - - - - - •- Previous outline application proposals for residential Type 1 2 Bed Semi Detached 3 86m² (925ft²) Type 2 2 Bed Terrace 9 88m² (947ft²) Type 3 2 Bed Bungalow 1 85m² (915ft²) development of up to 65 no. dwellings at the site, with all 20 Type 4 3 Bed Semi Detached 16 93m² (1001ft²) Type 5 3 Bed Detached 10 119m² (1280ft²) Type 6 4 Bed Linked Detached 3 140m² (1506ft²) matters reserved except access (ref:-UTT/15/2069/OP), were Type 7 4 Bed Detached 9 145m² (1560ft²) Type 8 3 Bed Semi Detached 9 118m² (1270ft²) Type 9 5 Bed Detached 6 180m² (1937ft²) refused on 1st October 2015. Mix of Units 2 Bedrooms 13

62.0m Path (um) 3 Bedrooms 35 16 16 4 Bedrooms 12 15 5 Bedrooms 6 Total 66 • Five reasons for refusal were stated, based on the following (summarised) grounds:-

5 8 1 8 3 i) Unsustainable form of development outside of the

AREA OF STORM CELL 67m x 5m x 1.32m

2 2 settlement boundary of Little Easton BUTCHERS PASTURE

70.9m ii) Intensification and urbanising effect on the countryside Shelter Kaines iii) Insufficient information on biodiversity and ecology Magnolia Cottage Eastwood iv) Insufficient information on flood risk and drainage Duck StreetLB

Cottage TCB The Stag AREA OF STORM CELL 40m x 4m x 1.32m v) Lack of a S106 legal agreement to address local (PH) IN ROAD Manor Road infrastructure requirements Pedestrian access to potential village shop adjacent The Stag

Bus lay-by 1a

1a • The scheme was heavily criticised by UDC, particularly in 1b 1b respect of a porosity of details provided on flood risk, ecology,

1 and landscape. Officers’ considered that the proposals The Old Stag generally displayed a lack of ‘joined-up thinking’ across the environmental issues involved, especially in relation to the AREA OF STORM CELL 40m x 4m x 1.32m

Yew Tree Arch IN ROAD importance of bio-diversity and potential habitat linkages 4

4 71.1m FOR ILLUSTRATIVEgiven PURPOSES the location ONLY of nearby woodland.

• This statement, together with the accompanying consultant reports,SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE will demonstrate how all of the above previous

Project 1 1 PROPOSEDreasons DEVELOPMENT for refusal have been overcome. DUCK STREET LITTLE EASTON • It will---- be shown that the revised proposals have been radically FB Title 2.4 x Max sight line PROPOSEDaltered, SITE not only by substantially reducing the quantum of Extg public footpath to be extended 2.4 x Max sight line development,SKETCH 2 but also by completely re-imagining the whole Millfield DUCK STREET concept for the future of the site. Meadowbank Scale @ A1 Date Drn By Hillbrook Cott 59.0m 1:500 JUN 15 TC

Ref BRD/15/002/005 This drawing and design remain the property of BRD TECH LTD and should not be reproduced Metres 1:500 ACCREDITED or altered in any way with out their consent. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Local Authority All dimensions, levels and information indicated is BUILDING CONTROL to be verified on site prior to the commencement of 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 elmhurst THE CODE FOR any work on site. Any discrepancies are to be Metres 1:1000 SUSTAINABLE Partner Corporate Building HOMES reported to BRD TECH LTD directly. Engineers Site plan submitted as part of previous planning Application SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING AT YOUR OWN RISK.

Source: Planning Statement, produced by Magenta Planning please refer to Statement separately submitted as part of this application. 1. Introduction 1.4 Planning Context

• Planning Policy Context : • Planning Merits :

