16/05053/Ful
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
16/05053/FUL Consultations and Notification Responses Ward Councillor Preliminary Comments Councillor Audrey Jones Councillor David J Carroll Councillor Steve Broadbent Parish/Town Council Comments/Internal and External Consultees Hughenden Parish Council Comments: The Parish Council objects to these applications for the following reasons:- 1. The result of building 59 homes on this site will have a major impact on the infrastructure, community amenities, and the local school, especially with development of Terriers Farm and therefore would be totally unacceptable. 2. The increase level of traffic movements at peak times on a 50mph road will put road safety at risk to cars, cyclists and walkers. The previous movements from the conference centre were of a different pattern despite the figures shown in the applications. 3. The proposal to build a footpath has not been shown to be practical and to reduce the width of the Four Ashes Road, which is already narrow and dangerous, would result in an even worse situation than it is currently. There is no public transport in Four Ashes Road or Cryers Hill as indicated in the response to the Transport Document produced by Transport Planning Association. 4. The parking facilities on the site are not realistic even at 118 for 59 homes as when visitors or any increase of family numbers occur it would result in a substantial different requirement. 5. The Environmental Services has made it plain that there is insufficient information regarding surface water management and the Strategic Management Team at BCC objects to the proposed development. A comprehensive drainage strategy should be submitted to demonstrate that a compliant drainage design could be achieved. 6. The removal of trees and hedges in this Green Belt and AONB area would have a major impact on the appearance of the surrounding important rural area. If minded to be approved these two applications should be considered by the WDC Planning Committee. County Archaeological Service Comments: The proposed development is likely to affect a heritage asset of historic and architectural interest. All existing buildings are to be retained with the exception of the 19th century former coach house/stables which is an undesignated heritage asset. The proposed changes to the grounds respect the existing character of the landscape and include the retention of 19th century features including the walled garden and specimen trees. Although the site has significant historic and architectural interest, it appears to have limited archaeological interest. However a condition is recommended to appropriate recording of the coach house/stables building prior to demolition. Furthermore a condition is recommended in relation to securing appropriate investigation, recording, publication and archiving of results in conformity with NPPF paragraph 141. Natural England Comments: No objection and no conditions requested. The site is in close proximity to Millfield Wood Site of Special Scientific Interest and if the development is carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application they should not damage or destroy the interest features for which the site has been notified. The Ancient Woodland should be protected to the highest degree and that any management should involve only pruning works rather than cutting out of ancient tree species native to the area. The proposal to mitigate for the loss of off-site hedgerow of the Ecological Appraisal should be implemented in order to ensure that there is no net loss of biodiversity as a result of the development. The Chiltern Society Comments: Overall support for this application on the basis that it is a high quality scheme which should secure the long term future of this listed building. A commendably sensitive approach to the buildings and designed landscape, with the use of high quality design and materials. It will unfortunately be a largely car dependent development but this dis-benefit, is in our opinion, outweighed by the benefits of safeguarding this heritage asset. There are certain elements of the proposal that are not supported. 1. The footpath will have a major adverse impact on the roadside hedgerows whilst delivering negligible or nil practical benefit. The proximity of the footway to the narrow road would make it an unattractive and potentially dangerous option which few would choose. Other alternatives may have more merit. 2. Do not consider that adequate parking has been provided. This is a sensitive site and would be undermined by overspill parking. 3. The replacement coach house is too large and will be overbearing and should be at a scale and materials more closely matched to the previous Cullinan extensions. 4. Insufficient detail to the proposed lighting 5. Additional measures would improve the scheme: a. If there has to be a gate employ a less utilitarian design b. Proposed woodland path could be guided by historic maps c. The Denner setts in front of the main entrance should be retained d. Provision of private gardens to some properties should be reconsidered e. Some areas of wildflower meadows 6. There should be some opportunity for general public to view the ground and buildings 7. What will be the structure and mechanism are to be in place to conserve the appearance of the buildings and the grounds into the future. 8. Thought should be given to targeting the development towards the older population. National Grid Comments: No objection to the development as the IP gas pipeline in the vicinity will not be affected. The Chilterns AONB Planning Officer Comments: Chilterns Conservation Board previously raised objection to the 2013 application. The site was subsequently listed as Grade II on the 17th June 2014. They have the following comments to make in relation to this application. The current application addressed many previous objections. The listing of the building alters with a legal duty to preserve the buildings and their settings which is realised also in the AONB Management Policy HE3 (Development, other land use changes and management practices which would harm the significance of nationally important historic assets and their setting will be resisted). The conversion of the house maintains the open and rural character of the nationally protected landscape and is therefore policy compliance both with the Local Plan and the Management Plan. The Coach House. This building should be no higher than the existing built form. The natural grey slate will reduce the visual impact. For discharge of condition stage please refer to guidance in the Chilterns Design Guide supplementary technical note on roofing at para 3.30/ page 23 which deals with details of an appropriate type. Landscape Masterplan. The masterplan is appropriate and builds upon the Georgina Livingstone design. Management of the masterplan and the semi-natural ancient woodland requires an appropriate planning condition. A detailed landscape management plan which include a series of positive measures for the semi-natural ancient woodland should be conditioned. Landscape and Visual Impact. The LVIA identifies the high landscape sensitivity of the Chilterns AONB and the significant position of this site within the Great Kingshill settled plateau overlooking the Hughenden chalk valley. The previous point as to lighting remains unresolved and the details in Design and Access Statement are merely illustrative. A planning condition requiring a full lighting plan with explanation of lighting radii should be imposed. It is important that tranquillity is very carefully protected in this location. Transport Impacts. It is an important objective that any transport generation is materially lower than the existing/previous use, to improve the rural tranquillity of the AONB here. The new footway is linked to the objectives of reducing vehicle movements and would need to be suitable for cycle and pedestrian use. Crime Prevention Design Advisor Comments: The principles of a safe and sustainable community has been reviewed, acknowledged and included within the design principles. Identified below are a number of concerns. Access and security - the use of gates in designed to control access. However this needs to be part of a number of measures including lighting and surveillance. Gates will also restrict access to legitimate visitors and careful thought needs to be given to how access will be granted. Government thinking is that new development should be integrated into the wider community and the gating of developments should only be considered as a last resort. Further consideration should be given to the use of gates and if installed how they will be operated prior to any planning approval. Cycle Security 110 secure and covered cycle parking spaces proposed for the scheme. It would seem that there will be no surveillance over the 16 covered cycles by the made and no surveillance over the 50 cycle storage unit located in the parking area along from the maze. There is concern about surveillance opportunities across the site. Cullinan’s original design avoided overlooking between original study bedrooms and the conversion allows for the existing privacy to be maintained. The layout and design limit surveillance opportunities and this is a concern. The location of the cycle stores should be moved to be provided with better surveillance and should be provided in a secured container. The area should be lit to BS5489. Footpaths There is a footpath to be created from the site to Cryers Hill. Issues for consideration: the width of the paths, the buffer either side, whether they will be lit and how access onto the site will be gained. Defensible Space It is important that the boundary between a private and semi/public area is clearly defined. There is concern that there is no defensible space in front of ground floor windows on units B5, B4, D1, D2 and also EW8 and EW8. Active frontage/CCTV By maintaining the original privacy design envisaged by the architect active surveillance is being lost.