• The Council’s statutory development plan is the Uttlesford Local • At paragraph 38, the Framework stresses that LPAs should • In the light of the above policy context, it is necessary to assess Plan adopted 2005, which is now a very dated document that does approach decisions on proposed development in a positive the proposals against the three dimensions of sustainable not reflect the latest Government planning policy guidance. The and creative way, including working proactively with applicants development (ie. social, economic and environmental). The Council were therefore, until relatively recently, advancing with to secure developments that will improve the economic, social environmental matters related to the scheme proposals are their draft Uttlesford Local Plan 2019, but decided to start a new and environmental conditions of the area. It specifically states wide ranging and are covered in detail by the relevant specialist plan at their Extraordinary Council meeting on 30th April 2020. that:- ‘Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve consultants in their accompanying reports. This decision was in response to the Government’s appointed applications for sustainable development where possible’. Inspectors letter dated 10th January 2020 which found the plan • In terms of assessing the proposals against broader planning, to be unsound as drafted. It also reflected the advice of the • Chapter 5 of the document deals with ‘Delivering a sufficient supply sustainability and housing issues, the merits of the scheme have Independent Peer Review report from the East of England Local of homes’ outlining the Government’s objective of significantly been summarised in the Planning Statement some key aspects as Government Association dated March 2020. The Government boosting the supply of homes (para 59). At paragraph 67, the follows : has recently announced requirements for all LPAs to have up to Framework states that:- ‘Planning policies should identify a supply • Montare is working alongside Habinteg Housing Association date Local Plans in place by December 2023. UDC state on their of a) specific, deliverable sites for years one to five of the plan who will deliver the affordable housing for local people to web site that they will be outlining and developing a timetable to period, and b) specific, developable sites or broad locations for include specialist accessible housing for the elderly and achieve adoption within this timeframe over the coming weeks. growth, for years 6-10 and, where possible, for years 11-15 of the disabled. The brief for the affordable scheme is specific to plan’. • The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF; February meet the local needs of the area (Social/Economic benefits). 2019) continues to require that plans and decisions should apply • Chapter 12 on ‘Achieving well-designed places’ should also be • A mix of houses from 2-5 bedrooms including aspirational a ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’, a theme highlighted. This stresses that the creation of high quality buildings market homes (Economic benefits). Inclusion of 3 self-build that has remained at the heart of the Framework (paragraph 11). and places is fundamental to what the planning and development plots (Economic/Social benefits). In Authorities, such as Uttlesford, where there is no up-to-date process should achieve. At paragraph 124, it states:- ‘Good design development plan, it is necessary to assess whether the application is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places • Provision of commercial units (x3) offering flexible space at proposal is sustainable and whether or not the presumption in in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable affordable rates for local businesses (Economic benefits). favour is engaged. This presumption is increased where there is to communities’. no 5 year land supply for housing. • Allotments for private and community use (Social/Economic It is particularly instructive to note that the Council has carried • benefits). • In this regard, the most recent housing trajectory figures released out a review of their adopted policies against their compatibility by UDC’s Planning Policy team at their recent Developer Forum with the Framework. The Council’s review found Policy S7 to • Incorporation of biodiversity areas, with special focus on meeting (11/03/21) identified that the Council has an approximate be only partly consistent with the NPPF in that protection and linkages with the existing woodland and delivery through a land supply of only 3 years; whilst this is slightly improved over their enhancement of the natural environment is an important part bio-diversity management plan (Environmental benefits). last set of figures (from October 2019) it remains a very significant of the environmental dimension of sustainable development. shortfall. Specifically, paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the Framework makes However, it noted that the NPPF takes a positive approach, rather • Generous green spaces and landscaping enhancements, it clear that in such circumstances planning permission should be than a protective one. As a consequence, whilst Policy S7 is still including formal and informal play spaces, and fitness trail granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly relevant to the consideration of these proposals, there remains a (Environmental/Social benefits). Walkable Communities – and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against presumption in favour of sustainable development. Active Design: Landscape-led circuit to encourage physical the Framework’s policies as a whole. activity and social interaction (Social benefits).

Please refer to the Planning Statement for further information.

Source: Planning Statement, produced by Magenta Planning please refer to Statement separately submitted as part of this application. Land behind the stag PH, Little Easton | April 2021 9 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.1 Landscape Character Areas

Essex Landscape Character Areas

Central Essex Farmland

Key Aspects

• Valley-side meandering hedgerows • Small woods • Long Views

1 2 3 4 5

6 7

2Km radius

Chelmer Valley

Key Aspects

• Dense river trees • Arable valleysides with open character

Excludes front driveways and front gardens • Historic watermills

The character of the Upper River Chelmer (Uttlesford District Character) has been analysed to understand how the proposed design can fit in within the existing surrounding settings. For Further information reference Landscape Strategy Report - Drawing - RLA.LE.RP.3

Source: Esssex Landscape Character areas CBA and Ordinance Survey mapping

Source: Information produced by RLA Landscape Architects, please refer to their separately submitted reports for further information 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.2 Surrounding landscape and long views from Site

BUSH WOOD

LONG VIEW 1

Long view 1

RIVER CORRIDOR CHELMER VALLEY

LONG VIEW 2

The site is located in the Chelmer Valley and surrounded by the Central Essex Farmland Landscape Character Areas. Surrounding Long view 2 landscape character, with a valleyside of meandering hedgerows and small woods provide structure to the landscape. Key long views to and from the site would be preserved as part of the proposed designs.

For Further information reference Landscape Strategy Report - Drawing - RLA.LE.RP.5

Source: Information produced by RLA Landscape Architects, please refer to their separately submitted reports for further information Land behind the stag PH, Little Easton | April 2021 11 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.3 Strategic Views

C N

0 50 100 150 200 250 500m

2500m

E 2000m

1500m

1000m

B G A 500m

Land to rear of The Stag Public House, Little K Easton - strategic views

J H Photomap showing position of strategic views in reltion to subject site plan

Source: Information produced by Mark Wellings, please refer to the Strategic Views Document submitted separately 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.3 Strategic Views

• View A - from Duck Street, looking south -ie no view of site • View B - from snicket, looking south - dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond existing properties

view A - from Duckview StreetA - from, looking Duck Streetsouth, looking south view B - from snicketview B, -looking from snicket south, looking south

nb no view of sitenb no view of site dotted line indicatesdotted extent line indicates of development extent of development area beyond existingarea beyond properties existing properties

Land at rear ofLand The Stag at rear Public of The House Stag, LittlePublic Easton House, Little Easton - strategic views - strategic views

• View C - from Great Easton church graveyard, looking south - dotted line indicates • View D - from public right of way, looking south - dotted line indicates extent of extent of development area beyond tree line development area beyond tree line

Source: Information produced by Mark Wellings, please refer to the Strategicview C - fromViews Greatview Document CEaston - from church Great submitted Eastongraveyard church, lookingseparately graveyard south, looking south Landview behindD - from the public viewstag PH, D right -Little from of Easton waypublic, looking| rightApril of 2021south way , looking south 13

dotted line indicatesdotted extent line indicates of development extent of development dotted line indicatesdotted extent line indicates of development extent of development area beyond treearea line beyond tree line area beyond treearea line beyond tree line

Land at rear ofLand The Stag at rear Public of The House Stag, LittlePublic Easton House, Little Easton - strategic views - strategic views 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.3 Strategic Views

• View E - from public right of way, looking south - dotted line indicates extent of • View F - from public right of way, looking south - dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond trees in fore and background development area beyond existing properties

view E - from publicview E right - from of waypublic, looking right of south way, looking south view F - from publicview F right - from of waypublic, looking right of south way, looking south

dotted line indicatesdotted extent line indicates of development extent of development dotted line indicatesdotted extent line indicates of development extent of development area beyond treesarea in beyond fore and trees background in fore and background area beyond existingarea beyond properties existing properties

Land at rear of LandThe Stag at rear Public of The House Stag, LittlePublic Easton House, Little Easton - strategic views - strategic views

• View G - from B184, looking west - no view of site • View H - from Park Road, looking north - dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond existing properties, landscape and hedgerows -ie no view

Source: Information produced by Mark Wellings, please refer to the Strategic Views Document submitted separately view G - fromview B184 G, -looking from B184 west, looking west view H - fromview Park H Road - from, looking Park Road north, looking north

no view no view dotted line indicatesdotted line extent indicates of development extent of development area beyond areaexisting beyond properties existing, landscape properties , landscape and hedgerowsand ie hedgerows no view ie no view

Land at rear ofLand The at Stag rear Public of The House Stag Public, Little HouseEaston, Little Easton - strategic views - strategic views 2. Wider Context Analysis 2.3 Strategic Views

• View J - from Park Road, looking north - dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond existing properties, landscape and hedgerows - ie no view of site

view J - from Park Road, looking north view K - from Park Road, looking north

dotted line indicates extent of development dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond existing properties, landscape area beyond existing properties, landscape and hedgerows ie no view and hedgerows ie no view

Land at rear of The Stag Public House, Little Easton - strategic views

• View K - from Park Road, looking north - dotted line indicates extent of development area beyond existing properties, landscape and hedgerows -ie no view of site

Source: Information produced by Mark Wellings, please refer to the Strategic Views Document submitted separately Land behind the stag PH, Little Easton | April 2021 15 view J - from Park Road, looking north view K - from Park Road, looking north

Land at rear of The Stag Public House, Little Easton - strategic views